RSS iconTwitter iconFacebook icon

The Trek BBS title image

The Trek BBS statistics

Threads: 135,843
Posts: 5,220,440
Members: 24,228
Currently online: 660
Newest member: waqarkeihk

TrekToday headlines

Kurtzman And Orci Go Solo
By: T'Bonz on Apr 22

Star Trek #32 Preview
By: T'Bonz on Apr 22

Voyager Bridge Via The Oculus Rift
By: T'Bonz on Apr 21

Miles Away Glyph Award Nominations
By: T'Bonz on Apr 21

Q Meets NuTrek Crew
By: T'Bonz on Apr 18

Pine In Talks For Drama
By: T'Bonz on Apr 18

New X-Men: Days of Future Past Trailer
By: T'Bonz on Apr 17

Nimoy to Receive Award
By: T'Bonz on Apr 17

Star Trek Special: Flesh and Stone Comic
By: T'Bonz on Apr 16

These Are The Voyages TOS Season Two Book Review
By: T'Bonz on Apr 16


Welcome! The Trek BBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans. Please login to see our full range of forums as well as the ability to send and receive private messages, track your favourite topics and of course join in the discussions.

If you are a new visitor, join us for free. If you are an existing member please login below. Note: for members who joined under our old messageboard system, please login with your display name not your login name.


Go Back   The Trek BBS > Misc. Star Trek > Trek Tech

Trek Tech Pass me the quantum flux regulator, will you?

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old June 1 2012, 01:48 PM   #106
Timo
Admiral
 
Re: Matt Jefferies and NCC-1017

Who cares?

Timo Saloniemi
Timo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 1 2012, 03:13 PM   #107
Dukhat
Commodore
 
Dukhat's Avatar
 
Location: Baltimore, MD
Re: Matt Jefferies and NCC-1017

Timo wrote: View Post
Who cares?
I would imagine, someone who'd want to know if Okuda meant for this ship to be the Starfleet Antares class or not, based on the similarity between its dedication plaque and the TOS Enterprise's dedication plaque.

Of course, for all we know that kitbash could be the class ship. But I've always been under the impression that kit bashes were not meant to be taken seriously.
__________________
“Don’t believe everything you read on the internet.”
– Benjamin Franklin
Dukhat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 1 2012, 04:02 PM   #108
Timo
Admiral
 
Re: Matt Jefferies and NCC-1017

It appears unlikely that Okuda would have wanted either to create additional confusion on the Antares issue, or to clarify the issue. One wonders if he ever knew what the Xhosa would end up looking like, perhaps having missed "The Passenger". And it's even harder to believe he would have been thinking in terms of the Starfleet Antares class fleetingly mentioned in one of his graphics in "Redemption".

Timo Saloniemi
Timo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 1 2012, 05:13 PM   #109
Dukhat
Commodore
 
Dukhat's Avatar
 
Location: Baltimore, MD
Re: Matt Jefferies and NCC-1017

That's probably true. As a matter of fact, I hope it's true. And if he made that plaque as nothing more than an in-joke, that'd be fine too. However, my point is that unless we're told otherwise, it's still a possibility that the Xhosa and Norkova were once Starfleet Antares-class vessels now relegated to freight duty.
__________________
“Don’t believe everything you read on the internet.”
– Benjamin Franklin
Dukhat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 2 2012, 09:26 AM   #110
Timo
Admiral
 
Re: Matt Jefferies and NCC-1017

Given the suggestive design of the ship, I'd prefer to speculate that in such a case, the Starfleet Antares was always a transport, and her mission was not altered for the DS9 era. The only "Starfleet Antares" unit we have to worry about was the Hermes from Picard's blockade fleet in "Redemption", and it could well be argued that a fleet needed a logistics support vessel, or that any tub with a warp engine and room onboard for a tachyon generator would do.

Timo Saloniemi
Timo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 2 2012, 03:33 PM   #111
Dukhat
Commodore
 
Dukhat's Avatar
 
Location: Baltimore, MD
Re: Matt Jefferies and NCC-1017

Considering that Picard seemed to hastily gather his fleet from wherever he could get ships (i.e. the Sutherland was still in dock being repaired, and didn't even have a commanding officer when it was called to duty), then lumping an old available freighter into the mix is plausible.

However, there's still the issue of the ship looking absolutely nothing like a typical Starfleet vessel, and looking more like an alien ship, or at worst, a ship from an enemy of the Federation!

Of course it's also possible that the Hermes is not this type of ship, and there's a distinct difference between the Starfleet Antares class and the Federation Antares class.

