RSS iconTwitter iconFacebook icon

The Trek BBS title image

The Trek BBS statistics

Threads: 135,724
Posts: 5,214,919
Members: 24,210
Currently online: 844
Newest member: vagarcia74


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 TV Series > Star Trek - Original Series

Star Trek - Original Series The one that started it all...

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old February 24 2013, 10:31 PM   #91
Mr. Laser Beam
Fleet Admiral
 
Mr. Laser Beam's Avatar
 
Location: The visitor's bullpen
View Mr. Laser Beam's Twitter Profile
Re: The Constellation's registry number

BillJ wrote: View Post
But even then, the Defiant having a dedication plaque in the same spot as Enterprise is a retcon as it didn't have a plaque in The Tholian Web.
The only reason that last bit is true is because of budget. They didn't have the time or money to do that in TOS, but it can be assumed to be true nonetheless.

And Timo's "Aegis/Ticonderoga" reference does technically make sense, in that a ship can have two classes: one is the actual class name (here, Constitution) whereas the other is actually the ship's TYPE (Starship). So I'm prepared to call it even, really.
__________________
Taysiders in Space. In amungst ye!

"Set phasers tae malky!"
Mr. Laser Beam is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 24 2013, 10:36 PM   #92
BillJ
Admiral
 
Location: In the 23rd Century...
View BillJ's Twitter Profile
Re: The Constellation's registry number

Mr. Laser Beam wrote: View Post
BillJ wrote: View Post
But even then, the Defiant having a dedication plaque in the same spot as Enterprise is a retcon as it didn't have a plaque in The Tholian Web.
The only reason that last bit is true is because of budget. They didn't have the time or money to do that in TOS, but it can be assumed to be true nonetheless.
But lots of things are still canon even if the decision to do it was because of time or money.

As far as the type/class explanation, its as good as any.
__________________
I'm not popular enough to be different! - Homer Simpson
BillJ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 24 2013, 11:12 PM   #93
MarsWeeps
Commander
 
MarsWeeps's Avatar
 
Location: Outside of Space/Time
Re: The Constellation's registry number

BillJ wrote: View Post
But even then, the Defiant having a dedication plaque in the same spot as Enterprise is a retcon as it didn't have a plaque in The Tholian Web.
Are you sure? Here's is a screenshot of the Defiant's bridge from The Tholian Web. I got it from the TrekCore archives. You can see the plaque in the same place as the one on the Enterprise bridge, although you can't make out what it says.

MarsWeeps is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 24 2013, 11:19 PM   #94
BillJ
Admiral
 
Location: In the 23rd Century...
View BillJ's Twitter Profile
Re: The Constellation's registry number

MarsWeeps wrote: View Post
BillJ wrote: View Post
But even then, the Defiant having a dedication plaque in the same spot as Enterprise is a retcon as it didn't have a plaque in The Tholian Web.
Are you sure? Here's is a screenshot of the Defiant's bridge from The Tholian Web. I got it from the TrekCore archives. You can see the plaque in the same place as the one on the Enterprise bridge, although you can't make out what it says.

When you see a tighter shot, you'll notice they actually covered it up.
__________________
I'm not popular enough to be different! - Homer Simpson
BillJ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 24 2013, 11:50 PM   #95
BillJ
Admiral
 
Location: In the 23rd Century...
View BillJ's Twitter Profile
Re: The Constellation's registry number

It's possible I might be wrong.

It must've been the Exeter from The Omega Glory that had the covered dedication plaque.

Yep, this is the scene I'm thinking of...

__________________
I'm not popular enough to be different! - Homer Simpson
BillJ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 24 2013, 11:59 PM   #96
CorporalCaptain
Vice Admiral
 
CorporalCaptain's Avatar
 
Location: Kentucky
Re: The Constellation's registry number

So, let me get this straight.

Someone's miffed because, canonically in TOS: The Tholian Web, the dedication plaque on the Defiant bridge said "USS Enterprise", but that was retconned for ENT: In a Mirror, Darkly!?!

