View Single Post
Old September 20 2012, 11:54 PM   #19
Robert Comsol
Commodore
 
Robert Comsol's Avatar
 
Location: USS Berlin
Re: NCC = Not Constitution Class?

BK613 wrote: View Post
-stepping through the scene where Stone is viewing the extract frame-by-frame yesterday, the 8 in 1831 always looks like an 8 except once, so, at least on a 55" LED TV, it is 1831. The second digits below it that are 6s always looked like 6s.
When Greg Jein did his "The Case of Jonathan Doe Starship" he most likely just had a print from a film cell and was not able to discern whether it's 1631 or 1831.

BK613 wrote: View Post
-even if you say that only 17xx is "like her in the fleet", i.e, Constitution-class, there are still five of the twelve* listed here, apparently laid up for repairs/maintenance.
Again, USS Constitution NCC-1601, USS Enterprise NCC-1701.
For anyone interested in the subject, I strongly recommend reading Jein's original (and most influential) article at www.trekplace.com. Witness how he concludes that NCC-1700 should be Constitution and how at the end of the article he makes a (correct) 180 turn and figures that a short bar indicates a starship just being under construction (NCC-1700)!!!

With NCC-1631 having been established to be Intrepid by TOS-R the display no longer lists starships in orbit of Starbase 11. I think that's a good thing (again, why withdraw starship captains from active duty to transport them to a starbase where you have 9 of them waiting for repairs with nothing else to do?), Timo does not the way I read his comments.

BK613 wrote: View Post
-1697? Under the Jefferies' paradigm, the 97th "bird?" Of course, the one hundred numbers could have been assigned to the various shipyard in blocks, ie, SF gets 1600-1615, Utopia gets 1616-1630, etc. So a build order might be 1600, 1631, 1616, each yard finishing the first of its number block. That would allow for a smallish fleet (that TOS often suggested) but such large serial numbers.
Not the 97th "bird" (in the sense of starship). If the new cruiser design (1601) starts the series I believe it also starts a new construction cycle and all vessels built during this construction cycle - from a cargo drone to a starship - will get a prefix of 16.
Of course the 31st, the 64th, the 72nd, the 85th and 97th Starfleet vessel built during this cycle are Constitution Class starships, too.

I find your proposal with the shipyard blocks fascinating! But with the last shipyard (1685-1699) we'd already be having 12 starships just from this particular one plus the others. Wouldn't this make the fleet rather bigger?

BK613 wrote: View Post
-the Jefferies system does not have to continue into the 24th century. A switch to straight serial numbering could have occurred as the Jefferries system became too cumbersome to use. Such changes happen all the time IRL.
I agree, the 24th century may require a different system for various reasons.
One is definitely that federation space has become so big that it's necessary to assign certain sectors to certain ships which stay there. Warping from one end of federation space to the other seems to be a waste of time. I assume the NCC registries now to be codes that tell every able Starfleet officer just by hearing an NCC number which sector a certain ship is usually operating in.
IRL our banks give us account numbers that contain the routing code to identify which bank a certain account number belongs to.

Bob
__________________
"The first duty of every Starfleet officer is to the truth" Jean-Luc Picard
"We can't solve problems by using the same kind of thinking we used when we created them."
Albert Einstein
Robert Comsol is offline   Reply With Quote