View Single Post
Old August 28 2013, 10:30 PM   #125
Vice Admiral
Praetor's Avatar
Location: The fine line between continuity and fanwank.
Re: Was the Enterprise A actually the Yorktown?

Workbee wrote: View Post
Of course, production wise it was a "have their cake and eat it too" compromise. They wanted it to be the same ship from TOS, but wanted freedom to update the design for the big screen. This idea would have been more credible with the initial Phase II design, but after all the changes by Andy Probert, it became much harder to see as the same ship. Likely the reason we didn't see that concept used much after is that Trek never had such a huge leap in quality and budget for effects as TOS to TMP. And when such changes did happen, they were with different ships or locations. Probably the next closest is probably Nemesis to Star Trek 2009, but we have an alternate reality to explain the differences.
This is a very succinct way of describing events more or less just as I've seen them too.

Workbee wrote: View Post
Though internally, we do see lots of the Excelsiors, Oberths, and Mirandas sporting the "TNG" aesthetic inside. And with the warp speed effect using the Q-flash instead of the cartoons streaks suggest substantial changes to their warp systems.
It's interesting, we more or less "know" that swapping a bridge is an easy thing. Warp nacelles look modular, and corridors and room modules, at least according to backstage materials, are probably fairly modular too... OTOH most of what we saw for ship's innards was probably either aesthetic or coincidental. (The fact that the TUC ship interiors resemble the TNG era and the TFF interiors are nearly identical actually helps.) Further, it appears that the Enterprise-A and Excelsior had warp cores rather similar to the Enterprise-D, which may in and of itself be coincidental but may also signal the first appearance of a modern warp core.

Workbee wrote: View Post
In universe, one might suppose that in both the TMP and TNG timeframe, ENTERPRISE carries so much political weight that starfleet will undertake these impractical overhaul and space frame modifications simply so they can claim it is the same ship on paper. Though it is likely more cost effective (or as close to in a "moneyless" society) to simply build a new ship from ground up. We don't see much of the civilian sphere in TOS and TNG. But having one of those ship save earth from VGER and another save earth from the Borg, may have started a rabid fanaticism on Earth (the likes of which never seen on this website) that, short of her complete destruction, would not allow starfleet to ever retire the Enterprise.
I've always leaned towards this notion too. But, let's be open-minded about it; it doesn't have to be the only possibility. Canonically, all we really know is that the Enterprise's appearance changed significantly when she was probably 25 years old, yet ships that are at least this old, on designs that we know to be older, were never seen to have changed so drastically.

The way I see it there are these possibilities, not all of which are mutually exclusive:
  1. The Enterprise was so important, symbolism necessitated her refit/preservation
  2. The refit process as seen on the Enterprise is actually fairly common, and it's a coincidence that we haven't seen it
  3. The refit process is fairly easy, but the Federation generally chooses to simply build new ships instead
  4. Refits like this were once typical in the 23rd century, but technological progress changed somehow so that by the 24th century such drastic changes were rendered unnecessary
Workbee wrote: View Post
For all we know, one of the national holidays is Enterprise Day.
January 17th, of course?
"If you can't take a little bloody nose, maybe you ought to go back home and crawl under your bed. It's not safe out here. It's wondrous, with treasures to satiate desires both subtle and gross; but it's not for the timid." - Q
Praetor is offline   Reply With Quote