__________________
John
CorporalCaptain is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 24 2013, 11:59 PM   #97
MarsWeeps
Commander
 
MarsWeeps's Avatar
 
Location: Outside of Space/Time
Re: The Constellation's registry number

BillJ wrote: View Post
It's possible I might be wrong.

It must've been the Exeter from The Omega Glory that had the covered dedication plaque.

Yep, this is the scene I'm thinking of...

Yes, I was just getting ready to post that same shot. Funny, I never even noticed that until you mentioned it.
MarsWeeps is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 25 2013, 12:20 AM   #98
MarsWeeps
Commander
 
MarsWeeps's Avatar
 
Location: Outside of Space/Time
Re: The Constellation's registry number

CorporalCaptain wrote: View Post
So, let me get this straight.

Someone's miffed because, canonically in TOS: The Tholian Web, the dedication plaque on the Defiant bridge said "USS Enterprise", but that was retconned for ENT: In a Mirror, Darkly!?!

Not quite. Someone is miffed because the Enterprise dedication plaque says "Starship Class" while the Defiant dedication plaque says "Constitution Class."

The Defiant plaque is illegible in The Tholian Web (as far as I can tell) but is seen in Enterprise: In a Mirror, Darkly.
MarsWeeps is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 25 2013, 12:31 AM   #99
CorporalCaptain
Vice Admiral
 
CorporalCaptain's Avatar
 
Location: Kentucky
Re: The Constellation's registry number

MarsWeeps wrote: View Post
CorporalCaptain wrote: View Post
So, let me get this straight.

Someone's miffed because, canonically in TOS: The Tholian Web, the dedication plaque on the Defiant bridge said "USS Enterprise", but that was retconned for ENT: In a Mirror, Darkly!?!

Not quite. Someone is miffed because the Enterprise dedication plaque says "Starship Class" while the Defiant dedication plaque says "Constitution Class."

The Defiant plaque is illegible in The Tholian Web (as far as I can tell) but is seen in Enterprise: In a Mirror, Darkly.
Oh, yeah, right. As pointed out upthread, that ship sailed with TNG, season one, The Naked Now, while Gene Roddenberry was executive producer. Sorta hard to argue intent, given that.
__________________
John
CorporalCaptain is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 25 2013, 12:51 AM   #100
GSchnitzer
Co-Executive Producer
 
GSchnitzer's Avatar
 
Location: Gaithersburg, Maryland, USA, Terra
Send a message via AIM to GSchnitzer Send a message via Windows Live Messenger to GSchnitzer Send a message via Yahoo to GSchnitzer
Re: The Constellation's registry number

Robert Comsol wrote: View Post
Rather than to explain or rationalize the official "Starship Class" every attempt is made to ridicule it and push it over the cliff on behalf of this "Constitution Class" popularized by Franz Joseph, who took it from Greg Jein (but didn't like Jein's NCC numbering), and who wasn't even involved in the production of the original show and who wasn't even a Star Trek fan by his own admission!
Popularzed by Franz Jospeh Schnaubelt in December of 1973? I suppose so. He took it from Greg Jein's April, 1973 article? Yes, I suppose so--but go back further. It's found in Bjo Trimble's Star Trek Concordance from 1969--but go back further. It's found on a screen display from "The Trouble with Tribbles" shot in August of 1967--which some people for some unfathomable reason think shows Scotty reading about something other than the Enterprise). But go back further. It's found in footage from "Space Seed" for which the "Trouble with Tribbles"-used diagram was actually initially created--shot in late December of 1966. But go back further. It's found in the actual shooting script for "Space Seed" from early December of 1966--and who knows how many earlier versions of the script before that:

Scene 44 of the Second Revised Final Draft for "Space Seed," dated December 13, 1966 has the following content:

44 ANGLE ON SICK BAY VIEWER

It is covered with mathematical symbols and diagrams. CAMERA PULLS BACK to show Khan studying with great concentration. He pushes a button. Another transparency appears: a chapter heading, reading: BASIC SPECIFICATIONS, CONSTITUTION CLASS STAR SHIP.

Scenes 47 and 48 have similar content:

From 47:

...At the door, she [McGivers] turns and looks back at him. He gives her a strong, masculine, confident smile. She is about to say something, but turns and exits. Khan turns back to his studying. He pushes a button, stares back up at his screen.

