This is a gross violation of Star Trek history. It's like painting
graffitti on the Mona Lisa:

http://img.trekmovie.com/images/tosr_ei2.jpg

(Episode: The Enterprise Incident)

Richard Fangnail wrote:
> This is a gross violation of Star Trek history. It's like painting
> graffitti on the Mona Lisa:
>
> http://img.trekmovie.com/images/tosr_ei2.jpg
>
> (Episode: The Enterprise Incident)


Huh? The bird of prey always had a bird painted on it...

..

--

We must change the way we live,
or the climate will do it for us.

On Apr 4, 1:28 pm, cloud dreamer <Global_Warm...@is.real> wrote:
> Richard Fangnail wrote:
> > This is a gross violation of Star Trek history. It's like painting
> > graffitti on the Mona Lisa:
>
> >http://img.trekmovie.com/images/tosr_ei2.jpg
>
> > (Episode: The Enterprise Incident)
>
> Huh? The bird of prey always had a bird painted on it...
>
> ..
>
> --
>
> We must change the way we live,
> or the climate will do it for us.

I know, but that's a Klingon ship, which had never been painted like a
bird before.

Richard Fangnail wrote:
> On Apr 4, 1:28 pm, cloud dreamer <Global_Warm...@is.real> wrote:
>> Richard Fangnail wrote:
>>> This is a gross violation of Star Trek history. It's like painting
>>> graffitti on the Mona Lisa:
>>> http://img.trekmovie.com/images/tosr_ei2.jpg
>>> (Episode: The Enterprise Incident)
>> Huh? The bird of prey always had a bird painted on it...
>>
>> ..
>>
>> --
>>
>> We must change the way we live,
>> or the climate will do it for us.
>
> I know, but that's a Klingon ship, which had never been painted like a
> bird before.


The Romulans used Klingon ships.

..

--

We must change the way we live,
or the climate will do it for us.

Once Upon A Time,
cloud dreamer wrote:

>Richard Fangnail wrote:
>> On Apr 4, 1:28 pm, cloud dreamer <Global_Warm...@is.real> wrote:
>>> Richard Fangnail wrote:
>>>> This is a gross violation of Star Trek history. It's like painting
>>>> graffitti on the Mona Lisa:
>>>> http://img.trekmovie.com/images/tosr_ei2.jpg
>>>> (Episode: The Enterprise Incident)
>>> Huh? The bird of prey always had a bird painted on it...
>>>
>>> ..
>>>
>>> --
>>>
>>> We must change the way we live,
>>> or the climate will do it for us.
>>
>> I know, but that's a Klingon ship, which had never been painted like a
>> bird before.
>
>
>The Romulans used Klingon ships.

You're missing his point. Both of your statements are correct, but you are
still wrong. The Klingon ships used by the Romulans on TOS did not have
Bird of Prey markings on them.

Unless they did. I'm suddenly not sure. I need a drink.


**
Captain Infinity

On Fri, 04 Apr 2008 22:34:41 GMT, Captain Infinity
<Infinity@captaininfinity.us> wrote:


>You're missing his point. Both of your statements are correct, but you are
>still wrong. The Klingon ships used by the Romulans on TOS did not have
>Bird of Prey markings on them.

No, but the purpose of TOS-R is to do things that Roddenberry & Co.
would have done, had they the time and money. "Enterprise Incident"
resorted to the Klingon model because they didn't have the budget to
reshoot the Romulan model, but since Spock says "Intelligence reports
Romulans now using Klingon design," we were stuck with those Klingon
battlecruisers. TOS-R giving them Romulan paint schemes is well within
the scope of what they should be doing, and is a nice upgrade.

Brian

Captain Infinity wrote:
> Once Upon A Time,
> cloud dreamer wrote:
>
>> Richard Fangnail wrote:
>>> On Apr 4, 1:28 pm, cloud dreamer <Global_Warm...@is.real> wrote:
>>>> Richard Fangnail wrote:
>>>>> This is a gross violation of Star Trek history. It's like painting
>>>>> graffitti on the Mona Lisa:
>>>>> http://img.trekmovie.com/images/tosr_ei2.jpg
>>>>> (Episode: The Enterprise Incident)
>>>> Huh? The bird of prey always had a bird painted on it...
>>>>
>>>> ..
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>>
>>>> We must change the way we live,
>>>> or the climate will do it for us.
>>> I know, but that's a Klingon ship, which had never been painted like a
>>> bird before.
>>
>> The Romulans used Klingon ships.
>
> You're missing his point. Both of your statements are correct, but you are
> still wrong. The Klingon ships used by the Romulans on TOS did not have
> Bird of Prey markings on them.

But they *should* have. That was a mistake in the original TOS SFX:
The Romulans may have been using Klingon designed ships, but since they
were in the Romulan fleet, they should have been repainted with Romulan
markings for identification purposes. The new "remastered" FX corrects
the mistake.

Present day example: When the U.S. (or Russia) sells ships and planes
to smaller countries, they keep the design for the most part, but they
paint their own markings on them. Here is an American-designed F-15 in
the Japanese air force, painted with Japanese markings:

http://www.eielson.af.mil/shared/media/photodb/photos/070711-F-6561S-210.jpg

And here is the same type of plane in the Israel Air Force, painted with
Israel markings:

http://coat.ncf.ca/f-15%20israel.jpg

Israel and Japan wouldn't fly the plane with "USAF" painted on it!


--
Steven L.
Email: sdlitvin@earthlinkNOSPAM.net
Remove the NOSPAM before replying to me.

In article <nhbdv3tr9bp0cikoh4ohaq07e81s05escr@4ax.com>,
Brian Thorn <bthorn64@suddenlink.net> wrote:

> On Fri, 04 Apr 2008 22:34:41 GMT, Captain Infinity
> <Infinity@captaininfinity.us> wrote:
>
>
> >You're missing his point. Both of your statements are correct, but you are
> >still wrong. The Klingon ships used by the Romulans on TOS did not have
> >Bird of Prey markings on them.
>
> No, but the purpose of TOS-R is to do things that Roddenberry & Co.
> would have done, had they the time and money.

No, it's really not. It's to induldge Rossi's moronic fantasies.

--
Star Trek 09:

No Shat, No Show.
http://www.disneysub.com/board/noshat.jpg

In article
<9a175314-a095-4082-b72a-a26f3152a18a@a5g2000prg.googlegroups.com>,
Richard Fangnail <richardfangnail@excite.com> wrote:

> This is a gross violation of Star Trek history. It's like painting
> graffitti on the Mona Lisa:
>
> http://img.trekmovie.com/images/tosr_ei2.jpg
>
> (Episode: The Enterprise Incident)

Does it bother you that they tossed a real Romulan in there too?

--
Star Trek 09:

No Shat, No Show.
http://www.disneysub.com/board/noshat.jpg

> Back when FASA was doing the Star Trek RPG, they published _The
> Romulan Ship Recognition Manual_ (copyright 1985, creators not
> credited). The drawings of this Romulan/Klingon ship (just small
> black and white front/side/top line drawings) clearly show the Romulan
> feather markings. Even though the markings aren't supposed to be on
> the top of the ship, I thought it was a really clever idea. Come to
> think of it, given how much Romulans hate Klingons, it's probably a
> good idea to put Romulan markings on every surface to keep from being
> blown up by your own people.

I type corrected.

Richard Fangnail wrote:
> This is a gross violation of Star Trek history. It's like painting
> graffitti on the Mona Lisa:
>
> http://img.trekmovie.com/images/tosr_ei2.jpg
>
> (Episode: The Enterprise Incident)

That's not new, IIRC.

Richard Fangnail <richardfangnail@excite.com> wrote:

>This is a gross violation of Star Trek history. It's like painting
>graffitti on the Mona Lisa:
>
>http://img.trekmovie.com/images/tosr_ei2.jpg
>
>(Episode: The Enterprise Incident)

Back when FASA was doing the Star Trek RPG, they published _The
Romulan Ship Recognition Manual_ (copyright 1985, creators not
credited). The drawings of this Romulan/Klingon ship (just small
black and white front/side/top line drawings) clearly show the Romulan
feather markings. Even though the markings aren't supposed to be on
the top of the ship, I thought it was a really clever idea. Come to
think of it, given how much Romulans hate Klingons, it's probably a
good idea to put Romulan markings on every surface to keep from being
blown up by your own people.

It is a truth universally acknowledged, that a single man in possession of a good fortune must be in want of some smackdown laid on his sorry ***. - Stone Cold Jane Austen

--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

Richard Fangnail wrote:
> This is a gross violation of Star Trek history. It's like painting
> graffitti on the Mona Lisa:
>
> http://img.trekmovie.com/images/tosr_ei2.jpg
>
> (Episode: The Enterprise Incident)

Gee, I wish I knew when that particular scene occurred: I am having
trouble finding it on the DVD.

I was wanting to catch a screen grab from the original issue DVD.