(wondering if a new thread topic is needed about now...)
__________________
“Don’t believe everything you read on the internet.”
– Benjamin Franklin
Dukhat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 2 2012, 03:43 PM   #112
Timo
Admiral
 
Re: Matt Jefferies and NCC-1017

On the other hand, the design looks extremely generic - this model and its big sister are encountered all across the galaxy. If it's a good and easily available design, why wouldn't Starfleet make use of it? Everybody is an enemy of Starfleet at some point or another, but an ally later on; giving money or other compensation to the people who provide ships like this need not be contrary to UFP interests.

Although we could always postulate that all Starfleet ships of this design are actually war loot. Qualor II had its share of alien vessels, including a veritable clan of ships previously seen operated by Talarians. A past war with that culture is already established; perhaps captured transports saw lots of use even if captured destroyers were deemed useless?

Timo Saloniemi
Timo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 2 2012, 05:23 PM   #113
TIN_MAN
Fleet Captain
 
TIN_MAN's Avatar
 
Re: Matt Jefferies and NCC-1017

I think the safest bet is that Okuda simply intended a nod to "Charlie's" Antares and “TOS” in general, as a sort of “Easter egg” with no further continuity issues attached than that, and nothing more? So beyond this meager intent, the field is wide open for speculation?
TIN_MAN is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 3 2012, 05:15 PM   #114
Dukhat
Commodore
 
Dukhat's Avatar
 
Location: Baltimore, MD
Re: Matt Jefferies and NCC-1017

TIN_MAN wrote: View Post
I think the safest bet is that Okuda simply intended a nod to "Charlie's" Antares and “TOS” in general, as a sort of “Easter egg” with no further continuity issues attached than that, and nothing more? So beyond this meager intent, the field is wide open for speculation?
Yeah, you probably hit the nail on the head here. It's just fun to speculate about this stuff.
__________________
“Don’t believe everything you read on the internet.”
– Benjamin Franklin
Dukhat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 3 2012, 09:14 PM   #115
publiusr
Commodore
 
Re: Matt Jefferies and NCC-1017

I liked Brian Pimenta's Antares, but I would have made the saucer smaller for his drawing.
http://www.trekships.org/antares.htm

Being a red supergiant--it needs to be the name of a shuttlecarrier though...
publiusr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 4 2012, 11:53 AM   #116
Timo
Admiral
 
Re: Matt Jefferies and NCC-1017

The total of Antares references in "reasonably official" fanon/RPG/novel/comic material, as per Memory Beta, seems to give us Starfleet ships of that name fairly frequently, in terms of registries and likely launch dates.

We have this NCC-501 (no doubt a misreading of NCC-G01, of course! ) from TOS-R. Then there's Pimenta's NCC-717. Then comes the FJ Constitution starship, NCC-1820. Two FASA ships next, although their chronological ordering appears different from the ordering suggested by their registries: the Loknar at NCC-2714 actually comes before NCC-1820, and then the Constellation follows both at NCC-2514. Now insert this DS9 ship at NCC-9844...

This collection doesn't pose continuity problems as such, as we can assume an older ship was always lost or retired before the newer one came along. (We would have to assume NCC-501 was slotted after NCC-2714, from the 2240s, and before NCC-1820, from the 2270s, but that ain't really a problem. NCC-717 could slip in wherever/whenever we like.)

Okay, that FASA Constellation is a bit too much, perhaps; then again, the entire FASA lists of Constellation and Excelsior names have to be discounted in any Grand Theory of registries, as they trample on way too many toes.

The problem lies in inserting an actual "Antares class" in there: none of the starships mentioned above should be considered the class ship, probably, as it would be pretty silly for Starfleet to name any later ship Antares when the class by that name is still going strong. And choosing the last Antares in that collection for the class ship doesn't work out, either, as it's a stock Miranda with minimal changes: for the 24th century at least, minimal changes shouldn't result in a separate class designation.

Timo Saloniemi
Timo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 4 2012, 02:49 PM   #117
Dukhat
Commodore
 
Dukhat's Avatar
 
Location: Baltimore, MD
Re: Matt Jefferies and NCC-1017

Timo wrote: View Post
We have this NCC-501...from TOS-R....
Which, chronologically speaking, shouldn't be the class ship for the Starfleet Antares class, if only because her sister ship the Yorkshire was NCC-330.

