Talk:Viper 1104/Archive 1 - Revision history

Joe Beaudoin Jr.: Text replacement - "[[Image:" to "[[File:"

2025-06-24T20:12:48Z

Text replacement - "[[Image:" to "[[File:"

← Older revision		Revision as of 20:12, 24 June 2025
Line 7:		Line 7:
	::This gives us some idea of the extent of ''Galactica's'' repair capabilities. I wonder why [[Viper 289]] had to be scrapped? Probably unshown structural damage or somesuch. --[[User:April Arcus\|April Arcus]] 17:15, 22 February 2006 (EST)		::This gives us some idea of the extent of ''Galactica's'' repair capabilities. I wonder why [[Viper 289]] had to be scrapped? Probably unshown structural damage or somesuch. --[[User:April Arcus\|April Arcus]] 17:15, 22 February 2006 (EST)
	:::Perhaps 1104 didn't suffer damage to its frame like 289 seemed to have. 1104 lost it's wings and engines but the fuselage seemed relatively unharmed. --[[User:Talos\|Talos]] 19:57, 22 February 2006 (EST)		:::Perhaps 1104 didn't suffer damage to its frame like 289 seemed to have. 1104 lost it's wings and engines but the fuselage seemed relatively unharmed. --[[User:Talos\|Talos]] 19:57, 22 February 2006 (EST)
	[[~~Image~~:1104Ragnar Mini.JPG\|thumb\|1104NC at the Battle of the Ragnar Anchorage ([[Miniseries]]).]]		[[File:1104Ragnar Mini.JPG\|thumb\|1104NC at the Battle of the Ragnar Anchorage ([[Miniseries]]).]]

	[[~~Image~~:1104 litmus.JPG\|thumb\|left\|1104NC in hangerbay ([[Litmus]]).]]		[[File:1104 litmus.JPG\|thumb\|left\|1104NC in hangerbay ([[Litmus]]).]]

	Viper 1104 is the Final Cylon!!! ;-) {{unsigned\|LaloMartins}}		Viper 1104 is the Final Cylon!!! ;-) {{unsigned\|LaloMartins}}

Joe Beaudoin Jr.: Text replacement - "Peter Farago" to "April Arcus"

2020-04-11T01:58:45Z

Text replacement - "Peter Farago" to "April Arcus"

← Older revision		Revision as of 01:58, 11 April 2020
Line 1:		Line 1:
	SciFi's CAG roster, which they kept updated in the first season, never decremented to account for the loss of this fighter. However, the damage always looked quite severe to me, certainly more so than [[Viper 289]], declared unsalvageable in "[[Flight of the Phoenix]]".		SciFi's CAG roster, which they kept updated in the first season, never decremented to account for the loss of this fighter. However, the damage always looked quite severe to me, certainly more so than [[Viper 289]], declared unsalvageable in "[[Flight of the Phoenix]]".

	Do any of you think we should note this vessel as destroyed/scrapped in the Galactica (RDM) tallies? --[[User:~~Peter Farago~~\|~~Peter Farago~~]] 01:03, 17 December 2005 (EST)		Do any of you think we should note this vessel as destroyed/scrapped in the Galactica (RDM) tallies? --[[User:April Arcus\|April Arcus]] 01:03, 17 December 2005 (EST)

	Here's a pic of 1104 at Ragnar, this is at least the second time it's registry is visible during the battle. This is when Starbuck flips over before going nose-to-nose with 7242. --[[User:Talos\|Talos]] 18:38, 21 February 2006 (EST)		Here's a pic of 1104 at Ragnar, this is at least the second time it's registry is visible during the battle. This is when Starbuck flips over before going nose-to-nose with 7242. --[[User:Talos\|Talos]] 18:38, 21 February 2006 (EST)
	:It looks like 1104 survived the battle as it's visible right behind Socinus in the below pic (and repaired as well). It makes sense though, for once they actually had time to recover the fighter or what was left of it. --[[User:Talos\|Talos]] 12:57, 22 February 2006 (EST)		:It looks like 1104 survived the battle as it's visible right behind Socinus in the below pic (and repaired as well). It makes sense though, for once they actually had time to recover the fighter or what was left of it. --[[User:Talos\|Talos]] 12:57, 22 February 2006 (EST)
	::This gives us some idea of the extent of ''Galactica's'' repair capabilities. I wonder why [[Viper 289]] had to be scrapped? Probably unshown structural damage or somesuch. --[[User:~~Peter Farago~~\|~~Peter Farago~~]] 17:15, 22 February 2006 (EST)		::This gives us some idea of the extent of ''Galactica's'' repair capabilities. I wonder why [[Viper 289]] had to be scrapped? Probably unshown structural damage or somesuch. --[[User:April Arcus\|April Arcus]] 17:15, 22 February 2006 (EST)
	:::Perhaps 1104 didn't suffer damage to its frame like 289 seemed to have. 1104 lost it's wings and engines but the fuselage seemed relatively unharmed. --[[User:Talos\|Talos]] 19:57, 22 February 2006 (EST)		:::Perhaps 1104 didn't suffer damage to its frame like 289 seemed to have. 1104 lost it's wings and engines but the fuselage seemed relatively unharmed. --[[User:Talos\|Talos]] 19:57, 22 February 2006 (EST)
	[[Image:1104Ragnar Mini.JPG\|thumb\|1104NC at the Battle of the Ragnar Anchorage ([[Miniseries]]).]]		[[Image:1104Ragnar Mini.JPG\|thumb\|1104NC at the Battle of the Ragnar Anchorage ([[Miniseries]]).]]

