For myself, some of the bigger issues with the ships from "Conspiracy" is that (a.) there is a ship with the registry NCC-42 and (b.) there are ships which seem to share the same registry...For me, the issues with the registries, as of the end of the third season, is proof of evidence that Michael Okuda hadn't yet developed a master copy of Federation starships in which each ship had an assigned number and class.
That's another reason why I didn't add them: A lot of those ships are nothing more than in-jokes that were never meant to be scrutinized up close or to be taken seriously, at least for what I was writing.
I have been studying the chart from "Court Martial". I have noticed that there is a slight difference between the 6 and 8. It can be seen here - there is a separation between the end of the curve and the enclosed circle. This can be seen in the blu-ray. (I have a 42" flatscreen TV.) I am now reading the chart as:
* NCC 1709
* NCC 1831
* NCC 1703
* NCC 1672
* NCC 1864
* NCC 1697
* NCC 1701
* NCC 1718
* NCC 1685
* NCC 1700
Actually, I have what was advertised as a copy of this master list that Greg Jein used in T-Negative. Here's what it reads:
Unfortunately I don't remember the source, but I can post the pic if you want to see it.
But at that distance, and that stage of the footage, what we would really see if we squinted infinitely hard is the general triangular shape plus the engine glow, and both correspond nicely to the Fajo configuration. Plus perhaps the lower "cannon" prong, but in such a position as to match Fajo's "canards" in silhouette. So our make-believe would be based on "almost visual canon" rather than complete dismissing of visuals, which I find rather enjoyable.
Be that as it may, the fact remains that it still wasn't Fajo's ship, it was the Husnock ship, no matter what angle it was (barely) seen from. If one is just going to fudge stuff like that, then one can also feel free to claim that they saw a ship with saucer and nacelles, and it would have just as much validity. That is, none whatsoever. If they had used, say, stock footage of a Cardassian Galor exploding in the far-off distance, we wouldn't even be debating this.
But it's a transport ship, and we have seen some UFP wedge-shaped, nacelle-free ones (such as the Pakled ship, which apparently is e.g. a common Rigelian = UFP model, or the Trill ship from "The Host") plus other shapes lacking prominent nacelles (the Norkova or the ST:INS holoship) but only one obviously nacelled design (the Sydney).
But to my knowledge, none of the above examples was ever classified as a "starship," which has uually been the purview of the saucer/nacelle Starfleet, whatever its function. The LaSalle was classified as such in dialogue, so that's what I'm going with.
The evidence isn't all that strongly in support of that. The writer of the episode did not express any sentiment that this class would be the only one warranting the designation "star ship", and we have no clear reason to think that the maker of the artwork would have been thinking in terms of a list featuring just a single class of ships. Quite to the contrary, the diversity in numbers would appear to be another attempt at creating diversity on the cheap.
True; it was Greg Jein who assumed they were all Connies way after the fact. Which when you think about it, makes no sense whatsoever. Almost all the Connies built just happen to be under repairs at that one Starbase at the exact same time?