Richard Fangnail wrote:
> On Apr 4, 1:28 pm, cloud dreamer <Global_Warm...@is.real> wrote:
>> Richard Fangnail wrote:
>>> This is a gross violation of Star Trek history. It's like painting
>>> graffitti on the Mona Lisa:
>>> http://img.trekmovie.com/images/tosr_ei2.jpg
>>> (Episode: The Enterprise Incident)
>> Huh? The bird of prey always had a bird painted on it...
>>
>> ..
>>
>> --
>>
>> We must change the way we live,
>> or the climate will do it for us.
>
> I know, but that's a Klingon ship, which had never been painted like a
> bird before.

It was established in that episode that Romulans had adopted ships of
Klingon design.

I suppose the paint job was to visually distinguish them from Klingon ships.

To those of us who watched the show when it was new, the revelation that
Romulans were now using Klingon-style ships was horrifying. Romulans
had a badass weapon, and the power to cloak. The only advantage
Federation ships had was we had warp capability.

Well, the Klingons also had warp capability.

If the Romulans also now had warp capability, that was VERY BAD for the
Federation!

cloud dreamer wrote:
> Richard Fangnail wrote:
>> This is a gross violation of Star Trek history. It's like painting
>> graffitti on the Mona Lisa:
>>
>> http://img.trekmovie.com/images/tosr_ei2.jpg
>>
>> (Episode: The Enterprise Incident)
>
>
> Huh? The bird of prey always had a bird painted on it...
>
> ..
>

IIRC did the Romulans use the Klingon-built ships due to budget production constraints?
Even though that doesn't explain the definite Romulan ship on the left of the screengrab.
Maybe the episode called for more firepower for the Romulan fleet, and thus a repainted
Klingon ship(ie built on license) was built.

IIRC in another ST episode they took an Enterprise model and re-arranged the numbers(1701)
to give birth to another Federation ship.

Captain Infinity wrote:

> You're missing his point. Both of your statements are correct, but you are
> still wrong. The Klingon ships used by the Romulans on TOS did not have
> Bird of Prey markings on them.
>
> Unless they did. I'm suddenly not sure. I need a drink.

Yes that is his point, but it is not established whether he is correct.

I was trying to catch a screen grab to settle the question, but I am
having trouble pin-pointing the moment.

BTW, FWIW, Romulans do customarily paint a bird on their ships. When
they adopted Klingon design for their ships, it is in character for them
to paint a bird on it.

If it wasn't there all along, it should have been, IMHO.

ToolPackinMama wrote:
> Richard Fangnail wrote:
>> This is a gross violation of Star Trek history. It's like painting
>> graffitti on the Mona Lisa:
>>
>> http://img.trekmovie.com/images/tosr_ei2.jpg
>>
>> (Episode: The Enterprise Incident)
>
> That's not new, IIRC.

Seriously, I think it was that way in the first airing. Anybody got
proof to the contrary?

On Fri, 04 Apr 2008 22:58:53 -0400, ToolPackinMama
<philnblanc@comcast.net> wrote:


>To those of us who watched the show when it was new, the revelation that
>Romulans were now using Klingon-style ships was horrifying. Romulans
>had a badass weapon, and the power to cloak. The only advantage
>Federation ships had was we had warp capability.

The propulsion of the Romulan ships is one of those things that can't
be resolved. There is Scotty saying "simple impulse" power in "Balance
of Terror", but later we saw the same type of ship (stock footage from
"Balance") keep pace with the Enterprise at warp speed ("The Deadly
Years".)

Brian

Brian Thorn wrote:
> On Fri, 04 Apr 2008 22:58:53 -0400, ToolPackinMama
> <philnblanc@comcast.net> wrote:
>
>
>> To those of us who watched the show when it was new, the revelation that
>> Romulans were now using Klingon-style ships was horrifying. Romulans
>> had a badass weapon, and the power to cloak. The only advantage
>> Federation ships had was we had warp capability.
>
> The propulsion of the Romulan ships is one of those things that can't
> be resolved. There is Scotty saying "simple impulse" power in "Balance
> of Terror", but later we saw the same type of ship (stock footage from
> "Balance") keep pace with the Enterprise at warp speed ("The Deadly
> Years".)

Yeah, that is a puzzler.

OK, in this grab the OP seems to be correct:

http://allyourtrekarebelongto.us/nopaint.jpg

Whether or not it is deplorable that warbird-paint later occurs is a
matter of opinion.

ToolPackinMama wrote:
> OK, in this grab the OP seems to be correct:
>
> http://allyourtrekarebelongto.us/nopaint.jpg
>
> Whether or not it is deplorable that warbird-paint later occurs is a
> matter of opinion.
>

I wish to emphasize that I felt no shock when I saw Romulan ships of
Klingon design WITH the bird on them. I therefore felt that it must
have always been that way.

Memory is a funny thing. We remember in ways that are mysterious, and
not always accurate.

"Richard Fangnail" <richardfangnail@excite.com> wrote in message
news:9a175314-a095-4082-b72a-a26f3152a18a@a5g2000prg.googlegroups.com...
> This is a gross violation of Star Trek history. It's like painting
> graffitti on the Mona Lisa:
>
> http://img.trekmovie.com/images/tosr_ei2.jpg
>
> (Episode: The Enterprise Incident)


LET YOUR GEEKINESS SHINE

"cloud dreamer" <Global_Warming@is.real> wrote in message
news:KY6dnZ3s-uv_EmvanZ2dnUVZ_gednZ2d@supernews.com...
> Richard Fangnail wrote:
>> This is a gross violation of Star Trek history. It's like painting
>> graffitti on the Mona Lisa:
>>
>> http://img.trekmovie.com/images/tosr_ei2.jpg
>>
>> (Episode: The Enterprise Incident)
>
>
> Huh? The bird of prey always had a bird painted on it...
>

But a pigeon? C'mon. That makes the Romulans look like pussies!

Orson Wells as CitizenCain wrote:
> "Richard Fangnail" <richardfangnail@excite.com> wrote in message
> news:9a175314-a095-4082-b72a-a26f3152a18a@a5g2000prg.googlegroups.com...
>> This is a gross violation of Star Trek history. It's like painting
>> graffitti on the Mona Lisa:
>>
>> http://img.trekmovie.com/images/tosr_ei2.jpg
>>
>> (Episode: The Enterprise Incident)
>
>
> LET YOUR GEEKINESS SHINE

Hmm, I like Star Trek, that makes me a <geek>.

You like expanding a discussion's scope by x-posting to a half-dozen
unrelated newsgroups, that makes you a <choose word here>.

:)

In article <EKKdnYzYaaAzdmvanZ2dnUVZ_rPinZ2d@comcast.com>,
S1500 <s1500@nospam.comcast.net> wrote:

> cloud dreamer wrote:
> > Richard Fangnail wrote:
> >> This is a gross violation of Star Trek history. It's like painting
> >> graffitti on the Mona Lisa:
> >>
> >> http://img.trekmovie.com/images/tosr_ei2.jpg
> >>
> >> (Episode: The Enterprise Incident)
> >
> >
> > Huh? The bird of prey always had a bird painted on it...
> >
> > ..
> >
>
> IIRC did the Romulans use the Klingon-built ships due to budget production
> constraints?

No. Inbetween BALANCE OF TERROR and THE ENTERPRISE INCIDENT, they

I swear

Lost the Romulan model.


> Even though that doesn't explain the definite Romulan ship on the left of the
> screengrab.
> Maybe the episode called for more firepower for the Romulan fleet, and thus a
> repainted
> Klingon ship(ie built on license) was built.
>
> IIRC in another ST episode they took an Enterprise model and re-arranged the
> numbers(1701)
> to give birth to another Federation ship.

The Constellaton (an AMT kit) in THE DOOMSDAY MACHINE.

--
Star Trek 09:

No Shat, No Show.
http://www.disneysub.com/board/noshat.jpg

On Apr 5, 12:20 am, "Orson Wells as CitizenCain"
<noem...@here.invalid> wrote:
> "cloud dreamer" <Global_Warm...@is.real> wrote in message
>
> news:KY6dnZ3s-uv_EmvanZ2dnUVZ_gednZ2d@supernews.com...
>
> > Richard Fangnail wrote:
> >> This is a gross violation of Star Trek history.  It's like painting
> >> graffitti on the Mona Lisa:
>
> >>http://img.trekmovie.com/images/tosr_ei2.jpg
>
> >> (Episode: The Enterprise Incident)
>
> > Huh? The bird of prey always had a bird painted on it...
>
> But a pigeon? C'mon. That makes the Romulans look like pussies!

They could have a pigeon shaped ship that shot torpedoes out of the
back.

Did the ones in the original episode have birds or just the Romulan
ship in "Balance of Terror?"

David E. Powell wrote:
> On Apr 5, 12:20 am, "Orson Wells as CitizenCain"
> <noem...@here.invalid> wrote:
>
>>"cloud dreamer" <Global_Warm...@is.real> wrote in message
>>
>>news:KY6dnZ3s-uv_EmvanZ2dnUVZ_gednZ2d@supernews.com...
>>
>>
>>>Richard Fangnail wrote:
>>>
>>>>This is a gross violation of Star Trek history. It's like painting
>>>>graffitti on the Mona Lisa:
>>
>>>>http://img.trekmovie.com/images/tosr_ei2.jpg
>>
>>>>(Episode: The Enterprise Incident)
>>
>>>Huh? The bird of prey always had a bird painted on it...
>>
>>But a pigeon? C'mon. That makes the Romulans look like pussies!
>
>
> They could have a pigeon shaped ship that shot torpedoes out of the
> back.
>
> Did the ones in the original episode have birds or just the Romulan
> ship in "Balance of Terror?"