April Arcus at 06:57, 18 April 2008

2008-04-18T06:57:54Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 06:57, 18 April 2008
Line 11:		Line 11:
	[[Image:1104 litmus.JPG\|thumb\|left\|1104NC in hangerbay ([[Litmus]]).]]		[[Image:1104 litmus.JPG\|thumb\|left\|1104NC in hangerbay ([[Litmus]]).]]

	Viper 1104 is the Final Cylon!!! ;-)		Viper 1104 is the Final Cylon!!! ;-) {{unsigned\|LaloMartins}}

	== Razor Flashback appearance ==		== Razor Flashback appearance ==

LaloMartins at 06:21, 18 April 2008

2008-04-18T06:21:01Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 06:21, 18 April 2008
Line 10:		Line 10:

	[[Image:1104 litmus.JPG\|thumb\|left\|1104NC in hangerbay ([[Litmus]]).]]		[[Image:1104 litmus.JPG\|thumb\|left\|1104NC in hangerbay ([[Litmus]]).]]

			Viper 1104 is the Final Cylon!!! ;-)

	== Razor Flashback appearance ==		== Razor Flashback appearance ==

Talos: /* Razor Flashback appearance */

2007-10-24T18:12:55Z

Razor Flashback appearance

← Older revision		Revision as of 18:12, 24 October 2007
Line 20:		Line 20:
	:: Yeah, they're reusing stock footage here. -- [[User:Joe Beaudoin Jr.\|Joe Beaudoin]] <sup>[[User talk:Joe Beaudoin Jr.\|So say we all]] - [[Battlestar Wiki:Site support\|Donate]] - [http://www.sanctuarywiki.org Sanctuary Wiki — ''New'']</sup> 13:20, 13 October 2007 (CDT)		:: Yeah, they're reusing stock footage here. -- [[User:Joe Beaudoin Jr.\|Joe Beaudoin]] <sup>[[User talk:Joe Beaudoin Jr.\|So say we all]] - [[Battlestar Wiki:Site support\|Donate]] - [http://www.sanctuarywiki.org Sanctuary Wiki — ''New'']</sup> 13:20, 13 October 2007 (CDT)
	:::Stock audio as well, you can here the difference in the voice when they mention Adama's name after the line about 1104. --[[User:Talos\|Talos]] 17:21, 13 October 2007 (CDT)		:::Stock audio as well, you can here the difference in the voice when they mention Adama's name after the line about 1104. --[[User:Talos\|Talos]] 17:21, 13 October 2007 (CDT)

			==Cylon War Info==
			Doh! That's what happens when I try doing a quick entry before running to class. --[[User:Talos\|Talos]] 13:12, 24 October 2007 (CDT)

Talos: /* Razor Flashback appearance */

2007-10-13T22:21:25Z

Razor Flashback appearance

← Older revision		Revision as of 22:21, 13 October 2007
Line 19:		Line 19:

	:: Yeah, they're reusing stock footage here. -- [[User:Joe Beaudoin Jr.\|Joe Beaudoin]] <sup>[[User talk:Joe Beaudoin Jr.\|So say we all]] - [[Battlestar Wiki:Site support\|Donate]] - [http://www.sanctuarywiki.org Sanctuary Wiki — ''New'']</sup> 13:20, 13 October 2007 (CDT)		:: Yeah, they're reusing stock footage here. -- [[User:Joe Beaudoin Jr.\|Joe Beaudoin]] <sup>[[User talk:Joe Beaudoin Jr.\|So say we all]] - [[Battlestar Wiki:Site support\|Donate]] - [http://www.sanctuarywiki.org Sanctuary Wiki — ''New'']</sup> 13:20, 13 October 2007 (CDT)
			:::Stock audio as well, you can here the difference in the voice when they mention Adama's name after the line about 1104. --[[User:Talos\|Talos]] 17:21, 13 October 2007 (CDT)

Joe Beaudoin Jr.: /* Razor Flashback appearance */ reply

2007-10-13T18:20:11Z

Razor Flashback appearance: reply

← Older revision		Revision as of 18:20, 13 October 2007
Line 17:		Line 17:
	:Couldn't this be just from the reuse of stock footage? The launch tube scene is clearly from the Miniseries.		:Couldn't this be just from the reuse of stock footage? The launch tube scene is clearly from the Miniseries.
	:I don't pay much attention to those numbers anyways. One thing that bugs me here, is that hullnumbers get confused with wireless/dradis identifiers (like Vipers 3, etc.). Though that's not the case here. --[[User:Serenity\|Serenity]] 08:08, 13 October 2007 (CDT)		:I don't pay much attention to those numbers anyways. One thing that bugs me here, is that hullnumbers get confused with wireless/dradis identifiers (like Vipers 3, etc.). Though that's not the case here. --[[User:Serenity\|Serenity]] 08:08, 13 October 2007 (CDT)

			:: Yeah, they're reusing stock footage here. -- [[User:Joe Beaudoin Jr.\|Joe Beaudoin]] <sup>[[User talk:Joe Beaudoin Jr.\|So say we all]] - [[Battlestar Wiki:Site support\|Donate]] - [http://www.sanctuarywiki.org Sanctuary Wiki — ''New'']</sup> 13:20, 13 October 2007 (CDT)

Serenity: seems like reused stock footage. No big deal

2007-10-13T13:08:27Z

seems like reused stock footage. No big deal

← Older revision		Revision as of 13:08, 13 October 2007
Line 14:		Line 14:

	Note that the Viper Husker flies in the second Razor flashback is identified as "Viper one one zero four", but has "Lt. William "Husker" Adama" on the nameplate rather than Joker's name. Also, the "Husker" Viper is supposed to be [[Viper 7242]]... Not necessarily a continuity error (Husker could've gotten another Viper on another battlestar, Joker getting the 1104), but very weird all the same. --[[User:Catrope\|Catrope]]<sup>([[User talk:Catrope\|Talk to me]] or [[Special:Emailuser/Catrope\|e-mail me]])</sup> 07:52, 13 October 2007 (CDT)		Note that the Viper Husker flies in the second Razor flashback is identified as "Viper one one zero four", but has "Lt. William "Husker" Adama" on the nameplate rather than Joker's name. Also, the "Husker" Viper is supposed to be [[Viper 7242]]... Not necessarily a continuity error (Husker could've gotten another Viper on another battlestar, Joker getting the 1104), but very weird all the same. --[[User:Catrope\|Catrope]]<sup>([[User talk:Catrope\|Talk to me]] or [[Special:Emailuser/Catrope\|e-mail me]])</sup> 07:52, 13 October 2007 (CDT)

			:Couldn't this be just from the reuse of stock footage? The launch tube scene is clearly from the Miniseries.
			:I don't pay much attention to those numbers anyways. One thing that bugs me here, is that hullnumbers get confused with wireless/dradis identifiers (like Vipers 3, etc.). Though that's not the case here. --[[User:Serenity\|Serenity]] 08:08, 13 October 2007 (CDT)

Catrope: New section: Razor Flashback appearance

2007-10-13T12:52:52Z

New section: Razor Flashback appearance

← Older revision		Revision as of 12:52, 13 October 2007
Line 10:		Line 10:

	[[Image:1104 litmus.JPG\|thumb\|left\|1104NC in hangerbay ([[Litmus]]).]]		[[Image:1104 litmus.JPG\|thumb\|left\|1104NC in hangerbay ([[Litmus]]).]]

