RSS iconTwitter iconFacebook icon

The Trek BBS title image

The Trek BBS statistics

Threads: 140,075
Posts: 5,432,368
Members: 24,931
Currently online: 477
Newest member: emogs

TrekToday headlines

The Red Shirt Diaries #8
By: T'Bonz on Oct 20

IDW Publishing January Comics
By: T'Bonz on Oct 20

Retro Review: Chrysalis
By: Michelle on Oct 18

The Next Generation Season Seven Blu-ray Details
By: T'Bonz on Oct 17

CBS Launches Streaming Service
By: T'Bonz on Oct 17

Yelchin In New Indie Thriller
By: T'Bonz on Oct 17

Saldana In The Book of Life
By: T'Bonz on Oct 17

Cracked’s New Sci-Fi Satire
By: T'Bonz on Oct 16

Beltran Introduces Shakespeare To Theater Group
By: T'Bonz on Oct 16

Burton To Be Honored at Facets Boo! Bash
By: T'Bonz on Oct 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 > Star Trek Movies > Star Trek Movies I-X

Star Trek Movies I-X Discuss the first ten big screen outings in this forum!

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old May 31 2012, 06:15 AM   #46
Marc
Fleet Admiral
 
Location: An Aussie in Canukistan
Send a message via ICQ to Marc
Re: The operational status of NCC 1701-A...?

Captaindemotion wrote: View Post

In-universe, I also like Timo's explanation that each ENT lasted so long that by the time it was destroyed or decommissioned, it was time for a new class of ship.
Except the Galaxys were suppose to have a service life of nearly a century according to the technical manual the -D was still in grade school when it was lost

But then I guess when the Tech Manual was written the Borg weren't really on the radar with the Soverigns probably accelerated because of that threat.
__________________
Gentlemen you can't fight in here - this is the war room.

Pres. Merkin P. Muffly
Marc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 31 2012, 09:40 AM   #47
Timo
Admiral
 
Re: The operational status of NCC 1701-A...?

We don't have to consider the Sovereign class the successor of the Galaxy class in any sense. For all we know, Galaxy is still going strong - and it just so happens that the lifespan of starship classes has been gradually increasing, so that the E-D could theoretically have been succeeded by an E-E of the same class. And the E-C could have been succeeded by another Ambassador (a type with a lifespan of perhaps sixty years), but Starfleet didn't give her a successor until after the days of Ambassador were over. But the E-B was a shorter-lived design (say, forty years *), and was already old news when the time came to name the E-C.

Timo Saloniemi

*) I mean, looking at the registry numbers and the ships carrying them, one can approximate a progression of a thousand NCC numbers per year, or at least ten thousand per ten years, in the 24th century. We witness ships of E-B ilk having a coarse range from NCC 10k to NCC 40k, or forty years during which these things are being built.
Timo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 31 2012, 11:43 AM   #48
MacLeod
Admiral
 
Location: Great Britain
Re: The operational status of NCC 1701-A...?

Captaindemotion wrote: View Post
Marc wrote: View Post
Captaindemotion wrote: View Post
@Timo^ The E came soon after the D and the Defiant also followed its predecessor immediately.

Ultimately, it's all in one's personal continuity or belief and there's nothing to prove anyone right or wrong. But I don't find the version you suggest convincing. I'm sure the reverse is true too!
But there's a difference.

After the Enterprise-A, the name has only passed on when there's been a new ship class.

Original Enterprise - Constitution Class
1701-A - Constitution II (depends on one's canon).
1701-B - Excelsior
1701-C - Nebula
1701-D - Galaxy
1701-E - Soverign
Well, the other difference is that each time they came up with a new ENT for a tv show or movie, they clearly wanted to distinguish it from its predecessors or successors, either to make it easier to see what was going on onscreen (eg Yesterday's Enterprise) or simply to sell more toys.

Whereas in DS9, by the time the original Defiant bought it, the show was cash-strapped and was re-using stock footage for some space scenes. They couldn't afford a whole new ship to design action sequences or computer programmes around, which is why the next Defiant even had an identical registry; 'in-universe', we were told that they got a special dispensation because the original ship had perished before its time, after being so invaluable to the war effort.

In-universe, I also like Timo's explanation that each ENT lasted so long that by the time it was destroyed or decommissioned, it was time for a new class of ship.
Well that's true to a certain extent

1701 lasted almost 40 years (with at least 1 major refit)
1701-A about 10 years (as far as we know not a new ship)
1701-B around at least 20 years
1701-C no data available
1701-D about 8 years.
__________________
On the continent of wild endeavour in the mountains of solace and solitude there stood the citadel of the time lords, the oldest and most mighty race in the universe looking down on the galaxies below sworn never to interfere only to watch.
MacLeod is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 31 2012, 06:57 PM   #49
Ronald Held
Rear Admiral
 
Location: On the USS Sovereign
Re: The operational status of NCC 1701-A...?