Just the Warbird in BoT, IIRC.

Maybe alien pigeons is nastier. Or maybe the Enterprise was frech out
of the ship wash.

Is this the first time they've actually changed something in the
re-special-effects-version of Star Trek (the Romulan Warbird inplace of
the third Klingon ship)? Every time I've watched an episode it looks
like they've done the new stuff the same as the old stuff. Same ship,
same design, same angle, just better quality.

Michael

On Apr 5, 11:27 am, Michael <thissp...@for.rent> wrote:
> David E. Powell wrote:
> > On Apr 5, 12:20 am, "Orson Wells as CitizenCain"
> > <noem...@here.invalid> wrote:
>
> >>"cloud dreamer" <Global_Warm...@is.real> wrote in message
>
> >>news:KY6dnZ3s-uv_EmvanZ2dnUVZ_gednZ2d@supernews.com...
>
> >>>Richard Fangnail wrote:
>
> >>>>This is a gross violation of Star Trek history.  It's like painting
> >>>>graffitti on the Mona Lisa:
>
> >>>>http://img.trekmovie.com/images/tosr_ei2.jpg
>
> >>>>(Episode: The Enterprise Incident)
>
> >>>Huh? The bird of prey always had a bird painted on it...
>
> >>But a pigeon? C'mon. That makes the Romulans look like pussies!
>
> > They could have a pigeon shaped ship that shot torpedoes out of the
> > back.
>
> > Did the ones in the original episode have birds or just the Romulan
> > ship in "Balance of Terror?"
>
> Just the Warbird in BoT, IIRC.

I thought the same brah....

> Maybe alien pigeons is nastier.  Or maybe the Enterprise was frech out
> of the ship wash.

My thoughts exactly. "He slimed me Ray...."

> Is this the first time they've actually changed something in the
> re-special-effects-version of Star Trek (the Romulan Warbird inplace of
> the third Klingon ship)?  Every time I've watched an episode it looks
> like they've done the new stuff the same as the old stuff.  Same ship,
> same design, same angle, just better quality.
>
> Michael

Looks like the same "D7" class ship, froma rear view, just with a bird
painted on it....

On Sat, 05 Apr 2008 03:16:25 GMT, Brian Thorn <bthorn64@suddenlink.net>
wrote:

>The propulsion of the Romulan ships is one of those things that can't
>be resolved. There is Scotty saying "simple impulse" power in "Balance
>of Terror", but later we saw the same type of ship (stock footage from
>"Balance") keep pace with the Enterprise at warp speed ("The Deadly
>Years".)

We did *not* see that in Deadly Years. The Roms "intercepted" and
"bracketed" the Enterprise. They did not pursue, and never once is a warp
factor mentioned in connection with a Romulan ship, and never once is the
speed of those warbirds specifically stated. Yes, it is highly implausible
that the warbirds could have intercepted the Enterprise without warp
capacity, but that episode is not an explicit declaration of that capacity
...

"George Peatty" <peattyg47-1230@copper.net> wrote in message
news:k5cfv39cfqmuggipleu9liqlre8ina1ujl@4ax.com...
> On Sat, 05 Apr 2008 03:16:25 GMT, Brian Thorn <bthorn64@suddenlink.net>
> wrote:
>
>>The propulsion of the Romulan ships is one of those things that can't
>>be resolved. There is Scotty saying "simple impulse" power in "Balance
>>of Terror", but later we saw the same type of ship (stock footage from
>>"Balance") keep pace with the Enterprise at warp speed ("The Deadly
>>Years".)
>
> We did *not* see that in Deadly Years. The Roms "intercepted" and
> "bracketed" the Enterprise. They did not pursue, and never once is a warp
> factor mentioned in connection with a Romulan ship, and never once is the
> speed of those warbirds specifically stated. Yes, it is highly
> implausible
> that the warbirds could have intercepted the Enterprise without warp
> capacity, but that episode is not an explicit declaration of that capacity
> ..

People still seem to get "warp" and "FTL" mixed up. Warp is a kind of FTL,
one POWERED by mater and anti mater versus the Romulan FTL powered by a
quantum singularity. (as established in TNG)

--

Qapla'
Kweeg
Ten of Canadian Clubs in the Eeeevil Trek Cabal
"Half a gallon a'scotch!" Scotty (Spectre of the Gun)
1,079,252,848.8 km/h, not just a good idea, it's the law.
"So say we all!"

You know those Romulans, always pimping out their Birds of Prey.
"Richard Fangnail" <richardfangnail@excite.com> wrote in message
news:9a175314-a095-4082-b72a-a26f3152a18a@a5g2000prg.googlegroups.com...
> This is a gross violation of Star Trek history. It's like painting
> graffitti on the Mona Lisa:
>
> http://img.trekmovie.com/images/tosr_ei2.jpg
>
> (Episode: The Enterprise Incident)

Geeks.

--
C The Shocker
Uh.... yeah.

Kweeg wrote:
> "George Peatty" <peattyg47-1230@copper.net> wrote in message
> news:k5cfv39cfqmuggipleu9liqlre8ina1ujl@4ax.com...
>> On Sat, 05 Apr 2008 03:16:25 GMT, Brian Thorn
>> <bthorn64@suddenlink.net> wrote:
>>
>>> The propulsion of the Romulan ships is one of those things that
>>> can't be resolved. There is Scotty saying "simple impulse" power in
>>> "Balance of Terror", but later we saw the same type of ship (stock
>>> footage from "Balance") keep pace with the Enterprise at warp speed
>>> ("The Deadly Years".)
>>
>> We did *not* see that in Deadly Years. The Roms "intercepted" and
>> "bracketed" the Enterprise. They did not pursue, and never once is
>> a warp factor mentioned in connection with a Romulan ship, and never
>> once is the speed of those warbirds specifically stated. Yes, it is
>> highly implausible
>> that the warbirds could have intercepted the Enterprise without warp
>> capacity, but that episode is not an explicit declaration of that
>> capacity ..
>
> People still seem to get "warp" and "FTL" mixed up. Warp is a kind of
> FTL, one POWERED by mater and anti mater versus the Romulan FTL
> powered by a quantum singularity. (as established in TNG)

It all comes down to what Scotty meant by "simple impulse".

Bearing in mind this is an episode in which phasers have proximity fuses,
mind.


Ian

--
http://www.jaxtrawstudios.com
sci-fi comics with shagging in

C The Shocker wrote:
> Geeks.
>
Ya Think?

And people say <I> need a girlfriend......

--
aem sends....

S1500 <s1500@nospam.comcast.net> wrote in
news:EKKdnYzYaaAzdmvanZ2dnUVZ_rPinZ2d@comcast.com:

> cloud dreamer wrote:
>> Richard Fangnail wrote:
>>> This is a gross violation of Star Trek history. It's like painting
>>> graffitti on the Mona Lisa:
>>>
>>> http://img.trekmovie.com/images/tosr_ei2.jpg
>>>
>>> (Episode: The Enterprise Incident)
>>
>>
>> Huh? The bird of prey always had a bird painted on it...
>>
>> ..
>>
>
> IIRC did the Romulans use the Klingon-built ships due to budget
> production constraints? Even though that doesn't explain the definite
> Romulan ship on the left of the screengrab. Maybe the episode called
> for more firepower for the Romulan fleet, and thus a repainted Klingon
> ship(ie built on license) was built.
>
> IIRC in another ST episode they took an Enterprise model and
> re-arranged the numbers(1701) to give birth to another Federation
> ship.

Roddenberry wanted to sell more AMT Klingon ship kits so he had the
Romulans use the same ships.

--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

Wiseguy wrote:
> S1500 <s1500@nospam.comcast.net> wrote in
> news:EKKdnYzYaaAzdmvanZ2dnUVZ_rPinZ2d@comcast.com:
>
>> cloud dreamer wrote:
>>> Richard Fangnail wrote:
>>>> This is a gross violation of Star Trek history. It's like painting
>>>> graffitti on the Mona Lisa:
>>>>
>>>> http://img.trekmovie.com/images/tosr_ei2.jpg
>>>>
>>>> (Episode: The Enterprise Incident)
>>>
>>> Huh? The bird of prey always had a bird painted on it...
>>>
>>> ..
>>>
>> IIRC did the Romulans use the Klingon-built ships due to budget
>> production constraints? Even though that doesn't explain the definite
>> Romulan ship on the left of the screengrab. Maybe the episode called
>> for more firepower for the Romulan fleet, and thus a repainted Klingon
>> ship(ie built on license) was built.
>>
>> IIRC in another ST episode they took an Enterprise model and
>> re-arranged the numbers(1701) to give birth to another Federation
>> ship.
>
> Roddenberry wanted to sell more AMT Klingon ship kits so he had the
> Romulans use the same ships.
>

Well, he still owes me one. I ordered one 25 years ago...still haven't
gotten it...