			== Razor Flashback appearance ==

			Note that the Viper Husker flies in the second Razor flashback is identified as "Viper one one zero four", but has "Lt. William "Husker" Adama" on the nameplate rather than Joker's name. Also, the "Husker" Viper is supposed to be [[Viper 7242]]... Not necessarily a continuity error (Husker could've gotten another Viper on another battlestar, Joker getting the 1104), but very weird all the same. --[[User:Catrope\|Catrope]]<sup>([[User talk:Catrope\|Talk to me]] or [[Special:Emailuser/Catrope\|e-mail me]])</sup> 07:52, 13 October 2007 (CDT)

Mercifull: Miniseries naming convention

2006-04-05T08:48:59Z

Miniseries naming convention

← Older revision		Revision as of 08:48, 5 April 2006
Line 7:		Line 7:
	::This gives us some idea of the extent of ''Galactica's'' repair capabilities. I wonder why [[Viper 289]] had to be scrapped? Probably unshown structural damage or somesuch. --[[User:Peter Farago\|Peter Farago]] 17:15, 22 February 2006 (EST)		::This gives us some idea of the extent of ''Galactica's'' repair capabilities. I wonder why [[Viper 289]] had to be scrapped? Probably unshown structural damage or somesuch. --[[User:Peter Farago\|Peter Farago]] 17:15, 22 February 2006 (EST)
	:::Perhaps 1104 didn't suffer damage to its frame like 289 seemed to have. 1104 lost it's wings and engines but the fuselage seemed relatively unharmed. --[[User:Talos\|Talos]] 19:57, 22 February 2006 (EST)		:::Perhaps 1104 didn't suffer damage to its frame like 289 seemed to have. 1104 lost it's wings and engines but the fuselage seemed relatively unharmed. --[[User:Talos\|Talos]] 19:57, 22 February 2006 (EST)
	[[Image:1104Ragnar Mini.JPG\|thumb\|1104NC at the Battle of the Ragnar Anchorage ([[~~Mini-Series~~]]).]]		[[Image:1104Ragnar Mini.JPG\|thumb\|1104NC at the Battle of the Ragnar Anchorage ([[Miniseries]]).]]

	[[Image:1104 litmus.JPG\|thumb\|left\|1104NC in hangerbay ([[Litmus]]).]]		[[Image:1104 litmus.JPG\|thumb\|left\|1104NC in hangerbay ([[Litmus]]).]]

← Older revision		Revision as of 20:12, 24 June 2025
Line 7:		Line 7:
	::This gives us some idea of the extent of ''Galactica's'' repair capabilities. I wonder why [[Viper 289]] had to be scrapped? Probably unshown structural damage or somesuch. --[[User:April Arcus\|April Arcus]] 17:15, 22 February 2006 (EST)		::This gives us some idea of the extent of ''Galactica's'' repair capabilities. I wonder why [[Viper 289]] had to be scrapped? Probably unshown structural damage or somesuch. --[[User:April Arcus\|April Arcus]] 17:15, 22 February 2006 (EST)
	:::Perhaps 1104 didn't suffer damage to its frame like 289 seemed to have. 1104 lost it's wings and engines but the fuselage seemed relatively unharmed. --[[User:Talos\|Talos]] 19:57, 22 February 2006 (EST)		:::Perhaps 1104 didn't suffer damage to its frame like 289 seemed to have. 1104 lost it's wings and engines but the fuselage seemed relatively unharmed. --[[User:Talos\|Talos]] 19:57, 22 February 2006 (EST)
	[[~~Image~~:1104Ragnar Mini.JPG\|thumb\|1104NC at the Battle of the Ragnar Anchorage ([[Miniseries]]).]]		[[File:1104Ragnar Mini.JPG\|thumb\|1104NC at the Battle of the Ragnar Anchorage ([[Miniseries]]).]]

	[[~~Image~~:1104 litmus.JPG\|thumb\|left\|1104NC in hangerbay ([[Litmus]]).]]		[[File:1104 litmus.JPG\|thumb\|left\|1104NC in hangerbay ([[Litmus]]).]]

	Viper 1104 is the Final Cylon!!! ;-) {{unsigned\|LaloMartins}}		Viper 1104 is the Final Cylon!!! ;-) {{unsigned\|LaloMartins}}

← Older revision		Revision as of 01:58, 11 April 2020
Line 1:		Line 1:
	SciFi's CAG roster, which they kept updated in the first season, never decremented to account for the loss of this fighter. However, the damage always looked quite severe to me, certainly more so than [[Viper 289]], declared unsalvageable in "[[Flight of the Phoenix]]".		SciFi's CAG roster, which they kept updated in the first season, never decremented to account for the loss of this fighter. However, the damage always looked quite severe to me, certainly more so than [[Viper 289]], declared unsalvageable in "[[Flight of the Phoenix]]".

