Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 11
02-01-2012, 04:43 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by mister_dee
It's not just the appearance of the Farragut.
Actually all non-CGI Nebulas had this hull-design.

USS Phoenix, the first Nebula class seen from TNG: "The Wounded"

USS Sutherland from TNG: "Redemption"

USS Prometheus from DS9: "Second Sight"

For some reason for later DS9 and Voyager episodes they decided to use a Galaxy-style hull/deflector design...my guess is they could recylcle parts of the Galaxy CGI model.

CGI Nebula from DS9: "The Changing Face of Evil"

CGI Nebula from Voyager: "Message In a Bottle"


There is some indication in soft-canon that the Nebula class was in production before the Galaxy class was ready.
So my theory is the first appearance might possibly be some kind of "block 1" design while the later appearance might be "block 2" and this change was done to ease production since the deflector of both the later Nebulas and the Galaxys would be the same.
As a result Starfleet would only have to produce one type of deflector (and spare parts) for two ships.

[Of course there's also the remote (and totally theroetical) possibility that the original USS Galaxy used the same deflector design as the first Nebulas do.
It wouldn't be the first time the prototype of a new class of ships looked different from the production series and was changed because a different solution was more practical.
Based on that theory the design with the "bulge" was the forerunner of the deflector used on the later Nebula and Galaxy models.
But that is actually just complete speculation on my part.
Would however look interesting IMO. ]

Anyway I agree the original Nebula lower hull design is missing and missed, just like the actual sensor pod from "The Wounded"
I said "Farragut" because that's generally the ship name used to describe that particular variant, like the "Bonchune" is used to describe the later CGI variant.

As to why the CGI version is different, well, when Foundation Imaging visual effects supervisor Rob Bonchune was asked to make a CGI version of the Nebula, he was only given the CGI Galaxy-class built by ILM for Star Trek: Generations as reference to work from. So the ship came out looking more like a hacked up Galaxy than the physical model ever did.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 12
02-01-2012, 06:30 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Amosov
I said "Farragut" because that's generally the ship name used to describe that particular variant, like the "Bonchune" is used to describe the later CGI variant.
I'd known "Bonchune" for the CGI, but I didn'd know "Farragut" for the physical. I only knew her as "Sutherland" variant since that's the first appearance of the physical with the pod.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Amosov
As to why the CGI version is different, well, when Foundation Imaging visual effects supervisor Rob Bonchune was asked to make a CGI version of the Nebula, he was only given the CGI Galaxy-class built by ILM for Star Trek: Generations as reference to work from. So the ship came out looking more like a hacked up Galaxy than the physical model ever did.
Another mystery solved, thanks.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 13
02-01-2012, 06:48 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by mister_dee
I'd known "Bonchune" for the CGI, but I didn'd know "Farragut" for the physical. I only knew her as "Sutherland" variant since that's the first appearance of the physical with the pod.
Yeah the Farragut was still essentially the same model, but with several detail changes for the films Generations and First Contact. I couldn't exactly tell you what those details were, but I'd guess it had something to do with making the ship look better for the big screen.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 14
02-01-2012, 03:39 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Amosov
Yeah the Farragut was still essentially the same model, but with several detail changes for the films Generations and First Contact. I couldn't exactly tell you what those details were, but I'd guess it had something to do with making the ship look better for the big screen.
My understanding is that the physical model is still part of the traveling Star Trek collection that has traveled the world numerous times. I hear that the bottem of the model has the decals for U.S.S. Leeds, the ship seen in the later DS9 credits, while the top still has the Farragut details. It is a shame that despite not initially having the model avalible for scanning into CGI, they never decided to go back and scan the model when it did become avalible.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 15
02-01-2012, 06:51 PM
Personally i would me very happy if we had the option to choose from differnt Hardpoints for Hull and Pylons to make the ship a bit longer.
I think if we could move the Saucer a bit more forward, the Nebula could be a real beauty, instead of the ugly sister (IMO) of the galaxy class.
For everybody who likes the Nebula as it is, there would be no change at all.

Live long and prosper.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 16
02-02-2012, 07:52 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yreodred
Personally i would me very happy if we had the option to choose from different Hardpoints for Hull and Pylons to make the ship a bit longer.
I think if we could move the Saucer a bit more forward, the Nebula could be a real beauty, instead of the ugly sister (IMO) of the galaxy class.
For everybody who likes the Nebula as it is, there would be no change at all.

Live long and prosper.
Actually there's other versions of the Nebula-class, some of which were seen in the wreckage at Wolf 359, which did have a longer secondary hull: http://www.ex-astris-scientia.org/ar...oto-nebula.htm
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 17
02-02-2012, 10:44 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Amosov
Yeah the Farragut was still essentially the same model, but with several detail changes for the films Generations and First Contact. I couldn't exactly tell you what those details were, but I'd guess it had something to do with making the ship look better for the big screen.
I seem to remember for the most adding windows.
The first Nebula incarnation basically had the same saucer as the Galaxy but with fewer windows.
For the movie model the saucer was changed so the number and arrangment of windows was either similal or identical to the windows on the Galaxy saucer.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 18
02-02-2012, 10:49 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Amosov
Yeah the Farragut was still essentially the same model, but with several detail changes for the films Generations and First Contact. I couldn't exactly tell you what those details were, but I'd guess it had something to do with making the ship look better for the big screen.
That model looks like a Miranda-class updated with Galaxy-class parts.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 19
02-02-2012, 02:19 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Amosov
Actually there's other versions of the Nebula-class, some of which were seen in the wreckage at Wolf 359, which did have a longer secondary hull: http://www.ex-astris-scientia.org/ar...oto-nebula.htm
Yeah thats not bad, but the pylons+nacelles should be placed more to the rear side, i wouldn't mind if the Nacelles would be a bit higher or even on the same level as the Engineering hull.

BTW: Nice find!


Live long and prosper.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 20
02-06-2012, 04:05 PM
I think the simplest way to make this ship look at bit better would be to mirror the Pylons especially the Magellan pylons) from facing forwards to backwards.
The naclees would be more to at the back of the ship and the ship itself wouldn't look so compressed anymore.
I think it wouldn't be too much work to do something like that. I think many of us players would use such an opiton, because the itself Nebula is a good science ship (performance, universal BO slot). Just the looks is something to get used to, some of us just can't.

Personally i would love to use that ship more often, but staring at this for more than 10 minutes makes me go to spacedock and switch ship, no matter how good it performs.


Live long and prosper.
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 03:39 PM.