..

--

We must change the way we live,
or the climate will do it for us.


www.ipcc.ch/

On Fri, 04 Apr 2008 22:10:33 -0700, Anim8rFSK <ANIM8Rfsk@cox.net>
wrote:

>In article <EKKdnYzYaaAzdmvanZ2dnUVZ_rPinZ2d@comcast.com>,
> S1500 <s1500@nospam.comcast.net> wrote:
>
>> cloud dreamer wrote:
>> > Richard Fangnail wrote:
>> >> This is a gross violation of Star Trek history. It's like painting
>> >> graffitti on the Mona Lisa:
>> >>
>> >> http://img.trekmovie.com/images/tosr_ei2.jpg
>> >>
>> >> (Episode: The Enterprise Incident)
>> >
>> >
>> > Huh? The bird of prey always had a bird painted on it...
>> >
>> > ..
>> >
>>
>> IIRC did the Romulans use the Klingon-built ships due to budget production
>> constraints?
>
>No. Inbetween BALANCE OF TERROR and THE ENTERPRISE INCIDENT, they
>
>I swear
>
>Lost the Romulan model.

The Deadly Years

I seem to recall a story -- and it might be an apocryphal story --
that the original Romulan ship model was damaged or lost at some
point, forcing the change.
--
"Please captain, not in front of the Klingons."
-- Spock

Roberto Castillo
robertocastillo@ameritech.net
http://zombie-gulch.myminicity.com/

Zombie Elvis wrote:
> On Fri, 04 Apr 2008 22:10:33 -0700, Anim8rFSK <ANIM8Rfsk@cox.net>
> wrote:
>
>> In article <EKKdnYzYaaAzdmvanZ2dnUVZ_rPinZ2d@comcast.com>,
>> S1500 <s1500@nospam.comcast.net> wrote:
>>
>>> cloud dreamer wrote:
>>>> Richard Fangnail wrote:
>>>>> This is a gross violation of Star Trek history. It's like
>>>>> painting graffitti on the Mona Lisa:
>>>>>
>>>>> http://img.trekmovie.com/images/tosr_ei2.jpg
>>>>>
>>>>> (Episode: The Enterprise Incident)
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Huh? The bird of prey always had a bird painted on it...
>>>>
>>>> ..
>>>>
>>>
>>> IIRC did the Romulans use the Klingon-built ships due to budget
>>> production constraints?
>>
>> No. Inbetween BALANCE OF TERROR and THE ENTERPRISE INCIDENT, they
>>
>> I swear
>>
>> Lost the Romulan model.
>
> The Deadly Years
>
> I seem to recall a story -- and it might be an apocryphal story --
> that the original Romulan ship model was damaged or lost at some
> point, forcing the change.

The thing I can never understand about all this with the models and budgets
is why the models seem to have cost so much money you couldn't just make a
new one for a few bucks. I mean, especially on the TVs of the day, in all
but the closest closeup all you saw was a rough blob. Even the AMT
Enterprise model kit looked okay except in the bad choice of rear close-up,
for the time.

How much of an afternoon would it have taken up to cobble together another
Romulan ship?


Ian

--
http://www.jaxtrawstudios.com
sci-fi comics with shagging in

In article <se5gv3dr372shv5rncck6qg1q0nmn6qnd1@4ax.com>,
Zombie Elvis <DELETEMETOREPLYrobertocastillo@ameritech.net> wrote:

> On Fri, 04 Apr 2008 22:10:33 -0700, Anim8rFSK <ANIM8Rfsk@cox.net>
> wrote:
>
> >In article <EKKdnYzYaaAzdmvanZ2dnUVZ_rPinZ2d@comcast.com>,
> > S1500 <s1500@nospam.comcast.net> wrote:
> >
> >> cloud dreamer wrote:
> >> > Richard Fangnail wrote:
> >> >> This is a gross violation of Star Trek history. It's like painting
> >> >> graffitti on the Mona Lisa:
> >> >>
> >> >> http://img.trekmovie.com/images/tosr_ei2.jpg
> >> >>
> >> >> (Episode: The Enterprise Incident)
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > Huh? The bird of prey always had a bird painted on it...
> >> >
> >> > ..
> >> >
> >>
> >> IIRC did the Romulans use the Klingon-built ships due to budget production
> >> constraints?
> >
> >No. Inbetween BALANCE OF TERROR and THE ENTERPRISE INCIDENT, they
> >
> >I swear
> >
> >Lost the Romulan model.
>
> The Deadly Years
>
> I seem to recall a story -- and it might be an apocryphal story --
> that the original Romulan ship model was damaged or lost at some
> point, forcing the change.


Lost. Deadly Years is all stock footage isn't it?

--
Star Trek 09:

No Shat, No Show.
http://www.disneysub.com/board/noshat.jpg

Anim8rFSK wrote:
> In article <se5gv3dr372shv5rncck6qg1q0nmn6qnd1@4ax.com>,
> Zombie Elvis <DELETEMETOREPLYrobertocastillo@ameritech.net> wrote:
>
>> On Fri, 04 Apr 2008 22:10:33 -0700, Anim8rFSK <ANIM8Rfsk@cox.net>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> In article <EKKdnYzYaaAzdmvanZ2dnUVZ_rPinZ2d@comcast.com>,
>>> S1500 <s1500@nospam.comcast.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>> cloud dreamer wrote:
>>>>> Richard Fangnail wrote:
>>>>>> This is a gross violation of Star Trek history. It's like
>>>>>> painting graffitti on the Mona Lisa:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> http://img.trekmovie.com/images/tosr_ei2.jpg
>>>>>>
>>>>>> (Episode: The Enterprise Incident)
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Huh? The bird of prey always had a bird painted on it...
>>>>>
>>>>> ..
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> IIRC did the Romulans use the Klingon-built ships due to budget
>>>> production constraints?
>>>
>>> No. Inbetween BALANCE OF TERROR and THE ENTERPRISE INCIDENT, they
>>>
>>> I swear
>>>
>>> Lost the Romulan model.
>>
>> The Deadly Years
>>
>> I seem to recall a story -- and it might be an apocryphal story --
>> that the original Romulan ship model was damaged or lost at some
>> point, forcing the change.
>
>
> Lost. Deadly Years is all stock footage isn't it?

As a matter of fact, it is :)


Ian

--
http://www.jaxtrawstudios.com
sci-fi comics with shagging in

"Jaxtraw" <jax@knickersjaxtrawstudios.com> wrote in message
news:47f7db3e$0$32050$da0feed9@news.zen.co.uk...
> Kweeg wrote:
>> "George Peatty" <peattyg47-1230@copper.net> wrote in message
>> news:k5cfv39cfqmuggipleu9liqlre8ina1ujl@4ax.com...
>>> On Sat, 05 Apr 2008 03:16:25 GMT, Brian Thorn
>>> <bthorn64@suddenlink.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>> The propulsion of the Romulan ships is one of those things that
>>>> can't be resolved. There is Scotty saying "simple impulse" power in
>>>> "Balance of Terror", but later we saw the same type of ship (stock
>>>> footage from "Balance") keep pace with the Enterprise at warp speed
>>>> ("The Deadly Years".)
>>>
>>> We did *not* see that in Deadly Years. The Roms "intercepted" and
>>> "bracketed" the Enterprise. They did not pursue, and never once is
>>> a warp factor mentioned in connection with a Romulan ship, and never
>>> once is the speed of those warbirds specifically stated. Yes, it is
>>> highly implausible
>>> that the warbirds could have intercepted the Enterprise without warp
>>> capacity, but that episode is not an explicit declaration of that
>>> capacity ..
>>
>> People still seem to get "warp" and "FTL" mixed up. Warp is a kind of
>> FTL, one POWERED by mater and anti mater versus the Romulan FTL
>> powered by a quantum singularity. (as established in TNG)
>
> It all comes down to what Scotty meant by "simple impulse".


Scotty only said that their *power* was "simple impulse."


> Bearing in mind this is an episode in which phasers have proximity fuses,
> mind.


Indeed, and a phaser control room. {{;-/>

--

Qapla'
Kweeg
Ten of Canadian Clubs in the Eeeevil Trek Cabal
"Half a gallon a'scotch!" Scotty (Spectre of the Gun)
1,079,252,848.8 km/h, not just a good idea, it's the law.
"So say we all!"

