Talk:The Fleet (TRS)/Archive 1: Difference between revisions

Discussion page of The Fleet (TRS)/Archive 1
m (Archiving 1 thread(s) (older than 10d) to Talk:The Fleet (RDM)/Archive1.)
Line 87: Line 87:


::Blech. That's my half. It's all you, spence. --[[User:Peter Farago|Peter Farago]] 20:20, 10 January 2006 (EST)
::Blech. That's my half. It's all you, spence. --[[User:Peter Farago|Peter Farago]] 20:20, 10 January 2006 (EST)
== Time for cleanup ==
I do think we need to convert the list of ships into a table-chart, similar to what we have on [[List of Vipers]]. Frankly, a lot of the articles on the ships we have are merely one liners. For instance, a bulk of the individual articles on the ships simply state "this ship's name was seen on the whiteboard in blahblahblah but hasn't been seen yet", which is extremely repetitive, and would be better served in a table-format. (We had the same problem earlier with the [[List of pilots]] and with every pilot having a one-sentence entry in a separate article, which Serenity was able to rectify several months earlier.) Obviously, the ships of importance or uniqueness would retain their own separate articles. Thoughts? -- [[User:Joe Beaudoin Jr.|Joe Beaudoin]] <sup>[[User talk:Joe Beaudoin Jr.|So say we all]] - [[Battlestar Wiki:Site support|Donate]] - [[bsp:|Battlestar Pegasus]]</sup> 21:25, 14 June 2008 (UTC)
:Yeah, that always bugged me a bit. However, many of the ships also contain a note about the origin of the name, even if it's a one-liner otherwise. That would become lost in a merge. -- [[User:Serenity|Serenity]] 09:56, 15 June 2008 (UTC)
:: Well, a "notes" column would probably address that issue quite nicely. -- [[User:Joe Beaudoin Jr.|Joe Beaudoin]] <sup>[[User talk:Joe Beaudoin Jr.|So say we all]] - [[Battlestar Wiki:Site support|Donate]] - [[bsp:|Battlestar Pegasus]]</sup> 14:10, 15 June 2008 (UTC)
::: Or "origin of name". I had the same thought after writing that. For the "mentioned only" table that is. The rest are more important and generally have their own articles. Mentioned only ships that can have an own article include [[Adriatic]], [[Baah Pakal]], [[Freighter 212]], [[Greenleaf]], [[Inchon Velle]], [[Rising Star]], [[Salpica]] and [[Zephyr]]. These are either more prominent and/or mentioned in dialogue, rather than just the voting board. -- [[User:Serenity|Serenity]] 14:32, 15 June 2008 (UTC)
:::: Ditto. Basically, the prominent ones would have their own section while the rest (mentioned-onlys) would have another. Then I was thinking of a "destroyed" section, similar to what we have for [[List of Vipers]] and [[List of Raptors]], which I just went through. -- [[User:Joe Beaudoin Jr.|Joe Beaudoin]] <sup>[[User talk:Joe Beaudoin Jr.|So say we all]] - [[Battlestar Wiki:Site support|Donate]] - [[bsp:|Battlestar Pegasus]]</sup> 14:36, 15 June 2008 (UTC)
:::::Bout time, I've been suggesting this since Razor.--[[User:CoreyDanian|Corey "Shadow" Danian]] 1.07, 16 June 2008 (CST)
Ok, I've started the cleanup process. I've organized the seen ships into a sortable table. Just need to work on all those pesky "mentioned only" ships, but that's for later. -- [[User:Joe Beaudoin Jr.|Joe Beaudoin]] <sup>[[User talk:Joe Beaudoin Jr.|So say we all]] - [[Battlestar Wiki:Site support|Donate]] - [[bsp:|Battlestar Pegasus]]</sup> 07:51, 16 June 2008 (UTC)
:I'll get to that soon. The page looks good, but the "last seen" column is kinda annoying. Before that, the text mentioned prominent appearances and the entry was maybe updated once or twice every season. Now the list appears to be an accounting of every on-screen appearance. But keeping that list up-to-date is both unnecessary and has very little benefit for too much work. Aside from the uncertainties of New Caprica, unless a ship is explicitly destroyed, it can be assumed to still exist. For me, the episode citations weren't so much about a detailed episode-by-episode score-keeping, but a pointer towards an episode where the ship can be seen well. -- [[User:Serenity|Serenity]] 17:18, 16 June 2008 (UTC)
:: Ditto about the last seen column. I was gonna go through and change it later to "First Introduced" (at least in the case of the active ships). The destroyed ships can keep the "last seen" thing. -- [[User:Joe Beaudoin Jr.|Joe Beaudoin]] <sup>[[User talk:Joe Beaudoin Jr.|So say we all]] - [[Battlestar Wiki:Site support|Donate]] - [[bsp:|Battlestar Pegasus]]</sup> 17:59, 16 June 2008 (UTC)
:::Hey, I just looked at your revision of the fleet and you placed that ''Picon 36'' was destroyed. According to it's dialogue, the captain told ''Colonial One'' that he can't believe he wanted to leave the sublight ships' population behind. Personally, I like ''Picon 36'' and it may still be in the fleet, but it wasn't destroyed in the [[Miniseries, Night 2|Miniseries]].--[[User:CoreyDanian|Corey "Shadow" Danian]] 9.05pm June 16 2008 CST
::::It's not in the destroyed list, but in "mentioned only". If it were, it would have been an accident. Moving dozens of articles is hard work :s -- [[User:Serenity|Serenity]] 06:39, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

