@ Robert D. Robot
Indeed, a concise "Starship Class" serves all interests (no bloody A, B, C or D and no Constitution or Enterprise Class).
@ throwback
Yes, "Enterprise Class" was a label on the bridge simulator door.
Andrew Probert felt that because of Commander Decker's "This is a totally new
Enterprise" the registry number should have started with 18 and the ship would be Enterprise Class. When it came to Star Trek VI DP Nicholas Meyer may have gotten second thoughts ("Constitution" whiteprint).
Come to think of it, I wondered how it's rationalized now that TOS-R had established NCC registries starting with 16 for
Intrepid, Excalibur and
Exeter (
Potemkin got her 1657 in Star Trek VI), three ships had already been visualized as relatives of the
Enterprise in TOS.
These obviously don't belong to a Constitution Class where the
Constitution supposedly is NCC-1700
The correct registry for the
USS Constitution would then be NCC-1601 (according to Jefferies Rule) and we'd have 8 known starships of the 16th Federation Design (Constitution Class).
In comparison we'd have 7 known starships of the 17th Federation Design (Enterprise Class).
(Where to put
USS Constellation NCC-1017(-A) I leave this open to imagination).
The beauty of this positive Retcon Maneuver:
1) Jefferies Rule has been reconstituted
2) Numbers make perfect sense
3) "Constitution Class" is a colloquialism in the broader sense: If you start with this class, have the next design to be indiscernible from the outside (Enterprise Class), then have a refit transformation beginning with
USS Constitution that will also include previous Enterprise Class Starships which then will equally end up as (new) Constitution Class Starships, I wouldn't find fault that the majority of fans refer to these vessels just as "Constitution Class Starships".
Of course, the erroneous "NCC-1700" for the
USS Constitution would have to receive a proper military burial...
Bob