Kweeg wrote:
> "Jaxtraw" <jax@knickersjaxtrawstudios.com> wrote in message
> news:47f7db3e$0$32050$da0feed9@news.zen.co.uk...
>> Kweeg wrote:
>>> "George Peatty" <peattyg47-1230@copper.net> wrote in message
>>> news:k5cfv39cfqmuggipleu9liqlre8ina1ujl@4ax.com...
>>>> On Sat, 05 Apr 2008 03:16:25 GMT, Brian Thorn
>>>> <bthorn64@suddenlink.net> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> The propulsion of the Romulan ships is one of those things that
>>>>> can't be resolved. There is Scotty saying "simple impulse" power
>>>>> in "Balance of Terror", but later we saw the same type of ship
>>>>> (stock footage from "Balance") keep pace with the Enterprise at
>>>>> warp speed ("The Deadly Years".)
>>>>
>>>> We did *not* see that in Deadly Years. The Roms "intercepted" and
>>>> "bracketed" the Enterprise. They did not pursue, and never once is
>>>> a warp factor mentioned in connection with a Romulan ship, and
>>>> never once is the speed of those warbirds specifically stated.
>>>> Yes, it is highly implausible
>>>> that the warbirds could have intercepted the Enterprise without
>>>> warp capacity, but that episode is not an explicit declaration of
>>>> that capacity ..
>>>
>>> People still seem to get "warp" and "FTL" mixed up. Warp is a kind
>>> of FTL, one POWERED by mater and anti mater versus the Romulan FTL
>>> powered by a quantum singularity. (as established in TNG)
>>
>> It all comes down to what Scotty meant by "simple impulse".
>
>
> Scotty only said that their *power* was "simple impulse."
>
>
>> Bearing in mind this is an episode in which phasers have proximity
>> fuses, mind.
>
>
> Indeed, and a phaser control room. {{;-/>

As you may recall, that phaser control room is my canon evidence that Sulu
doesn't actually do anything at that console of his. You leave my phaser
control room alone :)


Ian

--
http://www.jaxtrawstudios.com
sci-fi comics with shagging in

In article <47f81f76$0$10630$fa0fcedb@news.zen.co.uk>,
"Jaxtraw" <jax@knickersjaxtrawstudios.com> wrote:

> Zombie Elvis wrote:
> > On Fri, 04 Apr 2008 22:10:33 -0700, Anim8rFSK <ANIM8Rfsk@cox.net>
> > wrote:
> >
> >> In article <EKKdnYzYaaAzdmvanZ2dnUVZ_rPinZ2d@comcast.com>,
> >> S1500 <s1500@nospam.comcast.net> wrote:
> >>
> >>> cloud dreamer wrote:
> >>>> Richard Fangnail wrote:
> >>>>> This is a gross violation of Star Trek history. It's like
> >>>>> painting graffitti on the Mona Lisa:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> http://img.trekmovie.com/images/tosr_ei2.jpg
> >>>>>
> >>>>> (Episode: The Enterprise Incident)
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> Huh? The bird of prey always had a bird painted on it...
> >>>>
> >>>> ..
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>> IIRC did the Romulans use the Klingon-built ships due to budget
> >>> production constraints?
> >>
> >> No. Inbetween BALANCE OF TERROR and THE ENTERPRISE INCIDENT, they
> >>
> >> I swear
> >>
> >> Lost the Romulan model.
> >
> > The Deadly Years
> >
> > I seem to recall a story -- and it might be an apocryphal story --
> > that the original Romulan ship model was damaged or lost at some
> > point, forcing the change.
>
> The thing I can never understand about all this with the models and budgets
> is why the models seem to have cost so much money you couldn't just make a
> new one for a few bucks. I mean, especially on the TVs of the day, in all
> but the closest closeup all you saw was a rough blob. Even the AMT
> Enterprise model kit looked okay except in the bad choice of rear close-up,
> for the time.
>
> How much of an afternoon would it have taken up to cobble together another
> Romulan ship?

Yeah, but you'd have to have the plans and reference and somebody in
place to do it. Now, that's all readily available. Then? Plans that
are 2 years old, film clips, all of which might be lost or hard to get
ahold of. Or "just use this model, it's sci-fi, who cares?"

--
Star Trek 09:

No Shat, No Show.
http://www.disneysub.com/board/noshat.jpg

"Jaxtraw" <jax@knickersjaxtrawstudios.com> wrote in message
news:47f82bf8$0$32044$da0feed9@news.zen.co.uk...
> Kweeg wrote:
>> "Jaxtraw" <jax@knickersjaxtrawstudios.com> wrote in message
>> news:47f7db3e$0$32050$da0feed9@news.zen.co.uk...
>>> Kweeg wrote:
>>>> "George Peatty" <peattyg47-1230@copper.net> wrote in message
>>>> news:k5cfv39cfqmuggipleu9liqlre8ina1ujl@4ax.com...
>>>>> On Sat, 05 Apr 2008 03:16:25 GMT, Brian Thorn
>>>>> <bthorn64@suddenlink.net> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> The propulsion of the Romulan ships is one of those things that
>>>>>> can't be resolved. There is Scotty saying "simple impulse" power
>>>>>> in "Balance of Terror", but later we saw the same type of ship
>>>>>> (stock footage from "Balance") keep pace with the Enterprise at
>>>>>> warp speed ("The Deadly Years".)
>>>>>
>>>>> We did *not* see that in Deadly Years. The Roms "intercepted" and
>>>>> "bracketed" the Enterprise. They did not pursue, and never once is
>>>>> a warp factor mentioned in connection with a Romulan ship, and
>>>>> never once is the speed of those warbirds specifically stated.
>>>>> Yes, it is highly implausible
>>>>> that the warbirds could have intercepted the Enterprise without
>>>>> warp capacity, but that episode is not an explicit declaration of
>>>>> that capacity ..
>>>>
>>>> People still seem to get "warp" and "FTL" mixed up. Warp is a kind
>>>> of FTL, one POWERED by mater and anti mater versus the Romulan FTL
>>>> powered by a quantum singularity. (as established in TNG)
>>>
>>> It all comes down to what Scotty meant by "simple impulse".
>>
>>
>> Scotty only said that their *power* was "simple impulse."
>>
>>
>>> Bearing in mind this is an episode in which phasers have proximity
>>> fuses, mind.
>>
>>
>> Indeed, and a phaser control room. {{;-/>
>
> As you may recall, that phaser control room is my canon evidence that Sulu
> doesn't actually do anything at that console of his. You leave my phaser
> control room alone :)


{{;-/>

--

Qapla'
Kweeg
Ten of Canadian Clubs in the Eeeevil Trek Cabal
"Half a gallon a'scotch!" Scotty (Spectre of the Gun)
1,079,252,848.8 km/h, not just a good idea, it's the law.
"So say we all!"

Michael wrote:
> David E. Powell wrote:
>> On Apr 5, 12:20 am, "Orson Wells as CitizenCain"
>> <noem...@here.invalid> wrote:

<snip>

>
> Is this the first time they've actually changed something in the
> re-special-effects-version of Star Trek (the Romulan Warbird inplace
> of the third Klingon ship)? Every time I've watched an episode it
> looks like they've done the new stuff the same as the old stuff. Same
> ship, same design, same angle, just better quality.
>

In the 'Ultimate Computer' that starbase was originally a re-use of Deep
Space Station K7 from 'The Trouble With The Tribbles'.
Changing canon. :(
'Better quality' is debatable.

--
www.woutervalentijn.net

www.nksf.scifics.com/nksfseries.html

liam=mail

On Sat, 05 Apr 2008 19:15:57 -0500, Zombie Elvis
<DELETEMETOREPLYrobertocastillo@ameritech.net> wrote:

>The Deadly Years

>I seem to recall a story -- and it might be an apocryphal story --
>that the original Romulan ship model was damaged or lost at some
>point, forcing the change.

That was the story I had heard.

Wouter Valentijn wrote:
> Michael wrote:
>> David E. Powell wrote:
>>> On Apr 5, 12:20 am, "Orson Wells as CitizenCain"
>>> <noem...@here.invalid> wrote:
>
> <snip>
>
>> Is this the first time they've actually changed something in the
>> re-special-effects-version of Star Trek (the Romulan Warbird inplace
>> of the third Klingon ship)? Every time I've watched an episode it
>> looks like they've done the new stuff the same as the old stuff. Same
>> ship, same design, same angle, just better quality.
>>
>
> In the 'Ultimate Computer' that starbase was originally a re-use of Deep
> Space Station K7 from 'The Trouble With The Tribbles'.
> Changing canon. :(
> 'Better quality' is debatable.
>
I'd agree on that one- why NOT use the same set of blueprints for
multiple space stations, just like you do the ships themselves? There
was no logical reason to retcon that image.

--
aem sends...

aemeijers wrote:
> Wouter Valentijn wrote:
>> Michael wrote:
>>> David E. Powell wrote:
>>>> On Apr 5, 12:20 am, "Orson Wells as CitizenCain"
>>>> <noem...@here.invalid> wrote:
>>
>> <snip>
>>
>>> Is this the first time they've actually changed something in the
>>> re-special-effects-version of Star Trek (the Romulan Warbird inplace
>>> of the third Klingon ship)? Every time I've watched an episode it
>>> looks like they've done the new stuff the same as the old stuff. Same
>>> ship, same design, same angle, just better quality.
>>>
>>
>> In the 'Ultimate Computer' that starbase was originally a re-use of
>> Deep Space Station K7 from 'The Trouble With The Tribbles'.
>> Changing canon. :(
>> 'Better quality' is debatable.
>>
> I'd agree on that one- why NOT use the same set of blueprints for
> multiple space stations, just like you do the ships themselves? There
> was no logical reason to retcon that image.

What's so illogical about "to make it look better"?