...and then the Constellation follows both at NCC-2514.
This is from The Next Generation Officer's Manual, the closest FASA ever got to a TNG technical manual before they lost their license to make Trek RPGs. I own a copy, and while a lot of their ship diagrams (especially the Constellation Class) are wildly inaccurate, it's an interesting book nonetheless. Do you own a copy too?

The problem lies in inserting an actual "Antares class" in there: none of the starships mentioned above should be considered the class ship...and choosing the last Antares in that collection for the class ship doesn't work out, either, as it's a stock Miranda with minimal changes: for the 24th century at least, minimal changes shouldn't result in a separate class designation.
Well, here's two facts: One, there's not a lot of numerical difference between the Antares NCC-9844 and the Antares class Hermes NCC-10376, and two, there is a precedence where two ships of very close design are in fact two separate classes: the Miranda and the Soyuz (and the Antares is from that family apparently). Of course, the exact opposite could be said of the Excelsior and the Enterprise-B, which are the same class...

However, I'm sure the intention was not to make this kitbash into one of Okuda's conjectural classes from the Encyclopedia; it was most likely a simple rearranging of letters and numbers from two Reliant kits, and the name was coincidental.

Also, don't forget the once-semi-canonical/official Jeri Taylor novel Pathways, where she makes Chakotay's raider Antares class...but at this point that book is pretty much out of the running for various reasons.
__________________
“Don’t believe everything you read on the internet.”
– Benjamin Franklin
Dukhat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 4 2012, 03:22 PM   #118
Timo
Admiral
 
Re: Matt Jefferies and NCC-1017

Which, chronologically speaking, shouldn't be the class ship for the Starfleet Antares class, if only because her sister ship the Yorkshire was NCC-330.
...Assuming the two really were of the same class. Perhaps they sported different modules, making all the difference, considering how little we saw of the Yorkshire?

Personally, I will ignore both registries, not only because they conflict with more interesting fanon ones, but also because giving NCC numbers to drones like that will deplete the stock far too quickly. TAS had the right idea in adding prefix letters; both Antares and Yorkshire might get a G, although the former might also have an F.

Do you own a copy too?
Alas, no.

Since our single datapoint on a Starfleet Antares class is so vague (being TNG era and five-digit, it's even beyond the reach of speculation on sequential, "batch" registries being in use in the TOS and TFS eras), I wouldn't sweat it much. Having it be a Miranda batch is fine with me - although since the datapoint comes from a TNG era computer readout and we have zero evidence of "subclass" names from that era, as opposed to lots of fanon and some canon evidence from the TFS era, her being Antares IMHO still means her not being Miranda.

Also, don't forget the once-semi-canonical/official Jeri Taylor novel Pathways, where she makes Chakotay's raider Antares class...
Umm, I will, sorry.

Timo Saloniemi
Timo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 5 2012, 02:16 AM   #119
throwback
Captain
 
Re: Matt Jefferies and NCC-1017

Of the Antares-type freighters, the ship with the lowest known registry is the Woden (NCC-325). She appeared in the remastered "The Ultimate Computer" without a crew module.
throwback is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 5 2012, 06:29 AM   #120
Albertese
Commodore
 
Albertese's Avatar
 
Location: Portland, OR
Re: Matt Jefferies and NCC-1017

Dukhat wrote: View Post

...

However, I'm sure the intention was not to make this kitbash into one of Okuda's conjectural classes from the Encyclopedia; it was most likely a simple rearranging of letters and numbers from two Reliant kits, and the name was coincidental.

...
This may be a small point, but if you're suggesting the Bozeman was pieced together from two AMT Reliant kits, this isn't the case. It was one of several models of Reliant built for TWOK and modified by Greg Jein based on drawings by himself and Mike Okuda. Also the AMT kit was never released prior to 1995 which means it didn't exist in time to be used for a 1992 episode of TNG.

And there are quite a few more differences between it and the regular Miranda-class ships than between the Excelsior and the Enterprise-B/Lakota. I have no qualms about it being a different class.

Also, the Encyclopedia was released in 1994 so there's no way anything made prior to that was ever intended to be one of Okuda's conjectural ships. The name of both the ship and it's class are clearly stated in the episode so there's nothing conjectural about it.

Also, it's possible I'm misunderstanding which ship you're referring to...

--Alex
__________________
Check out my website: www.goldtoothstudio.squarespace.com

Last edited by Albertese; June 5 2012 at 07:11 AM.
Albertese is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump



All times are GMT +1. The time now is 04:28 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
FireFox 2+ or Internet Explorer 7+ highly recommended.