View Single Post
Old June 4 2012, 11:53 AM   #116
Timo
Admiral
 
Re: Matt Jefferies and NCC-1017

The total of Antares references in "reasonably official" fanon/RPG/novel/comic material, as per Memory Beta, seems to give us Starfleet ships of that name fairly frequently, in terms of registries and likely launch dates.

We have this NCC-501 (no doubt a misreading of NCC-G01, of course! ) from TOS-R. Then there's Pimenta's NCC-717. Then comes the FJ Constitution starship, NCC-1820. Two FASA ships next, although their chronological ordering appears different from the ordering suggested by their registries: the Loknar at NCC-2714 actually comes before NCC-1820, and then the Constellation follows both at NCC-2514. Now insert this DS9 ship at NCC-9844...

This collection doesn't pose continuity problems as such, as we can assume an older ship was always lost or retired before the newer one came along. (We would have to assume NCC-501 was slotted after NCC-2714, from the 2240s, and before NCC-1820, from the 2270s, but that ain't really a problem. NCC-717 could slip in wherever/whenever we like.)

Okay, that FASA Constellation is a bit too much, perhaps; then again, the entire FASA lists of Constellation and Excelsior names have to be discounted in any Grand Theory of registries, as they trample on way too many toes.

The problem lies in inserting an actual "Antares class" in there: none of the starships mentioned above should be considered the class ship, probably, as it would be pretty silly for Starfleet to name any later ship Antares when the class by that name is still going strong. And choosing the last Antares in that collection for the class ship doesn't work out, either, as it's a stock Miranda with minimal changes: for the 24th century at least, minimal changes shouldn't result in a separate class designation.

Timo Saloniemi
Timo is offline   Reply With Quote