--
Rockboy

We suffice

aemeijers <aemeijers@att.net> wrote in news:hbdKj.75892$D_3.60803@bgtnsc05-
news.ops.worldnet.att.net:

> Rockboy wrote:
>> What's so illogical about "to make it look better"?
>>
> I assumed he meant they had changed the design, not just switched it
> with a sharper CGI. (I don't have the redone disks or the hardware to
> watch them on, if they are any flavor of HD.)
>
> A space station isn't a yuppie McMansion. The design should be 'form
> follows function'. DS9, for example, although built as a federation
> station, strained plausibility with the art deco filligrees all over it.
> I can pretty much guarantee that reall space stations will either look
> like what we have now- erector sets and baked potatoes mating- or will
> look like oil tankers- scarred and many colors. They won't be fairy
> castles floating in the air.
>

I thought DS9 was built for Cardassian use and the Federation took it over
near the start of the series.

--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

Rockboy wrote:
> aemeijers wrote:
>> Wouter Valentijn wrote:
>>> Michael wrote:
>>>> David E. Powell wrote:
>>>>> On Apr 5, 12:20 am, "Orson Wells as CitizenCain"
>>>>> <noem...@here.invalid> wrote:
>>>
>>> <snip>
>>>
>>>> Is this the first time they've actually changed something in the
>>>> re-special-effects-version of Star Trek (the Romulan Warbird inplace
>>>> of the third Klingon ship)? Every time I've watched an episode it
>>>> looks like they've done the new stuff the same as the old stuff.
>>>> Same ship, same design, same angle, just better quality.
>>>>
>>>
>>> In the 'Ultimate Computer' that starbase was originally a re-use of
>>> Deep Space Station K7 from 'The Trouble With The Tribbles'.
>>> Changing canon. :(
>>> 'Better quality' is debatable.
>>>
>> I'd agree on that one- why NOT use the same set of blueprints for
>> multiple space stations, just like you do the ships themselves? There
>> was no logical reason to retcon that image.
>
> What's so illogical about "to make it look better"?
>
I assumed he meant they had changed the design, not just switched it
with a sharper CGI. (I don't have the redone disks or the hardware to
watch them on, if they are any flavor of HD.)

A space station isn't a yuppie McMansion. The design should be 'form
follows function'. DS9, for example, although built as a federation
station, strained plausibility with the art deco filligrees all over it.
I can pretty much guarantee that reall space stations will either look
like what we have now- erector sets and baked potatoes mating- or will
look like oil tankers- scarred and many colors. They won't be fairy
castles floating in the air.

--
aem sends...

--
aem sends....

"Richard Fangnail" <richardfangnail@excite.com> schreef in bericht
news:9a175314-a095-4082-b72a-a26f3152a18a@a5g2000prg.googlegroups.com...
> This is a gross violation of Star Trek history. It's like painting
> graffitti on the Mona Lisa:
>
> http://img.trekmovie.com/images/tosr_ei2.jpg
>
> (Episode: The Enterprise Incident)


http://mufoncms.com/cgi-bin/manage_sighting_reports.pl?mode=latest_reports

Rotate this photo
http://www.mufoncms.com/files/10169_submitter_file1__AC191-5.jpg


Bert RvB.


--

Bert ( A W RvB )
bert@rjrsnvbrn.nl
www.rjrsnvbrn.nl

aemeijers wrote:
> Rockboy wrote:
>> aemeijers wrote:
>>> Wouter Valentijn wrote:
>>>> Michael wrote:
>>>>> David E. Powell wrote:
>>>>>> On Apr 5, 12:20 am, "Orson Wells as CitizenCain"
>>>>>> <noem...@here.invalid> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> <snip>
>>>>
>>>>> Is this the first time they've actually changed something in the
>>>>> re-special-effects-version of Star Trek (the Romulan Warbird inplace
>>>>> of the third Klingon ship)? Every time I've watched an episode it
>>>>> looks like they've done the new stuff the same as the old stuff.
>>>>> Same ship, same design, same angle, just better quality.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> In the 'Ultimate Computer' that starbase was originally a re-use of
>>>> Deep Space Station K7 from 'The Trouble With The Tribbles'.
>>>> Changing canon. :(
>>>> 'Better quality' is debatable.
>>>>
>>> I'd agree on that one- why NOT use the same set of blueprints for
>>> multiple space stations, just like you do the ships themselves? There
>>> was no logical reason to retcon that image.
>>
>> What's so illogical about "to make it look better"?
>>
> I assumed he meant they had changed the design, not just switched it
> with a sharper CGI. (I don't have the redone disks or the hardware to
> watch them on, if they are any flavor of HD.)
>
> A space station isn't a yuppie McMansion. The design should be 'form
> follows function'. DS9, for example, although built as a federation
> station, strained plausibility with the art deco filligrees all over it.
> I can pretty much guarantee that reall space stations will either look
> like what we have now- erector sets and baked potatoes mating- or will
> look like oil tankers- scarred and many colors. They won't be fairy
> castles floating in the air.

Dude, I think you have to step for a moment and look what you're doing.
You're arguing complete gibberish about space station design in a
hypothetical future based on your own personal aesthetics.

I mean seriously, you just said "A space station isn't a yuppie
McMansion." I'm scared to imagine the thought process that led you to
believe that was a valid argument to present.

Anyway, the main point is, now that they have a chance, why not spruce
up the special effects a little? Just because visual effects guys on a
tv show in the 60s didn't have the budget to come up with new space
station designs doesn't mean we must rigidly adhere to those designs now.

PS, DS9 wasn't built by the Federation.

--
Rockboy

We suffice

On Apr 4, 9:54 pm, ToolPackinMama <philnbl...@comcast.net> wrote:

<snip>
> Hmm, I like Star Trek, that makes me a <geek>.
>
> You like expanding a discussion's scope by x-posting to a half-dozen
> unrelated newsgroups, that makes you a <choose word here>.
>
> :)



Hi Toolie!


TBerk

In article <hbdKj.75892$D_3.60803@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net>,
aemeijers <aemeijers@att.net> wrote:

> A space station isn't a yuppie McMansion. The design should be 'form
> follows function'. DS9, for example, although built as a federation
> station

It's been a while since I watched that show but as I recall, the station
was built by the Cardassians as an ore processing facility. It wasn't
built by the Federation.

Once Upon A Time,
aemeijers wrote:

>DS9, for example, although built as a federation station,

You Fail.
Go directly to Rura Penthe, do not pass "GO", do not collect 200 credits.



**
Captain Infinity

David E. Powell wrote:
> On Apr 5, 11:27 am, Michael <thissp...@for.rent> wrote:
>
>>David E. Powell wrote:
>>
>>>On Apr 5, 12:20 am, "Orson Wells as CitizenCain"
>>><noem...@here.invalid> wrote:
>>
>>>>"cloud dreamer" <Global_Warm...@is.real> wrote in message
>>
>>>>news:KY6dnZ3s-uv_EmvanZ2dnUVZ_gednZ2d@supernews.com...
>>
>>>>>Richard Fangnail wrote:
>>
>>>>>>This is a gross violation of Star Trek history. It's like painting
>>>>>>graffitti on the Mona Lisa:
>>
>>>>>>http://img.trekmovie.com/images/tosr_ei2.jpg
>>
>>>>>>(Episode: The Enterprise Incident)
>>
>>>>>Huh? The bird of prey always had a bird painted on it...
>>
>>>>But a pigeon? C'mon. That makes the Romulans look like pussies!
>>
>>>They could have a pigeon shaped ship that shot torpedoes out of the
>>>back.
>>
>>>Did the ones in the original episode have birds or just the Romulan
>>>ship in "Balance of Terror?"
>>
>>Just the Warbird in BoT, IIRC.
>
>
> I thought the same brah....
>
>
>>Maybe alien pigeons is nastier. Or maybe the Enterprise was frech out
>>of the ship wash.
>
>
> My thoughts exactly. "He slimed me Ray...."
>
>
>>Is this the first time they've actually changed something in the
>>re-special-effects-version of Star Trek (the Romulan Warbird inplace of
>>the third Klingon ship)? Every time I've watched an episode it looks
>>like they've done the new stuff the same as the old stuff. Same ship,
>>same design, same angle, just better quality.
>>
>>Michael
>
>
> Looks like the same "D7" class ship, froma rear view, just with a bird
> painted on it....

I was talking about the **** to the left between the Enterprise and the
D-7(now with Romulan Pigeon)'s nacelle).

But the question holds true for the pigeon on the D-7 as well. Or are
they updating little things like insignias?

Michael

Wouter Valentijn wrote:

> Michael wrote:
>
>>David E. Powell wrote:
>>
>>>On Apr 5, 12:20 am, "Orson Wells as CitizenCain"
>>><noem...@here.invalid> wrote:
>
>
> <snip>
>
>>Is this the first time they've actually changed something in the
>>re-special-effects-version of Star Trek (the Romulan Warbird inplace
>>of the third Klingon ship)? Every time I've watched an episode it
>>looks like they've done the new stuff the same as the old stuff. Same
>>ship, same design, same angle, just better quality.
>>
>
>
> In the 'Ultimate Computer' that starbase was originally a re-use of Deep
> Space Station K7 from 'The Trouble With The Tribbles'.
> Changing canon. :(
> 'Better quality' is debatable.