	Do any of you think we should note this vessel as destroyed/scrapped in the Galactica (RDM) tallies? --[[User:~~Peter Farago~~\|~~Peter Farago~~]] 01:03, 17 December 2005 (EST)		Do any of you think we should note this vessel as destroyed/scrapped in the Galactica (RDM) tallies? --[[User:April Arcus\|April Arcus]] 01:03, 17 December 2005 (EST)

	Here's a pic of 1104 at Ragnar, this is at least the second time it's registry is visible during the battle. This is when Starbuck flips over before going nose-to-nose with 7242. --[[User:Talos\|Talos]] 18:38, 21 February 2006 (EST)		Here's a pic of 1104 at Ragnar, this is at least the second time it's registry is visible during the battle. This is when Starbuck flips over before going nose-to-nose with 7242. --[[User:Talos\|Talos]] 18:38, 21 February 2006 (EST)
	:It looks like 1104 survived the battle as it's visible right behind Socinus in the below pic (and repaired as well). It makes sense though, for once they actually had time to recover the fighter or what was left of it. --[[User:Talos\|Talos]] 12:57, 22 February 2006 (EST)		:It looks like 1104 survived the battle as it's visible right behind Socinus in the below pic (and repaired as well). It makes sense though, for once they actually had time to recover the fighter or what was left of it. --[[User:Talos\|Talos]] 12:57, 22 February 2006 (EST)
	::This gives us some idea of the extent of ''Galactica's'' repair capabilities. I wonder why [[Viper 289]] had to be scrapped? Probably unshown structural damage or somesuch. --[[User:~~Peter Farago~~\|~~Peter Farago~~]] 17:15, 22 February 2006 (EST)		::This gives us some idea of the extent of ''Galactica's'' repair capabilities. I wonder why [[Viper 289]] had to be scrapped? Probably unshown structural damage or somesuch. --[[User:April Arcus\|April Arcus]] 17:15, 22 February 2006 (EST)
	:::Perhaps 1104 didn't suffer damage to its frame like 289 seemed to have. 1104 lost it's wings and engines but the fuselage seemed relatively unharmed. --[[User:Talos\|Talos]] 19:57, 22 February 2006 (EST)		:::Perhaps 1104 didn't suffer damage to its frame like 289 seemed to have. 1104 lost it's wings and engines but the fuselage seemed relatively unharmed. --[[User:Talos\|Talos]] 19:57, 22 February 2006 (EST)
	[[Image:1104Ragnar Mini.JPG\|thumb\|1104NC at the Battle of the Ragnar Anchorage ([[Miniseries]]).]]		[[Image:1104Ragnar Mini.JPG\|thumb\|1104NC at the Battle of the Ragnar Anchorage ([[Miniseries]]).]]

← Older revision		Revision as of 08:48, 5 April 2006
Line 7:		Line 7:
	::This gives us some idea of the extent of ''Galactica's'' repair capabilities. I wonder why [[Viper 289]] had to be scrapped? Probably unshown structural damage or somesuch. --[[User:Peter Farago\|Peter Farago]] 17:15, 22 February 2006 (EST)		::This gives us some idea of the extent of ''Galactica's'' repair capabilities. I wonder why [[Viper 289]] had to be scrapped? Probably unshown structural damage or somesuch. --[[User:Peter Farago\|Peter Farago]] 17:15, 22 February 2006 (EST)
	:::Perhaps 1104 didn't suffer damage to its frame like 289 seemed to have. 1104 lost it's wings and engines but the fuselage seemed relatively unharmed. --[[User:Talos\|Talos]] 19:57, 22 February 2006 (EST)		:::Perhaps 1104 didn't suffer damage to its frame like 289 seemed to have. 1104 lost it's wings and engines but the fuselage seemed relatively unharmed. --[[User:Talos\|Talos]] 19:57, 22 February 2006 (EST)
	[[Image:1104Ragnar Mini.JPG\|thumb\|1104NC at the Battle of the Ragnar Anchorage ([[~~Mini-Series~~]]).]]		[[Image:1104Ragnar Mini.JPG\|thumb\|1104NC at the Battle of the Ragnar Anchorage ([[Miniseries]]).]]

	[[Image:1104 litmus.JPG\|thumb\|left\|1104NC in hangerbay ([[Litmus]]).]]		[[Image:1104 litmus.JPG\|thumb\|left\|1104NC in hangerbay ([[Litmus]]).]]