Revision as of 05:03, 28 June 2008


Comment[edit]

I think we should add Galactica, and Pegaus in the fleet's listings.--QX100 7:59, 1 October 2005 (EST)

Hey, someone check out my mnew info on my user page.--Corey Danian 10.56, 26 March 2008 (aest)

Astral Queen[edit]

I thought the Astral Queen, from the New series, had 900 prisoners. Does anyone have a mini-series transcript? That's where the ship is first mentioned. -- Neochiiz3000 12:07, 11 July 2005 (EST)
Billy Keikeya - "Uh, the captain of the Astral Queen wants to you to know he's got nearly 500 convicted criminals under heavy guard in his cargo hold. They were being transported to a penal station when the attack happened." -- YeNguyen 13:09, 11 July 2005 (EST)
I thought so... I was only off by about 400. Better than a full thousand, though. -- Neochiiz3000 13:39, 11 July 2005 (EST)
It's 1,500 -- though in the mini-series Billy said 500. (Again, his trademark "crappy math" at work.) See: Bastille Day#Notes. -- Joe Beaudoin 13:40, 11 July 2005 (EDT)
I wouldn't want BIlly as my secretary. I know that much :P -- YeNguyen 14:18, 11 July 2005 (EST)

Celestra in New BSG[edit]

Isn't there a Celestra in the new series, too? I thought I had read that somewhere (or maybe it was that one of the new ships was based on the Celestra design). Kuralyov 13:57, 11 July 2005 (EDT)
It's listed on the Sci Fi Channel's BSG page. Though as to whether or not it is canon has yet to be determined. -- Joe Beaudoin 14:17, 11 July 2005 (EDT)
If you get a close up of the Celestra in "Water" and "Colonial Day", you see the name of the ship written on the side. Same with the Striker.--CoreyDanian

Size of the Fleet[edit]

"Saul Tigh's assertion in 'The Farm' that the twenty four ships which departed with the Laura Roslin faction during her insurrection represented 'almost a third of the fleet' imply that the number of ships in the Fleet is approximately in the mid-70's."

Could it be that Tigh was referring to the population of the fleet instead of the number of ships? Passenger and crew numbers vary considerably from ship to ship, but Tigh may have done more accurate math on the ones that had jumped earlier, then did a quick--but dependable--estimate when the last batch jumped.

