View Single Post
Old August 31 2013, 07:59 AM   #158
Avro Arrow
Fleet Captain
 
Location: Ontario, Canada
Re: Was the Enterprise A actually the Yorktown?

Mr. Laser Beam wrote: View Post
Avro Arrow wrote: View Post
Praetor wrote: View Post
OTOH, I disliked that they showed the Intrepid's registry in "Court Martial"
It completely bugged me that they used those stupid Jein numbers.
They're just numbers. What's so stupid about them?
Praetor already mentioned this, but since you asked: I find their provenance unlikely. Jein basically assumed all the ships in the "Court Martial" chart were Constitution class ships. Since it would appear that the chart was intended to represent ships that were currently at Starbase 11, it just doesn't make sense to me that all the Constitution class ships would be at the same starbase at the same time. I know people have tried to rationalize it by saying that maybe the chart represents mission completion status across the Connie fleet no matter where they are, but since Stone appeared to consult the chart to determine which ship to pull repair crews from, that rationalization doesn't sit well with me.

Mr. Laser Beam wrote: View Post
Avro Arrow wrote: View Post
If you're weren't going to use FJ, at least make new ones up that started with 17.
Why is that important? Franz Joseph was no more canon than any other printed work - that is to say, none. Why are his numbers suddenly more gospel than anything else?
Well, I just mentioned FJ's numbers because they were a pre-existing list that was already used in a licensed publication. But no, they are not gospel, which is why I suggested that if you weren't going to use the list that already existed, they should have just made up new numbers. In all fairness, FJ's list can't be entirely right, since his assignment for Intrepid (1708) doesn't appear on the "Court Martial" chart. (In my own "personal continuity", I modify the FJ list to switch Intrepid to 1709, which is on the chart, then give Valiant 1708.)

Praetor wrote: View Post
Eh, was it accidental? If the earliest number resembling the configuration was called Constellation, given the low registry, then indeed Constellation class may be more correct.
Hmm, good point. But we still couldn't use Constellation class to refer to Enterprise and her sisters, because the name still got used for a different class in TNG.

Praetor wrote: View Post
Avro Arrow wrote: View Post
It completely bugged me that they used those stupid Jein numbers. If you're weren't going to use FJ, at least make new ones up that started with 17.
My whole problem with that isn't anything relating to FJ... it's simply that the Jein numbering scheme doesn't make sense because it's built on false premises. The thought that all Constitution class ships would be shown on a repair chart for a particular starbase is just silly.
Yeah, completely agreed.

Robert Comsol wrote: View Post
I'm well aware that the worshippers of G.U.T. and desciples of Retcon use this kind of reasoning as the standard excuse for revisionism, poor research efforts and lack of interest to figure out what the original creators may have intended to tell us.
OK, based on the way this sentence is written, I'm fairly sure I'm opening myself up to a whole world of hurt just for asking... but what exactly is this G.U.T. you keep mentioning in every thread?

yenny wrote: View Post
Also, I had a friend in Job Corp that said that he was from the future, whom himself had a blue print of the refitted Enterprise which had Constitution class written on it.
Um, what?

yenny wrote: View Post
There's already a Enterprise class. And it's a Aircraft Carrier.
I'm pretty sure the fact that the 20th-century USN had an Enterprise class wouldn't preclude the 23rd-century UFP Starfleet from also having a class with the same name.
Avro Arrow is offline   Reply With Quote