I thought the E-C was Ambassador class?
Ronald Held is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 31 2012, 07:29 PM   #50
starburst
Fleet Captain
 
starburst's Avatar
 
Re: The operational status of NCC 1701-A...?

I dont get what the problem is with the ship being decommissioned so early, even if she was a new ship at the time it was christened as the A.

After the Khitomer battle Starfleet may have decided on the spot to retire the ship for a couple of reasons;
  1. The Consitution Class, and the Enterprise, represented Starfleet during the time of numerous conflicts with the Klingons, a conflict both sides were trying to put behind them.
  2. Its participation in the making sure the treaty was signed meant that they wanted to recognize this event and so decommissioned her instead of patch her up and send her off to get squatted by some random phenomena.
To me the events of TUC made the top brass mothball the ship as both a political move as well as a PR stunt. Take her off of active duty and replace her with a new top of the line Excelsior which was nearing completion, a new generation of ship to start the new era of peace and exploration which not only honours the Enterprise and her crew but also the Excelsior too.


Sorry to Shatner and any fans of Ashes of Eden (which I did enjoy) but I dont think Starfleet would plan on using the Enterprise for War Games or giving her to a foreign power but could see it being docked somewhere as a museum ship kind of in the same vein as the 'Mighty Mo'.



Other Constitutions I can see serving into the 24th century on milk run missions or supporting Starbases in obscure areas where a more modern ship would have been a waste of resources. This would be why we see parts of a Constitution Class ship at Wolf 359.
starburst is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 31 2012, 08:24 PM   #51
Timo
Admiral
 
Re: The operational status of NCC 1701-A...?

...Finding an antiquated ship right next to Earth need not be proof that the type is still operational. Could be proof that the type is in purely ceremonial use, much like Old Ironsides, as Earth would be the center of such ceremonies.

Timo Saloniemi
Timo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 31 2012, 08:33 PM   #52
Iamnotspock
Captain
 
Location: Bristol, England
Re: The operational status of NCC 1701-A...?

Lance wrote: View Post
What do you reckon? Personally, I think this seems more plausible than it would be to assume that Enterprise and her crew were actively undertaking regular missions during that short period of time, and at that particular stage in their careers.
TUC does indeed indicate that the crew is being reassembled after some time; Sulu has been in command of the Excelsior for 3 years, and McCoy hasn't missed him ("If we're all here, where's Sulu?"). It therefore seems unlikely that the full Enterprise-A crew has been on active duty together on that ship within the previous three years.
Iamnotspock is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 31 2012, 08:48 PM   #53
Timo
Admiral
 
Re: The operational status of NCC 1701-A...?

...Of course, it might be that the ship has been in constant active service; it's just that none of the TOS heroes have been part of her crew during that time.

In that scenario, it's just for this one politically important mission that Starfleet kicks out the previous top officers and inserts Kirk's Heroes in their place, on grounds of only Nixon being able to go to China.

Timo Saloniemi
Timo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 2 2012, 11:32 PM   #54
Lord Garth
Captain
 
Lord Garth's Avatar
 
Re: The operational status of NCC 1701-A...?

starburst wrote: View Post
I dont get what the problem is with the ship being decommissioned so early, even if she was a new ship at the time it was christened as the A.

After the Khitomer battle Starfleet may have decided on the spot to retire the ship for a couple of reasons;
  1. The Consitution Class, and the Enterprise, represented Starfleet during the time of numerous conflicts with the Klingons, a conflict both sides were trying to put behind them.
  2. Its participation in the making sure the treaty was signed meant that they wanted to recognize this event and so decommissioned her instead of patch her up and send her off to get squatted by some random phenomena.
To me the events of TUC made the top brass mothball the ship as both a political move as well as a PR stunt. Take her off of active duty and replace her with a new top of the line Excelsior which was nearing completion, a new generation of ship to start the new era of peace and exploration which not only honours the Enterprise and her crew but also the Excelsior too.
That and the hull was compromised. Between the battle damage and what you posted above, I figure those are the reasons the Enterprise-A was decomissioned when it was.

I don't think it was an older ship, more like one of the last ships of an older line.