No, because he wasn't looking at a readout of WHICH ships had left; all he heard was "24 ships have left" with no names, so he couldn't be basing it on population, it had to be ship number; of course the problem presented is what if he was rounding down? --Ricimer 21:47, 30 October 2005 (EST)
Yeah, and then there's context, too--if somebody's looking at/listening to information about ships, they would probably frame their immediate response to the information in terms of ships, too. Rounding down would be the only way for the writers to explain their way out of the inconsistency. That, or the Colonel's been taking math lessons from Billy. . . . --BlueResistance 22:07, 30 October 2005 (EST)
From The Farm, we know that 24 ships was "almost a third of the fleet" - Tigh has no rason to underexagerate this. From Home, Part I, we know that the number of people in those 24 ships was actually a little over a third of the fleet's population. --Peter Farago 09:39, 31 October 2005 (EST)

Here's something to think about in regards to the size of the fleet and how it increased from 40 to over 70 since the mini-series. In the mini-series, Roslin sent Boomer out with her Raptor to gather other ships which ended up with a ragtag fleet of 40 or so FTL-capabale ships and some other ships that were future space debris when they had to be left behind. Adama sent out a Fleet Wide Communication for all capable ships to jump to the Ragnar Station and roundevous with the Galactica. It's possible that the 30 or so extra ships that the fleet ended up with were other craft that recieved the communication and headed to Ragnar without hooking up with Rolsin's group. Does anyone else agree with this assessment? I think it's valid considering the chaning size of the fleet and would justify the presence of more than one refinery ship (one arrived with Roslin's group and others showed up in response to Adama's message). --Ltcrashdown 20:16, 1 January 2006 (EST)

I think you may be losing sight of what's, well, possible. Several things established in the Mini were changed for the series. When they were making the Mini, they weren't sure that there was going to be a series, so they didn't exactly plan on it. So those thirty ships came out of the script room. However, since then, we can probably better assume that the fleet size will be more consistant and, thus, worth talking about in terms of in-the-show reasons. --Day 20:39, 1 January 2006 (EST)
It's an admirable attempt at a no-prize, but has some problems of its own - Adama's order only went out to military units: "Send a message to all the colonial military units. Use priority channel one. Message begins: "Am taking command of fleet." Apollo then reads the message in full from Colonial One: "To all colonial units, am taking command of fleet. All units ordered to rendezvous at Ragnar anchorage for regroup and counterattack. Acknowledge by same encryption protocol, Adama."
So I think I have to agree with Day - unless each of the 30 ships happened to have a colonial military officer with military ciphers on board, I don't see how they could have found Galactica at Ragnar. --Peter Farago 20:49, 1 January 2006 (EST)
Well, it was worth a try. I thought I remembered the message only being for military ships, but if you consider that Dee or Gaeta are Cylons, then they may have 'accidentally' sent the message to non-military ships to increase the number of potential Cylon sleeper agents. Just a thought. I figured the message from Adama was just about the only way for more ships to arrive. --Ltcrashdown 21:27, 1 January 2006 (EST)
I think what Tigh said in "The Farm" should be ignored because Dualla said in "33" that fifty three ships had jumped with Colonial One and nine other ships still had trouble, two ships that could be heard saying they were jumping in the background radio calls and Galactica, giving us 66 ships. In "You Can't Go Home Again", Tigh says that there are 60-odd ships, meaning that there was about 65 ships. With the addtion of the Pegasus, the number goes back to 66. On the vote tally boards, the one on Colonial One had 50 ships and Galactica had 54 names, plus the ones not included but mentioned in episodes bring it to 66 all up. Cloud 9 and three other ships destroyed brought the number to 63 and two ships could've been taken apart to make the Cylon buildings on New Caprica (Galactica and Pegasus had eighteen civilians ships, including a mining ship, the Space Park luxury liner, Celestra, five-engined vessel, the six tubed vessel, the cargo transport seen orbitting near Cloud 9 in Colonial Day and the wedge-shaped vessel). With the destruction of Pegasus and the disappearance of Adriatic and Carina the number could be anywhere between 58 and 61 ships.--CoreyDanian
I think the number would actually be about 40 to 50 ships as of "The Passage" as each jump had at least 8 to about 10 ships in all five jumps.--CoreyDanian 16.19 Saturday 10 November 2007

Botanical Cruiser[edit]

Kahran writes: (While the original was destroyed in the Mini-Series, various background shots have placed an FTL-equiped Botanical Cruiser in the fleet.)

