There's probably more of the ship still there than some historical refits. Look at the likes of Conte di Cavour, Ise, Courageous and their sisters. In a lot of cases you'd be hard-pushed to recognise them as the same ships pre- and post-refit.McAvoy wrote:I think they basically disassembled the whole ship and recycled the material in rebuilding it. Maybe the very core of the ship is still there. The big problem is the saucer. It's shape is just too different from the original.
Most Aesthetically Pleasing Ship
- Captain Seafort
- 4 Star Admiral
- Posts: 15548
- Joined: Thu Jul 19, 2007 1:44 pm
- Location: Blighty
Re: Most Aesthetically Pleasing Ship
Only two things are infinite - the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the universe: Albert Einstein.
Re: Most Aesthetically Pleasing Ship
In my headcanon, there were going to be 3 new designs: Oberth, Miranda, Excelsior. Just before production began, Admiral Kno-wi'tall walked into the Excelsior offices and said "Transwarp. Make it happen." They needed a stopgap cruiser and would never get another design approved, so based a heavy cruiser on the new Miranda with just enough hull plates and structural supports from the old ships to justify calling it a refit. Explains why it's so similar to the Miranda and why we never saw them later (they were always meant to be temporary).
All that said, it is an absolutely gorgeous ship.
All that said, it is an absolutely gorgeous ship.
-
- Fleet Admiral
- Posts: 35635
- Joined: Fri Jul 27, 2007 3:04 am
- Commendations: The Daystrom Award
- Location: down the shore, New Jersey, USA
- Contact:
Re: Most Aesthetically Pleasing Ship
DonP wrote: based a heavy cruiser on the new Miranda
I can't stand nothing dull
I got the high gloss luster
I'll massacre your ass as fast
as Bull offed Custer
I got the high gloss luster
I'll massacre your ass as fast
as Bull offed Custer
Re: Most Aesthetically Pleasing Ship
The Italian rebuilds were pretty involved to be sure. Bored out guns, new bow, new anti torpedo sides, whole new superstructure so forth. But if you look at the interior cross section of the ship, they were still largely the same ship.Captain Seafort wrote:There's probably more of the ship still there than some historical refits. Look at the likes of Conte di Cavour, Ise, Courageous and their sisters. In a lot of cases you'd be hard-pushed to recognise them as the same ships pre- and post-refit.McAvoy wrote:I think they basically disassembled the whole ship and recycled the material in rebuilding it. Maybe the very core of the ship is still there. The big problem is the saucer. It's shape is just too different from the original.
I always thought of the major American submarine rebuilds post WW2 to be more comparable to the Connie refit. Those subs were cut in half, put a plug in, bow was rebuilt, major internal restructuring etc.
USS Midway is another one that looks nothing like what she was when she was first rebuilt.
You could also argue that the USS West Virginia is more like Refit Connie. As in an older class of ship from a previous generation that was rebuilt heavily to be very comparable to a modern ship of the time. West Virginia was aside from lacking a 16" gun and was several knots slower was very similar to the newer South Dakota class and even looked like one. It could be argued the ship had better anti torpedo protection because it had a wider beam post refit than a South Dakota
"Don't underestimate the power of technobabble: the Federation can win anything with the sheer force of bullshit"