View Single Post
Old September 21 2012, 01:08 PM   #21
BK613
Captain
 
BK613's Avatar
 
Location: BK613
Re: NCC = Not Constitution Class?

C.E. Evans wrote: View Post
BK613 wrote: View Post
-the Jefferies system does not have to continue into the 24th century.
That's the way I've generally looked at it. I do think Starfleet underwent a few changes between TOS and TNG, including what classifies as a starship.
Would certainly hope so; hate to think that SF would be stagnant for a hundred years!
Robert Comsol wrote: View Post
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.
my point was that if 16xx and 18xx are different classes, there are still a large number of Connies on that list, too many perhaps for there to be only twelve of them in all.
Greg Jein did his "The Case of Jonathan Doe Starship"
For anyone interested in the subject, I strongly recommend reading Jein's original (and most influential) article at www.trekplace.com.
Was never a fan of his list or the twisted logic that produced it
With NCC-1631 having been established to be Intrepid by TOS-R .
Established how? Only NCC 163 is legible; sure, we've been told behind-the-scenes that was the Intrepid but it certainly not visible on screen. As far as we know, she could be another ship in for a couple of days of R and R!
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?
Maybe you need officers with seniority to Kirk. Or these COs were the ones whose ships were undergoing months-long overhauls and could afford the time to be bogged down in a trial. Or it was their turn that duty cycle.
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.
I believe it also starts a new construction cycle and all vessels built during this construction cycle
No offense but I said Jefferies' paradigm, not yours...
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?
Bob
My ranges were for illustrative purposes only; others could be chosen. And no, the fleet would be smaller than a Jefferies' "17th cruiser design" approach or straight serial numbers.

In the Jefferies model, the implication is "16th cruiser design" and "18th cruiser design." By that method, there are/have been 98 16xx class, 19 17xx class, and 32 18xx class vessels indicated by that chart. (Not to mention the 18 10xx vessels. )
Serial numbers make it even a larger fleet, with 813 ships between NCC-1017 and NCC-1831, although not all of those are necessarily starships.
Albertese wrote: View Post
But the whole point of the "Jefferies Rule" is that the first number in the registry was related to the class of ship, Enterprise being of the 17th cruiser design. The last two digits being the production number of that particular hull in that particular design. Enterprise being "01" meant that it was the first production model of the ship authorized to be built. The "00" number is for the prototype of that design. The U.S.S. Constitution is number 1700 because it is the prototype, or number "0" of the 17th cruiser design.
That is correct, what I called above the Jefferies' paradigm
That it was still under construction as of "Court Martial" is weak sauce to my nose.
Well anyone that thinks that the Court-martial chart is referencing new ship construction is just plain silly. It's a job-completion chart, nothing more. With maybe a place on the end for repair sign-off/certification
On one of his drawings where he implied this "Rule" of his, MJ specified "17th CRUISER DESIGN" and also described an addition where the "1st MODERNIZE OR MODIFICATION" would get a letter suffix, which would make the TMP refit 1701A (he never used a dash). This would make more sense if there were other prefixes besides "NCC." If we were to assume "NCC" meant that the ship was a cruiser and "NCD" meant it was, say, a destroyer, then having the numbers being meaningful as per ship class would follow easier. But, all we see is "NCC."

These were associated with drawings he did for Roddenberry at the very beginning of the Star Trek: Phase 2 project, which MJ wasn't long associated with. But his sketches did provide the first nudgings toward what ultimately ended up being Probert's TMP refit design. And MJ's drawing of it is labeled as 1701A, interestingly enough. Only one of the "1701A" drawings is dated and it's "6/77" which means that it's entirely possible that the "Jefferies Rule" hadn't even been thought up during the run of the show, which could be why it's not so beholden to...

--Alex
Not sure that last bit is correct; the 17th cruiser design sketch also shows him working out design details on the secondary hull, like the clam-shell doors and the sensor dish. Also, his signature there is more consistent with the ones on the earlier ball-and-stick Enterprise sketches than the later Phase II stuff.
__________________
-------------------
"The single biggest problem with communication is the illusion that it has taken place." - George Bernard Shaw
BK613 is offline   Reply With Quote