 |
 |
|
 |
|
 |
December 11th, 2006, 12:30 AM
|
#1
|
|
Guest
|
pegasus and galactica
what exactly is the difference between the two ships, iv finally got the series on dvd and pause the sceen. they do look a little different. does anyone have clear pics or specs on the two of them?
thanks
balog
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 11th, 2006, 12:55 AM
|
#2
|
|
Major
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Ireland
Posts: 5,114
|
In Classic BSG they are the same model ...... just lit differently as far as I know .... you see more hull design on the landing bay of the PEGASUS
__________________
Formally Taranis
My Blog
"The world is my country, science my religion.” 
|
|
|
|
|
December 22nd, 2006, 03:23 PM
|
#3
|
|
Shuttle Pilot
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 29
|
The Pegasus had quad landing bays, more decking over the ribbing, and a different engine configuration. Internally it was more advanced in that it had a full fabrication capability for Vipers.
I only got a slight look at the Valkyrie - did anyone notice which class it was more like (looked like a 3rd design but I wasnt sure).
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 22nd, 2006, 06:24 PM
|
#4
|
|
Bad Email Address
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 35
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Emerys
The Pegasus had quad landing bays, more decking over the ribbing, and a different engine configuration. Internally it was more advanced in that it had a full fabrication capability for Vipers.
I only got a slight look at the Valkyrie - did anyone notice which class it was more like (looked like a 3rd design but I wasnt sure).
|
I think this was in regards to the original series(?). In the original series, the same model was used for both the Galactica, as was for the Pegasus. No battlestar shown in the original series was of different configuration
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 23rd, 2006, 10:05 AM
|
#5
|
|
Shuttle Pilot
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 29
|
Quite true. Always bothered me, too. No different models, much less support warships.
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 23rd, 2006, 06:53 PM
|
#6
|
|
Bad Email Address
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 35
|
Well, I never minded the battlestars that much. The Galactica is an extremely powerful type of warship, so it makes sense it would be the backbone of the colonial fleet. And, honestly, they spent their budget building the galactica model, probably. Well spent tho, its a classic, the best designed sci-fi vessel, in my opinion
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 25th, 2006, 08:20 AM
|
#7
|
|
Shuttle Pilot
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 29
|
I dont know - it bothered me. Even TOS Trek on a shoestring budget occasionally did a new model now and then. I look at the Ravenstar cruisers (really want to kitbash a BIG version of one or two of those!) and think that it couldnt have strained them that much to do something of the sort.
I always thought of the Battlestar as a primary combat ship, like a carrier... but a carrier always has escourt ships - some of which should have come along with the Big G when she pulled out.
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 26th, 2006, 06:44 AM
|
#8
|
|
Fleet Modeling Machine!
Join Date: May 2001
Location: chatsworth ca. us
Posts: 1,535
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 26th, 2006, 12:29 PM
|
#9
|
|
Shuttle Pilot
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 29
|
Several excellent ships! And much to the point - they'd have been easily made cannon ships for the series.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
For fans of the Classic Battlestar Galactica series
|
|
|
