RSS iconTwitter iconFacebook icon

The Trek BBS title image

The Trek BBS statistics

Threads: 141,428
Posts: 5,507,026
Members: 25,131
Currently online: 593
Newest member: Robert100a

TrekToday headlines

Retro Review: The Emperor’s New Cloak
By: Michelle on Dec 20

Star Trek Opera
By: T'Bonz on Dec 19

New Abrams Project
By: T'Bonz on Dec 18

IDW Publishing March 2015 Comics
By: T'Bonz on Dec 17

Paramount Star Trek 3 Expectations
By: T'Bonz on Dec 17

Star Trek #39 Sneak Peek
By: T'Bonz on Dec 16

Star Trek 3 Potential Director Shortlist
By: T'Bonz on Dec 16

Official Starships Collection Update
By: T'Bonz on Dec 15

Retro Review: Prodigal Daughter
By: Michelle on Dec 13

Sindicate Lager To Debut In The US Next Week
By: T'Bonz on Dec 12


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 April 24 2013, 05:08 PM   #196
feek61
Captain
 
feek61's Avatar
 
Location: The Sunshine State
Re: Franz Joseph Blueprints Revisited

I saw this from Lenny posted on another website yesterday:

"This is a little bit off-topic, but I don't know where to put it and I would like to make a general announcement to anyone who has tried to contact me on The Trek BBS... Trying to log-in there today, I got this message on my screen:

You have been banned for the following reason:
No reason was specified.

Date the ban will be lifted: Never

Apparently I wasn't up to snuff to be accepted by that particular website's clique... Where you either bow down to those "greats" who made names for themselves through books or websites, or you shut up and blindly agree without voicing any criticism that might upset their jointly accepted vision of Star Trek... "
__________________
feek61 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 24 2013, 05:40 PM   #197
Warped9
Admiral
 
Warped9's Avatar
 
Location: Brockville, Ontario, Canada
Re: Franz Joseph Blueprints Revisited

Whether it was Dixon or not he wasn't quite as intense as he was in the past. Still the deliberately combative as well as dismissive attitude was similar.
__________________
STAR TREK: 1964-1991, 2013-?
Warped9 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 24 2013, 05:40 PM   #198
sojourner
Admiral
 
sojourner's Avatar
 
Location: I'm at WKRP
Re: Franz Joseph Blueprints Revisited

Lenny is a sock puppet account of James Dixon. James was perma-banned from the site long ago, hence the sock puppet was banned once tptb noticed it.
__________________
Baby, you and me were never meant to be, just maybe think of me once in a while...
sojourner is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 24 2013, 05:46 PM   #199
Cookies and Cake
Admiral
 
Location: North America
Re: Franz Joseph Blueprints Revisited

Since I don't know all the history involved, I don't presume to know why he was banned. I'm certainly not inclined to accept narratives, either posted on the Internet at large or by regular members here, as true and complete, merely on face value.
__________________
CorporalCaptain
Cookies and Cake is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 24 2013, 05:52 PM   #200
Warped9
Admiral
 
Warped9's Avatar
 
Location: Brockville, Ontario, Canada
Re: Franz Joseph Blueprints Revisited

There is a fine line. You can have a dissenting viewpoint, but it's all in how you put it across. If they found out who he really is and he was perma-banned in the past then he surely knows why he's been banned now.
__________________
STAR TREK: 1964-1991, 2013-?
Warped9 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 24 2013, 06:07 PM   #201
Ho Ho Homeier
Vice Admiral
 
Ho Ho Homeier's Avatar
 
Location: Melakon's place
Re: Franz Joseph Blueprints Revisited

I noticed Lenny seemed incapable of writing a post unless it was over 1000 words.
__________________
Curly: Oh, you hit Santa Claus. Just for that, no toys! --Wee Wee Monsieur (1938)
Ho Ho Homeier is online now   Reply With Quote
Old April 24 2013, 06:52 PM   #202
aridas sofia
Rear Admiral
 
Re: Franz Joseph Blueprints Revisited

Robert Comsol wrote: View Post
aridas sofia wrote: View Post
You joined this BBS just last year so you might not be aware of the fact that I was arguing the "Enterprise-class" argument ten years ago. Just out of sheer orneriness.
Then what changed your mind as you are apparently advocating that the (TOS) Enterprise is a member of the Constitution Class, now?

You may believe whatever you want, of course, but since the focus of the schematic in "The Trouble With Tribbles" (and originally "Space Seed") is the "Primary Phaser L.R" and not a starship of the Constitution Class the "MK IX/01" obviously refers to the primary phaser (to tell you what generation and model you are looking at).

If Scotty or Khan would have wanted technical details of a starship of the Constitution Class they would have opened the corresponding file...

Jein reinterpretated the phaser designation as a starship designation because he needed the "01" to manufacture a connection to the "1701" to be able to "conclude" that the Enterprise belonged to the Constitution Class.

I don't believe that two separate people at the same time came up with the same "exotic" conclusion, thus I'm confident that Franz Joseph merely copied the "MK IX" from Greg Jein's article - and of course the idea that "NCC-1700" referred to the USS Constitution.

