Here are my two cents:
I do not believe that the ship is a smaller asgard type of transport vessel.
There a two things that the writers obviously wanted to point out:
Firstly, as some of you have stated before, the ship truely looked like an ancient ship with a design quite similar to a puddle jumper.
Secondly, why should that women in the control tower mention that "ancient ships can do it" if there's no deeper meaning behind that sentence?
We have a ship that looks like an oversized puddler jumper and that ship can pass ancients shields,just like ancient ships can do. This cannot be a coincidence-the writers wanted to give us a hint about where the technology, at least some parts these asgards are using is from.
And by the way: Did no one else wonder why these asgards are so persistent in whiping out the wraith at all costs?
Ok, this is speculative but I for one cannot think of another reason but a connection between the ancients in this galaxy, these rogue asgards and the wraith- they must have some sort history in common.
I do not believe that the ship is a smaller asgard type of transport vessel.
There a two things that the writers obviously wanted to point out:
Firstly, as some of you have stated before, the ship truely looked like an ancient ship with a design quite similar to a puddle jumper.
Secondly, why should that women in the control tower mention that "ancient ships can do it" if there's no deeper meaning behind that sentence?
We have a ship that looks like an oversized puddler jumper and that ship can pass ancients shields,just like ancient ships can do. This cannot be a coincidence-the writers wanted to give us a hint about where the technology, at least some parts these asgards are using is from.
And by the way: Did no one else wonder why these asgards are so persistent in whiping out the wraith at all costs?
Ok, this is speculative but I for one cannot think of another reason but a connection between the ancients in this galaxy, these rogue asgards and the wraith- they must have some sort history in common.
Comment