One thing thats annoyed me, though, is how certain “fans” (and I use the term loosely) positively *insist* that the stated offensive capabilities are overstated, despite evidence to the contrary. Besides the already-discussed torpedo ‘problem’, quite a few trekkie nerds armed with extensive amounts of “evidence” claim that the Akira doesn’t have a fly-through shuttlebay (despite all evidence to the contrary). The most persistent reason for this is that Peregrine-class fighters (as seen in the Dominion War arc on DS9) would barely have less than a meter clearance based on their ’size estimations’ (sometimes, they calculate that they wouldn’t fit at all). When confronted with the presence of the forward bays on the model, the common response is that they are, in fact, *windows*(!!!).

Given that Alex hasn’t responded to this thread since June, I don’t hold out much hope for a reply. Still, it would be interesting to know what his opinion on this matter is. Personally, I’ve always been too dumbfounded at selective ignorance of the facts from such persons to make a proper rebuttal.

That Norway image you linked to is an image of the Norway model used in the PC/XBox 360 game “Star Trek Legacy”. I’m 100% positive. The actual CGI model used in the film didn’t have phaser strips, (You can verify this fact by looking at pics of the original model here: http://www.ex-astris-scientia.org/scans/firstcontact1.htm ) the image you posted does, and they were added for the game.

VFX Supervisor David Stipes of DS9 obviously did know about the Norway, as indicated in the above post, but he said it would have to be remapped before it could be used onscreen, so the simplest explanation is that it was never done (for whatever reason) and thus the model remained unavailable in LightWave.

The best bet would be to track down whoever modelled these ships at ILM and see if they can’t open them up in the original software. From what I’ve seen, CG models tend to remain on the hard drives of people who worked with them.

That’s not quite true, the Norway-class has been positively identified in “Star Trek:First Contact”, albeit as deep background vessels (which explains why the model is not as pronounced as the others) as shown on the following websites http://www.trekmania.net (under one of their screencap analyses) and memory-alpha.org (under their Norway-class entry)

But yes, those were indeed the only onscreen-appearences ever as a CGI-model. And if we go from the “lost in a computer-glitch”-assumption for the time being then the CGI rendering (3/4 aft/dorsal view)in the book “Star Trek the next generation Sketchbook”, page 122, which I assume everybody here knows, seems to be the only surviving picture of the original model…
However I did came across this one a 3/4 bow/dorsal view:

http://premium1.uploadit.org/MaxOutrider/ShipImages/Norway-Class.jpg

Judging from the rendering as far as colour hue and tone is concerned I concluded, untill proven otherwise, that it is another one of Jaeger’s original model. So for now I assume that at least 1 other image escaped from the computer before it’s glitch…
Frustatingly enough though it’s the only one I could find on the net (and believe me I’ve tried)and the site itself seems to be “dead”. A larger picture could therefore not be obtained to be absolutely certain.
Hopefully some one out there recognizes the image and knows were it is coming from.

But I do agree with Boris that it is time to put the myth to rest soon, there is a lot of confusion out there. A finite answer preferably from someone directly involved would be so helpful…

http://groups.google.com/group/alt.tv.star-trek.ds9/msg/5fa327fe0033b5ab

Since we never saw the Norway, I’m assuming it wasn’t resurfaced following conversion to LightWave; David Stipes may recall the details, although it’s been a while.

I must say, I’ve always counted far more than 15 torpedo tubes, more than 17, too. In the pod, there are either 10 or 12 tubes, with what look like three more smaller tubes on the pod’s chin. That’s 13 or 15 for the pod in total. Then there are 2 starboard and 2 port tubes, for 15 or 17. There are what look like either 2 or 3 tubes under the bow of the saucer, for 17 and 19 or 18 and 20. There is then one more not on the model but which fired in First Contact, directly under the deflector. So, in total there are 18-21 torpedoes tubes, but 19 seems right to me, unless you want to ignore the under deflector firing, that leaves 18.

And you too for the blogging, Mr Drexler! I am grateful for your honesty and openness about the contradictory pressures that led to the NX.*

*My relationship to the NX is… …complicated. I like the design a lot (especially the WONDERFUL detailing and those great nacelles) but… how do I say that? SomeWHEN else.I call it the Beziers hull shape problem: from the E-nil to the E-E, the curves got more and more complex, like progressing from the simple Paint curve tool to the Bezier curve tool. The NX curves are so smooth, so warpdynamic! I always keep in mind the simple curves of the TOS-E, and, well, the NX still jars a little in my mind as a RomWar-era ship, no matter how much I like the NX design in itself, no matter how much I am in awe of the great job you and all the team did under pressure.**

**I will admit to being a Daedalus fan (less than I am an Akira fan, but still). I expected similar basic hull shapes for primitive spaceships, I guess.***

***And also that Masao Okazaki’s near-seamless conceptual starship evolution tree influenced enormously my vision of Early-Earth and Pre-TOS craft.****

****All that being said, thanks again for this treasure of a blog! Where everybody who’s somebody in Trek design is showcased!*****

*****I think I’m going overboard with the asterisks.