Are you sure that's not Cloud 9? They have similar external features. --Peter Farago 16:02, 27 November 2005 (EST)

I'm positive it's the Botanical Cruiser. They've re-used the FTL jump shot from the Mini Series at least once during season two. Durring "Scattered" when the fleet is making its emergencey jump there's a shot of various ships jumping away and right in the dead centre of the shot is the Botanical Cruiser from the Mini-Series. Kahran 20:32, 1 January 2006 (EST)

I noticed it too. Curious, either a mistake (like the B5 shot of the Agamenon destroying civilian transports) or it could be that it is a simalar fhip that IS equiped with FTL. It's possible that drives are used on ship as needed. If a ship is NOT intended to travel over interstallar distances, then it wouldn't need a FTL drive. FTL drives are probably costly to make, maitain, or operate -- not to mention the fuel/energy requirments. If a ship was only ment to operate in-system, an FTL drive might not have been cost effective. The inclusion of an ARGO ship is a tip of the hat to ship's inclusion in the opriginal series. In the original, stock footage of the ship from the movie SILENT RUNNING was used. In this new show, an original designed vessel was created -- probably because people knew about the stck footage use -- Centuri 06:29, 8 January 2006 (EST)

The article for the Botanical Cruiser notes the origin. Yes, it was a recreation of the Agro Ship as an homage to the ships used in TOS, which were the redressed models used in Silent Running.. That the Botanical Cruiser may seem to appear in the fleet suggests (from a story POV) that there is a FTL-capable ship of similar appearance that joined the Fleet. I think it's a gaffe--the visual effects people used stock footage or models and didn't think. Also, understand that FTL in the RDM series is apparent travel, not true "warp drive"-like flight. See the FTL article for a good synopsis. --Spencerian 13:32, 8 January 2006 (EST)

FTL[edit]

Acording to the article, in the original show "With the exception of Galactica, the ships were not capable of lightspeed. " I would like to know where this particular tidbit came from. As I remember some ships originallly were sub-light, but they were reto-fitted to be FTL capable. The problem was that none of them were capable of HIGH FTL speeds. Remember the specs of the Galactica show that she was capable of a flank speed of 10C. Remember, they were croosing not just interstellar space, but intergalactic space. If they were only in the Greater Magelanic Cloud, it would mean having to cover a distance of 140,000 light-years to get here. At anything other than FTL, the goal would be unatainable. Crossing interstellar distances requires FTL, no ifs, no ands, no buts. -- Centuri 06:29, 8 January 2006 (EST)

In the RDM series, FTL is FTL, it's not a matter of speed, but of distance in terms of the "length" of a wormhole that can be made from place to place. RDM's universe sticks to Einsteinian theories. TOS stories generally were a mismash of "science" that sometimes got in the way of the story. The Fleet probably moves at a good distance on each Jump, but space is really big. Like their TOS counterparts, it will be some time before they find Earth. --Spencerian 13:38, 8 January 2006 (EST)

Oh, Split[edit]

This article needs splitting and name-spacing, doesn't it? Into "The Fleet (RDM)" and "The Fleet (TOS)"? Is there a good reason not to split it that I don't know about, or... can I do it this evening? I was planning on moving it to "The Fleet (RDM)" and then copy/pasting to the TOS page and then making this one a disambiguation page. --Day 10:30, 10 January 2006 (EST)

No, go ahead. You might leave a redirect to the RDM article for now - I'll help you go link hunting tonight. --Peter Farago 12:10, 10 January 2006 (EST)
This is a happy kind of work that has to be done, now that our TOS pages are coming into their own. I'll look for double redirects and the like after you two pick through. --Spencerian 12:56, 10 January 2006 (EST)
Blech. That's my half. It's all you, spence. --Peter Farago 20:20, 10 January 2006 (EST)