I haven't seen that episode. I'll have to look for pics.

Michael

aemeijers wrote:

> Rockboy wrote:
>
>> aemeijers wrote:
>>
>>> Wouter Valentijn wrote:
>>>
>>>> Michael wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> David E. Powell wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On Apr 5, 12:20 am, "Orson Wells as CitizenCain"
>>>>>> <noem...@here.invalid> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> <snip>
>>>>
>>>>> Is this the first time they've actually changed something in the
>>>>> re-special-effects-version of Star Trek (the Romulan Warbird inplace
>>>>> of the third Klingon ship)? Every time I've watched an episode it
>>>>> looks like they've done the new stuff the same as the old stuff.
>>>>> Same ship, same design, same angle, just better quality.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> In the 'Ultimate Computer' that starbase was originally a re-use of
>>>> Deep Space Station K7 from 'The Trouble With The Tribbles'.
>>>> Changing canon. :(
>>>> 'Better quality' is debatable.
>>>>
>>> I'd agree on that one- why NOT use the same set of blueprints for
>>> multiple space stations, just like you do the ships themselves? There
>>> was no logical reason to retcon that image.
>>
>>
>> What's so illogical about "to make it look better"?
>>
> I assumed he meant they had changed the design, not just switched it
> with a sharper CGI. (I don't have the redone disks or the hardware to
> watch them on, if they are any flavor of HD.)
>
> A space station isn't a yuppie McMansion. The design should be 'form
> follows function'. DS9, for example, although built as a federation
> station, strained plausibility with the art deco filligrees all over it.
> I can pretty much guarantee that reall space stations will either look
> like what we have now- erector sets and baked potatoes mating- or will
> look like oil tankers- scarred and many colors. They won't be fairy
> castles floating in the air.

I thought DS9 was built as a Cardassian space station that the Feds took
over after the Cardassians were beat back away from Bajor.

Michael

Captain Infinity wrote:

> Once Upon A Time,
> aemeijers wrote:
>
>
>>DS9, for example, although built as a federation station,
>
>
> You Fail.
> Go directly to Rura Penthe, do not pass "GO", do not collect 200 credits.

And don't get to know a shapeshifting alien REALLY well!

Michael

Michael wrote:
> Wouter Valentijn wrote:
>
>> Michael wrote:
>>
>>> David E. Powell wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Apr 5, 12:20 am, "Orson Wells as CitizenCain"
>>>> <noem...@here.invalid> wrote:
>>
>>
>> <snip>
>>
>>> Is this the first time they've actually changed something in the
>>> re-special-effects-version of Star Trek (the Romulan Warbird inplace
>>> of the third Klingon ship)? Every time I've watched an episode it
>>> looks like they've done the new stuff the same as the old stuff.
>>> Same ship, same design, same angle, just better quality.
>>>
>>
>>
>> In the 'Ultimate Computer' that starbase was originally a re-use of
>> Deep Space Station K7 from 'The Trouble With The Tribbles'.
>> Changing canon. :(
>> 'Better quality' is debatable.
>
> I haven't seen that episode. I'll have to look for pics.
>

I did just that. ;-)


--
www.woutervalentijn.net

www.nksf.scifics.com/nksfseries.html

liam=mail

Michael wrote:
> aemeijers wrote:
>
>> Rockboy wrote:
>>
>>> aemeijers wrote:
>>>
>>>> Wouter Valentijn wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Michael wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> David E. Powell wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Apr 5, 12:20 am, "Orson Wells as CitizenCain"
>>>>>>> <noem...@here.invalid> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> <snip>
>>>>>
>>>>>> Is this the first time they've actually changed something in the
>>>>>> re-special-effects-version of Star Trek (the Romulan Warbird
>>>>>> inplace of the third Klingon ship)? Every time I've watched an
>>>>>> episode it looks like they've done the new stuff the same as the
>>>>>> old stuff. Same ship, same design, same angle, just better
>>>>>> quality.
>>>>>
>>>>> In the 'Ultimate Computer' that starbase was originally a re-use
>>>>> of Deep Space Station K7 from 'The Trouble With The Tribbles'.
>>>>> Changing canon. :(
>>>>> 'Better quality' is debatable.
>>>>>
>>>> I'd agree on that one- why NOT use the same set of blueprints for
>>>> multiple space stations, just like you do the ships themselves?
>>>> There was no logical reason to retcon that image.
>>>
>>>
>>> What's so illogical about "to make it look better"?

Because that part is really debatable. :-)
I *love* the K7 design. It completely jives with the Enterprise herself.


>>>
>> I assumed he meant they had changed the design, not just switched it
>> with a sharper CGI. (I don't have the redone disks or the hardware to
>> watch them on, if they are any flavor of HD.)
>>
>> A space station isn't a yuppie McMansion. The design should be 'form
>> follows function'. DS9, for example, although built as a federation
>> station, strained plausibility with the art deco filligrees all over
>> it. I can pretty much guarantee that reall space stations will
>> either look like what we have now- erector sets and baked potatoes
>> mating- or will look like oil tankers- scarred and many colors. They
>> won't be fairy castles floating in the air.
>
> I thought DS9 was built as a Cardassian space station that the Feds
> took over after the Cardassians were beat back away from Bajor.
>

Yes. The design is Cardassian (same as Empok Nor), the labor was Bajoran and
the Federation started to use it after the Cardies were chased off by the
Bajorans.


--
www.woutervalentijn.net

www.nksf.scifics.com/nksfseries.html

liam=mail

Rockboy wrote:
> aemeijers wrote:
>> Rockboy wrote:
>>> aemeijers wrote:
>>>> Wouter Valentijn wrote:
>>>>> Michael wrote:
>>>>>> David E. Powell wrote:
>>>>>>> On Apr 5, 12:20 am, "Orson Wells as CitizenCain"
>>>>>>> <noem...@here.invalid> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> <snip>
>>>>>
>>>>>> Is this the first time they've actually changed something in the
>>>>>> re-special-effects-version of Star Trek (the Romulan Warbird inplace
>>>>>> of the third Klingon ship)? Every time I've watched an episode it
>>>>>> looks like they've done the new stuff the same as the old stuff.
>>>>>> Same ship, same design, same angle, just better quality.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> In the 'Ultimate Computer' that starbase was originally a re-use of
>>>>> Deep Space Station K7 from 'The Trouble With The Tribbles'.
>>>>> Changing canon. :(
>>>>> 'Better quality' is debatable.
>>>>>
>>>> I'd agree on that one- why NOT use the same set of blueprints for
>>>> multiple space stations, just like you do the ships themselves?
>>>> There was no logical reason to retcon that image.
>>>
>>> What's so illogical about "to make it look better"?
>>>
>> I assumed he meant they had changed the design, not just switched it
>> with a sharper CGI. (I don't have the redone disks or the hardware to
>> watch them on, if they are any flavor of HD.)
>>
>> A space station isn't a yuppie McMansion. The design should be 'form
>> follows function'. DS9, for example, although built as a federation
>> station, strained plausibility with the art deco filligrees all over
>> it. I can pretty much guarantee that reall space stations will either
>> look like what we have now- erector sets and baked potatoes mating- or
>> will look like oil tankers- scarred and many colors. They won't be
>> fairy castles floating in the air.
>
> Dude, I think you have to step for a moment and look what you're doing.
> You're arguing complete gibberish about space station design in a
> hypothetical future based on your own personal aesthetics.
>
> I mean seriously, you just said "A space station isn't a yuppie
> McMansion." I'm scared to imagine the thought process that led you to
> believe that was a valid argument to present.
>
> Anyway, the main point is, now that they have a chance, why not spruce
> up the special effects a little? Just because visual effects guys on a
> tv show in the 60s didn't have the budget to come up with new space
> station designs doesn't mean we must rigidly adhere to those designs now.
>
> PS, DS9 wasn't built by the Federation.
>
Yeah, I know- mind generates words faster than fingers can type them.
Oops- so I'm not a typist.

But that embarrassment aside, I don't think my argument is gibberish.
It isn't a matter of aesthetics, it is a matter of cost, for whatever
species on whatever planet. Either lifting it out of a gravity well, or
creating it with a replicator, every extra pound costs energy. If and
when real space stations are ever created, I can pretty well guarantee
they will very minimalist structures.

I understand the desire for 'sexy' special effects and eye candy. But to
the part of the audience than knows anything about technology and
engineering, any useless features stand out like a sore thumb, and put
suspension of disbelief at risk. The scenery and background should not
call attention to itself, it should just look 'right'. Although he went
way overboard with sweetening the SFX in the revised editions of his
films, Lucas got a lot of stuff right the first time around by making
stuff look beat up and well-used. That is how military equipment or
stuff in a farm shed really looks, not shiny and showroom-new.

--
aem sends....