48 INSERT SCREEN

A chapter heading: Basic Propulsion Systems, Constitution Class Star Ship.

So, Constitution-class is not so much a pet theory of Franz Jospeh Schnaubelt or Greg Jein so much as it is a production decision made by the actual Star Trek producers--the actual creators--back in 1966. Asserting that it wasn't based on actual production material and somehow was fabricated out of whole cloth by people who actually weren't with the production is a little disingenuous. I think a lot of people couldn't or wouldn't do the proper research to find that Constitution-class was an actual contemporaneous Star Trek production decision, not some after-the-fact fan wankery speculation.

People don't think it's Constitution-Class and not just "Starship Class" because they are less knowledgeable about Star Trek starship nomenclature production materials than you; it looks like the people who first promulgated the Constitution-class information were actually more knowledgeable about starship nomenclature production materials than you.
__________________
Greg Schnitzer
Co-Executive Producer
Star Trek Phase II
http://www.startrekphase2.com
http://www.imdb.com/name/nm3348883/
GSchnitzer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 25 2013, 01:08 AM   #101
blssdwlf
Commodore
 
Re: The Constellation's registry number

CorporalCaptain wrote: View Post
So, let me get this straight.

Someone's miffed because, canonically in TOS: The Tholian Web, the dedication plaque on the Defiant bridge said "USS Enterprise", but that was retconned for ENT: In a Mirror, Darkly!?!

From what I can tell of my DVD copy of "The Tholian Web" and the TrekCore HD archives, the Defiant plaque is in darkness and too far away even on HD to where you can read it.

The USS Defiant in ENT can be a "Constitution-class" as there is no evidence that it cannot be.
blssdwlf is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 25 2013, 01:09 AM   #102
BillJ
Admiral
 
Location: In the 23rd Century...
View BillJ's Twitter Profile
Re: The Constellation's registry number

Damn Greg, you just completely destroyed Robert Comsol.
__________________
I'm not popular enough to be different! - Homer Simpson
BillJ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 25 2013, 01:13 AM   #103
CorporalCaptain
Vice Admiral
 
CorporalCaptain's Avatar
 
Location: Kentucky
Re: The Constellation's registry number

blssdwlf wrote: View Post
CorporalCaptain wrote: View Post
So, let me get this straight.

Someone's miffed because, canonically in TOS: The Tholian Web, the dedication plaque on the Defiant bridge said "USS Enterprise", but that was retconned for ENT: In a Mirror, Darkly!?!

From what I can tell of my DVD copy of "The Tholian Web" and the TrekCore HD archives, the Defiant plaque is in darkness and too far away even on HD to where you can read it.

The USS Defiant in ENT can be a "Constitution-class" as there is no evidence that it cannot be.
Alright, excellent. My point was that if you could somehow make out or otherwise glean what the Defiant plaque says in TTW, it's going to have "USS Enterprise" staring you in the face, anyway.

And, thanks, GSchnitzer, for the history lesson. I was aware of everything, except the contents of the Space Seed script.
__________________
John
CorporalCaptain is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 25 2013, 01:38 AM   #104
Wingsley
Commodore
 
Wingsley's Avatar
 
Location: Wingsley
Re: The Constellation's registry number

It would be interesting to base a "worldview" of the STAR TREK Universe strictly on the content of TOS exclusively, when we still had not seen any other "class" of "starship" other than the one of which the Enterprise was apparently a member. This would imply that there is only one kind of starship and that's it for the fleet. (It would be interesting to reconcile the names of all the starships mentioned in TOS against Kirk's brag to Captain Christopher, USAF, in "Tomorrow is Yesterday", about how "there are only twelve like it in the fleet".)

Let's see what kind of list we would come up with...

