The Constellation's registry number
 

NCC-1017. I know people have wondered why a Constitution class Starship would have such a low registry number instead of something in the 1700's.

I had a thought...maybe the Constellation used to be a Saladin class ship, you know, with a single warp nacelle in place of the secondary hull.

http://i34.photobucket.com/albums/d1...on_upgrade.jpg

Then, at some point, the Constellation was upgraded, the secondary hull and twin warp nacelles were added to convert it into a Constitution class starship. It kept the same name and registry that it had before.

May be reaching a little but I think it would be a good explanation of why the registry number is so low compared to other Constitution class ships.

Re: The Constellation's registry number
 

That's a fantastic idea. It makes a lot of sense. I'm adopting it immediately.

Re: The Constellation's registry number
 

Her saucer section being 1017 and later grafted to a full Constitution class frame was always a good enough explanation for me.

Re: The Constellation's registry number
 

I wonder why they didn't use NCC-1710.

Re: The Constellation's registry number
 

aridas sofia came up with as good an idea as I've ever seen, in that thread from last year: http://www.trekbbs.com/showthread.ph...78#post6568678.

Adding to his treatment the notion that the Constellation is older than Enterprise would provide the final piece to the puzzle.

Re: The Constellation's registry number
 

I wondered that also but I've read where it would have been too hard to distinguish between 1701 and 1710 on the small TV screens back in the 60's, while 1017 would be more obvious that it was a different ship.

Re: The Constellation's registry number
 

This idea will be promptly snapped up and added to the books as the official story. Stranger things have happened.

My father attended Tufts University and wrote a story for a student publication back then. In his story, he described a student crossing the campus and noting the elephant statue (which I believe is no longer there). The fictional student also noted a penny balanced in the up-raised trunk, a good luck / wishing well tradition on campus—according to the story. Yet no such tradition existed. By the time my brothers attended Tufts, the penny-in-the-trunk "tradition" was well known and practiced.

(The story was about a student who breaks into a professor's office and steals a test. The details in the story, including the type of locks on the doors and filing cabinet, were so well researched that the elephant tradition was not the only thing taken seriously. The admins called my dad onto the carpet to ask him about this story, and certain exams were delayed while new tests were written.)

Re: The Constellation's registry number
 

They used an old plastic model kit to show the (non-remastered) Constellation, didn't they? I wonder if they were tempted to switch a few of the bits around - TOS kitbashing, if you will. I mean, it's not as if this was a particularly important model, right?

Re: The Constellation's registry number
 

Yes, while the shots from the front weren't too bad, the rear shots were awful, the lack of detail on the impulse engines and rear (undamaged) nacelle made it very obvious this was just a cheap model thrown together for the show.

http://i34.photobucket.com/albums/d1...ion_damage.jpg

Again, it probably wasn't a big deal on the small TV's in the 60's but I remember watching the re-runs in the 70's and it was very noticeable.

I think the remastered version of The Doomsday Machine did an excellent job with the CGI Constellation.

Re: The Constellation's registry number
 

The new effects in the remastered Doomsday Machine were awful.

Re: The Constellation's registry number
 

While I agree for the most part, the Constellation CGI model was a huge upgrade.

Re: The Constellation's registry number
 

I disagree. I thought the new effects were a huge improvement over the originals.

I mean, seriously, there is no way that the original shot looks better than the remastered shot.

http://i34.photobucket.com/albums/d1...comparison.jpg

Re: The Constellation's registry number
 

Better in some ways doesn't stop it from being awful. Saying it's better than a ten dollar plastic model is faint praise; it could have been much better than it was.

Anyway, we can beat that dead horse in another thread, can't we?

Re: The Constellation's registry number
 

I'm not sure why the Constellation's registry number is a problem.

Re: The Constellation's registry number
 

While I've generally favored the idea that the Constellation was upgraded to a Constitution-class from an earlier design, I tend to think that earlier design was nearly identical in a way not too unlike the Soyuz- and Miranda-classes were.

Maybe that earlier design the Constellation came from looked like this:
http://www.blastr.com/sites/blastr/f...all01_1280.jpg