Wouter Valentijn wrote:
> Michael wrote:
>> aemeijers wrote:
>>
>>> Rockboy wrote:
>>>
>>>> aemeijers wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Wouter Valentijn wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Michael wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> David E. Powell wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Apr 5, 12:20 am, "Orson Wells as CitizenCain"
>>>>>>>> <noem...@here.invalid> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> <snip>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Is this the first time they've actually changed something in the
>>>>>>> re-special-effects-version of Star Trek (the Romulan Warbird
>>>>>>> inplace of the third Klingon ship)? Every time I've watched an
>>>>>>> episode it looks like they've done the new stuff the same as the
>>>>>>> old stuff. Same ship, same design, same angle, just better
>>>>>>> quality.
>>>>>> In the 'Ultimate Computer' that starbase was originally a re-use
>>>>>> of Deep Space Station K7 from 'The Trouble With The Tribbles'.
>>>>>> Changing canon. :(
>>>>>> 'Better quality' is debatable.
>>>>>>
>>>>> I'd agree on that one- why NOT use the same set of blueprints for
>>>>> multiple space stations, just like you do the ships themselves?
>>>>> There was no logical reason to retcon that image.
>>>>
>>>> What's so illogical about "to make it look better"?
>
> Because that part is really debatable. :-)
> I *love* the K7 design. It completely jives with the Enterprise herself.
>
>
>>> I assumed he meant they had changed the design, not just switched it
>>> with a sharper CGI. (I don't have the redone disks or the hardware to
>>> watch them on, if they are any flavor of HD.)
>>>
>>> A space station isn't a yuppie McMansion. The design should be 'form
>>> follows function'. DS9, for example, although built as a federation
>>> station, strained plausibility with the art deco filligrees all over
>>> it. I can pretty much guarantee that reall space stations will
>>> either look like what we have now- erector sets and baked potatoes
>>> mating- or will look like oil tankers- scarred and many colors. They
>>> won't be fairy castles floating in the air.
>> I thought DS9 was built as a Cardassian space station that the Feds
>> took over after the Cardassians were beat back away from Bajor.
>>
>
> Yes. The design is Cardassian (same as Empok Nor), the labor was Bajoran and
> the Federation started to use it after the Cardies were chased off by the
> Bajorans.
>
>
Damn- like ten different replies, and like 8 of them pick on one little
left-out 'not'. Don't any of you ever leave out words when you type?
Y'all shoulda KNOWN what I meant from the 'although'.

--
aem sends...

and thus aemeijers inscribed ...
> Wouter Valentijn wrote:
>>> I thought DS9 was built as a Cardassian space station that the Feds
>>> took over after the Cardassians were beat back away from Bajor.
>> Yes. The design is Cardassian (same as Empok Nor), the labor was
>> Bajoran and the Federation started to use it after the Cardies were
>> chased off by the Bajorans.

Still, and I don't have the dvd's or the good memory, but I coulda sworn that the Federation folks were complaining about the sparseness of it since the beginnning. And maybe it is along the lines of stargate, where Jack made it a point in an episode that the jaffa staff was very pretty, very big, but a weapon of terror, not a weapon of War. So I see DS9 as being a prison/mining camp and meant to also glorify the Cardassians than just hold people.
--
"... respect, all good works are not done by only good folk. For here, at the end of all things, we shall do what needs to be done."
--till next time, consul -x- <<poetry.dolphins-cove.com>>

aemeijers wrote:
> Wouter Valentijn wrote:
>> Michael wrote:
>>> aemeijers wrote:
>>>
>>>> Rockboy wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> aemeijers wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Wouter Valentijn wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Michael wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> David E. Powell wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Apr 5, 12:20 am, "Orson Wells as CitizenCain"
>>>>>>>>> <noem...@here.invalid> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> <snip>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Is this the first time they've actually changed something in the
>>>>>>>> re-special-effects-version of Star Trek (the Romulan Warbird
>>>>>>>> inplace of the third Klingon ship)? Every time I've watched an
>>>>>>>> episode it looks like they've done the new stuff the same as the
>>>>>>>> old stuff. Same ship, same design, same angle, just better
>>>>>>>> quality.
>>>>>>> In the 'Ultimate Computer' that starbase was originally a re-use
>>>>>>> of Deep Space Station K7 from 'The Trouble With The Tribbles'.
>>>>>>> Changing canon. :(
>>>>>>> 'Better quality' is debatable.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> I'd agree on that one- why NOT use the same set of blueprints for
>>>>>> multiple space stations, just like you do the ships themselves?
>>>>>> There was no logical reason to retcon that image.
>>>>>
>>>>> What's so illogical about "to make it look better"?
>>
>> Because that part is really debatable. :-)
>> I *love* the K7 design. It completely jives with the Enterprise herself.
>>
>>
>>>> I assumed he meant they had changed the design, not just switched it
>>>> with a sharper CGI. (I don't have the redone disks or the hardware to
>>>> watch them on, if they are any flavor of HD.)
>>>>
>>>> A space station isn't a yuppie McMansion. The design should be 'form
>>>> follows function'. DS9, for example, although built as a federation
>>>> station, strained plausibility with the art deco filligrees all over
>>>> it. I can pretty much guarantee that reall space stations will
>>>> either look like what we have now- erector sets and baked potatoes
>>>> mating- or will look like oil tankers- scarred and many colors. They
>>>> won't be fairy castles floating in the air.
>>> I thought DS9 was built as a Cardassian space station that the Feds
>>> took over after the Cardassians were beat back away from Bajor.
>>>
>>
>> Yes. The design is Cardassian (same as Empok Nor), the labor was
>> Bajoran and the Federation started to use it after the Cardies were
>> chased off by the Bajorans.
>>
>>
> Damn- like ten different replies, and like 8 of them pick on one little
> left-out 'not'. Don't any of you ever leave out words when you type?
> Y'all shoulda KNOWN what I meant from the 'although'.

I knew it meant you weren't very bright.

--
Rockboy

We suffice

aemeijers wrote:
> Rockboy wrote:
>> aemeijers wrote:
>>> Rockboy wrote:
>>>> aemeijers wrote:
>>>>> Wouter Valentijn wrote:
>>>>>> Michael wrote:
>>>>>>> David E. Powell wrote:
>>>>>>>> On Apr 5, 12:20 am, "Orson Wells as CitizenCain"
>>>>>>>> <noem...@here.invalid> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> <snip>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Is this the first time they've actually changed something in the
>>>>>>> re-special-effects-version of Star Trek (the Romulan Warbird inplace
>>>>>>> of the third Klingon ship)? Every time I've watched an episode it
>>>>>>> looks like they've done the new stuff the same as the old stuff.
>>>>>>> Same ship, same design, same angle, just better quality.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> In the 'Ultimate Computer' that starbase was originally a re-use
>>>>>> of Deep Space Station K7 from 'The Trouble With The Tribbles'.
>>>>>> Changing canon. :(
>>>>>> 'Better quality' is debatable.
>>>>>>
>>>>> I'd agree on that one- why NOT use the same set of blueprints for
>>>>> multiple space stations, just like you do the ships themselves?
>>>>> There was no logical reason to retcon that image.
>>>>
>>>> What's so illogical about "to make it look better"?
>>>>
>>> I assumed he meant they had changed the design, not just switched it
>>> with a sharper CGI. (I don't have the redone disks or the hardware to
>>> watch them on, if they are any flavor of HD.)
>>>
>>> A space station isn't a yuppie McMansion. The design should be 'form
>>> follows function'. DS9, for example, although built as a federation
>>> station, strained plausibility with the art deco filligrees all over
>>> it. I can pretty much guarantee that reall space stations will either
>>> look like what we have now- erector sets and baked potatoes mating-
>>> or will look like oil tankers- scarred and many colors. They won't be
>>> fairy castles floating in the air.
>>
>> Dude, I think you have to step for a moment and look what you're
>> doing. You're arguing complete gibberish about space station design
>> in a hypothetical future based on your own personal aesthetics.
>>
>> I mean seriously, you just said "A space station isn't a yuppie
>> McMansion." I'm scared to imagine the thought process that led you to
>> believe that was a valid argument to present.
>>
>> Anyway, the main point is, now that they have a chance, why not spruce
>> up the special effects a little? Just because visual effects guys on
>> a tv show in the 60s didn't have the budget to come up with new space
>> station designs doesn't mean we must rigidly adhere to those designs now.
>>
>> PS, DS9 wasn't built by the Federation.
>>
> Yeah, I know- mind generates words faster than fingers can type them.
> Oops- so I'm not a typist.
>
> But that embarrassment aside, I don't think my argument is gibberish. It
> isn't a matter of aesthetics, it is a matter of cost, for whatever
> species on whatever planet. Either lifting it out of a gravity well, or
> creating it with a replicator, every extra pound costs energy. If and
> when real space stations are ever created, I can pretty well guarantee
> they will very minimalist structures.

Just like the starships in Star Trek...

--
Rockboy

We suffice

aemeijers wrote:
> Wouter Valentijn wrote:
>> Yes. The design is Cardassian (same as Empok Nor), the labor was
>> Bajoran and the Federation started to use it after the Cardies were
>> chased off by the Bajorans.
>>
>>
> Damn- like ten different replies, and like 8 of them pick on one
> little left-out 'not'. Don't any of you ever leave out words when you
> type? Y'all shoulda KNOWN what I meant from the 'although'.

Next time I will try not to forget my telepathy pills. ;-)


--
www.woutervalentijn.net

www.nksf.scifics.com/nksfseries.html

liam=mail