I know Gene Roddenberry would've preferred that the Enterprise-A was previously the Yorktown but he wasn't in charge of the movies at that point, the Yorktown happened to be in TVH, and I don't see why that ship would've been damaged any worse than any other vessels in the probe's way.

The theory I always lean toward was that Starfleet intended for the yet-to-be-commissioned Enterprise-A to have originally had another name, which was changed at the last minute.
Lord Garth is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 4 2012, 12:49 PM   #55
Timo
Admiral
 
Re: The operational status of NCC 1701-A...?

The main reason I prefer the "older ship" theory over "new ship shunted over to Kirk" one is the interiors of the E-A, with their GNDN tubes and TOS-style shuttlebay. We know some Constitutions were subject to refitting; it just makes sense for the E-A to have been subject to it as well.

The secondary reason is that Starfleet could afford to give Kirk an older ship. If Starfleet felt it really needed newbuild Constitutions in the 2280s, it would not part with one and sacrifice it as a means of keeping Kirk out of mischief.

Timo Saloniemi
Timo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 4 2012, 01:13 PM   #56
Lance
Commodore
 
Lance's Avatar
 
Location: The Enterprise's Restroom
Re: The operational status of NCC 1701-A...?

I find it fascinating () that in the short space of time between STIII and STIV (a matter of mere months?), Starfleet goes from wanting to decommission the Enterprise (doesn’t Admiral Morrow say something about it getting too old?) to giving Kirk another, almost identical ship. If they could simply retrofit another Constitution Class, let alone building a new one from scratch, why would they be decommissioning Enterprise? Were they that confident that Excelsior was going to become the front line ship design?
Lance is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 4 2012, 03:12 PM   #57
BillJ
Admiral
 
BillJ's Avatar
 
Location: Covington, Ky.
View BillJ's Twitter Profile
Re: The operational status of NCC 1701-A...?

Well, the basic space frame components of the Enterprise would be nearly forty years old. As would the basic space frame components of the Yorktown if it came into service at roughly the same time and followed the same refit in the early-2270's. Yorktown was near Earth, possibly nearing the end of a mission herself and also being retired.

To me, it doesn't seem like they're retiring the class just those ships that were upgraded from earlier configurations.
__________________
"If I hadn't tried, the cost would have been my soul." - Admiral James T. Kirk, Star Trek III: The Search for Spock
BillJ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 4 2012, 03:29 PM   #58
Timo
Admiral
 
Re: The operational status of NCC 1701-A...?

If we assume Starfleet gave Kirk a dud, the "She's twenty years old!" exclamation regains full consistency.

If Starfleet wanted to reward rather than punish Kirk, they would have given him a Constellation (the obvious stopgap/insurance thing in case Excelsior didn't pan out - the same old, only now in duplicate to squeeze every last drop of performance out of the old hardware)...

Timo Saloniemi
Timo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 4 2012, 03:37 PM   #59
BillJ
Admiral
 
BillJ's Avatar
 
Location: Covington, Ky.
View BillJ's Twitter Profile
Re: The operational status of NCC 1701-A...?

Timo wrote: View Post
If we assume Starfleet gave Kirk a dud, the "She's twenty years old!" exclamation regains full consistency.

If Starfleet wanted to reward rather than punish Kirk, they would have given him a Constellation (the obvious stopgap/insurance thing in case Excelsior didn't pan out - the same old, only now in duplicate to squeeze every last drop of performance out of the old hardware)...

Timo Saloniemi
Except the fact that the command crew were more familiar with the Constitution class. We don't know what major internal differences there are between classes.
__________________
"If I hadn't tried, the cost would have been my soul." - Admiral James T. Kirk, Star Trek III: The Search for Spock
BillJ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 4 2012, 03:52 PM   #60
Captain Mike
Commodore
 
Captain Mike's Avatar
 
Location: Warren, Pa.
Re: The operational status of NCC 1701-A...?

I just don't understand some peoples idea that Starfleet is "punishing" Kirk by giving him and his crew another Constitution refit. Hell in TVH, most everybody that was on the shuttle in Spacedock were unsure of their fate. Even McCoy stated: "The bureaucratic mentality is the only constant in the universe, we'll get a freighter.".
Also as stated in GENERATIONS, Kirk and the crew were distinguished as "living legends", and that was a short span of time between TVH and then. so why this notion of "punishment" eludes me.
__________________
["Sweet Home Alabama" plays in background]
Define irony. Bunch of idiots dancing on a plane to a song made famous by a band that died in a plane crash. ~~~~Garland Greene- "Con Air"
Captain Mike 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 10:03 AM.

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