U.S.S. Enterprise

U.S.S. Valiant ("A Taste of Armageddon")

Antares? ("Charlie X")

Astral Queen? ("The Conscience of the King")


The list of ship names (apparently all Federation starships) from Commodore Stone's wall chart seen "Court Martial":
U.S.S. Constellation
U.S.S. Constitution
U.S.S. Defiant
U.S.S. Eagle
U.S.S. Endeavour
U.S.S. Enterprise
U.S.S. Essex
U.S.S. Excalibur
U.S.S. Exeter
U.S.S. Farragut
U.S.S. Hood
U.S.S. Intrepid
U.S.S. Kongo
U.S.S. Lexington
U.S.S. Potemkin
U.S.S. Republic
U.S.S. Valiant
U.S.S. Yorktown
(The Memory Alpha article on Greg Jein's "The Case of Jonathan Doe Starship" also contains other references.) It is worth mentioning that Kirk also mentioned the U.S.S. Republic, registry 1371, in his deposition.

Archon? ("The Return of the Archons"; Kirk does refer to the Starship Archon as missing)

"Constitution class" is shown on Khan's computer display in "Space Speed"; the "technical manual" schematic says:

PRIMARY PHASER L, R
STAR SHIP MK IX/01
CONSTITUTION CLASS
While we could give ourselves a Mulligan either way on this, either dismissing it as not clearly seen or accepting it as the first canon mention of the Constitution class starship, it does bear mentioning at the very least.


Unit XY-75847? (mentioned in "Errand of Mercy")


U.S.S. Carolina ("Friday's Child")

U.S.S. Constellation ("The Doomsday Machine")

U.S.S. Farragut, U.S.S. Yorktown ("Obsession")

U.S.S. Intrepid (remastered image in "Court Martial" and mentioned in "The Immunity Syndrome")

Horizon? ("A Piece of the Action")



"The Ultimate Computer": Wesley's task force...
U.S.S. Lexington
U.S.S. Hood
U.S.S. Excalibur
U.S.S. Potemkin


U.S.S. Exeter ("The Omega Glory")


U.S.S. Defiant ("The Tholian Web")



If we ignore Commodore Stone's wall chart, I still count at least 19 ships. (Of course, that's a total count of the entire TOS roster, including those encountered a year or two after Kirk's "Tomorrow is Yesterday" brag to Capt. Christopher.)

Discounting XY-75847, Archon, Astral Queen, Antares, and Horizon, as not clearly being identified as Federation starships (I strongly feel that the way Archon and Horizon were mentioned confirms they were, but that's just me) would bring the total starship roster to 14.

Then, of course, there's the matter of Stone's wall chart and the mention of a Constitution class phaser used in "Space Seed" and "The Trouble with Tribbles" to quibble over. If there is a Constitution-class ship, then there is likely to be a U.S.S. Constitution. Greg Jein's work seems to support this. That would bring the total number of Federation starships to 15.

If there were only a maximum of 14 to 19 "Star Ship Class" vessels in the entire Federation at the time of "The Tholian Web", this would certainly explain why being a captain of one would be regarded as extraordinary.

It also would not square with TAS, TWOK, TVH, etc.
__________________
"The way that you wander is the way that you choose. / The day that you tarry is the day that you lose. / Sunshine or thunder, a man will always wonder / Where the fair wind blows ..."
-- Lyrics, Jeremiah Johnson's theme.

Last edited by Wingsley; February 25 2013 at 01:40 AM. Reason: typo
Wingsley is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 25 2013, 01:58 AM   #105
BK613
Captain
 
BK613's Avatar
 
Location: BK613
Re: The Constellation's registry number

One question: Would we even know any of the "Constitution class" back story if it weren't for Star Trek/Lincoln Enterprises? Probably not.

Because, while "Constitution class" does appear in the Space Seed script and on a graphic created for that script (later used elsewhere,)* it was also appears to have been a production decision not to use that scene nor mention Constitution class anywhere else in the subsequent 55 episodes. Or include that bit of info in the writer's guide or The Making of Star Trek.

To me, Starship class is consistent with the planned vagueness of the show: no actual dates, no specific century, no real speed measures, patches/colors for the uniforms, etc.

Just me 2 coppers; YMMV.

*(The Trouble with Tribbles in my mind places that graphic in a peer-reviewed journal: "...another technical journal?" "...time to catch up on my technical journals!")
__________________
-------------------
"The single biggest problem with communication is the illusion that it has taken place." - George Bernard Shaw
BK613 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 02:39 PM.

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