Bob
As has been pointed out above, your timing is all off. Jein's article came out a year and a half after the Booklet of General Plans was complete, and a year after it was released. We know from the available documentary evidence that Franz Joseph was using (by his count) up to 100,000 film clips. Obviously he got the MK IX designation from the phaser diagram. The phaser diagram which first appeared in The Trouble With Tribbles. As you can see, it didn't appear in Space Seed:

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2321/...ace480cec6.jpg

As for your initial question about why I dropped the point that at the start, Enterprise was intended to be the first of her class, I'll quote myself:

I think events went sorta like this-

1. When Jefferies came up with that "1701" number, he retconned a decision made purely on visibility as being indicative of the first ship built in the seventeenth group of starships. So, when conceived, Enterprise was the class vessel. At least to Jefferies.

2. Along comes "Doomsday Machine". For whatever reason- convenience, visibility, distinctiveness, etc- the ship scripted as being "Enterprise type" is numbered "1017" and named "Constellation". This is the first ship seen onscreen that looks like Enterprise.

3. Later, a graphic of an Enterprise ship's phaser is needed. Whoever puts the thing together remembers that they've established some ship as having a lower number than Enterprise, probably because the obvious problems with a "1017" number were discussed and still on his mind. He misremembers the lower numbered, "1017" ship Constellation as Constitution and puts that name on the graphic.

4. By the time Bjo Trimble is putting together her Concordance, we have a Constellation with the lowest number, but a graphic hinting all these Enterprise-type ships are Constitution class. So we end up with fans making sense of the mess as Constitution being the prototype and class vessel (00), Enterprise being the first produced after the prototype (01), and Constellation being an older ship uprated to Constitution standards (1017).

5. Later, an attempt is made to make things right when TMP introduces the brand new, first of her type, rebuilt Enterprise. Probert, Cole and Kimble call this new class "Enterprise class" in an attempt to get back to what was originally intended back in 1964 and to recognize the entirely new nature of the design.

6. But even later, different artists try to "fix" the "mistakes" of the TWoK bridge simulator plaque and the TMP blueprints by identifying a ship looking like the rebuilt Enterprise as once again... Constitution class.

7. BUT this TMP-looking ship is ACTUALLY 1701-A. Some fans (like me) make sense of this new mess by saying that the rebuilt 1701 is Enterprise class but that 1701-A is Constitution class. Either because the class name was changed after the loss of 1701, or because 1701-A was an outwardly similar but inwardly different class.

8. In any event, if you want to go strictly by what was seen onscreen, the TOS Enterprise is "Constitution class" as established in later series, and "Star Ship Class" as established on the dedication plaque seen in the episodes. The TMP Enterprise is "Enterprise class" per the bridge simulator in TWoK, and the new 1701-A is "Constitution class" per the blueprints seen in ST VI. The only apparent contradiction is "Constitution" versus "Star Ship" class for the original ship. And that can easily be resolved by saying that "Star Ship" either represents a later, select subset of Constitution class ships (perhaps the 5YM ships?), or that "Star Ship" is an earlier designation, perhaps implying the ships were named for famous starships of the past or indicating a broader "type" category like "Class One Star Ship of the Line" as has been argued before. In any event, within the context of strictly TOS it is correct to call Enterprise a "Star Ship class" vessel. But within the broader context of the later series it is correct to also call her (and Defiant) "Constitution class" vessels.
I'm happy with that because, you know, life is short and there is no definitive answer so arguing the point is... pointless.
aridas sofia is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 24 2013, 08:54 PM   #203
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: Franz Joseph Blueprints Revisited

I think your timeline is a little messed up.

As has been discussed on this board, the "Trouble with Tribbles" diagram actually is from "Space Seed." It was originally made for the script direction of Scene 44 where Khan is reviewing diagrams for a Constitution Class Starship." The close-up of the graphic ended up on the cutting room floor, but the drawing was dusted off and repurposed later for "Tribbles." So the notion that Khan is looking at Constitution Class stuff was scripted long before "Doomsday Machine." (I guess whether we are to assume that Khan was interested in the class of ship that the Enterprise is, or if he's more interested in classes of ships that are forerunners of the Enterprise is something Matt Jefferies would know.)

Bjo Trimble probably landed on this Constitution Class data point for her Concordance book from 1968 from film clips or the script or both.

http://www.trekbbs.com/showpost.php?...&postcount=184
__________________
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 April 24 2013, 08:55 PM   #204
1001001
Let the Good Times Roll!!
 
1001001's Avatar
 
Location: People's Gaypublic of Drugafornia
Re: Franz Joseph Blueprints Revisited

sojourner wrote: View Post
Lenny is a sock puppet account of James Dixon. James was perma-banned from the site long ago, hence the sock puppet was banned once tptb noticed it.
This is the truth of what happened.

Now, everyone let's get back on topic please.

__________________
“There is a cult of ignorance in the United States...The strain of anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that 'my ignorance is just as good as your knowledge'.” - Isaac Asimov
1001001 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 24 2013, 09:01 PM   #205
aridas sofia
Rear Admiral
 
Re: Franz Joseph Blueprints Revisited

As has been discussed on this board, the "Trouble with Tribbles" diagram actually is from "Space Seed." It was originally made for the script direction of Scene 44 where Khan is reviewing diagrams for a Constitution Class Starship." The close-up of the graphic ended up on the cutting room floor, but the drawing was dusted off and repurposed later for "Tribbles."
Are you sure about that, Greg? I bow to your expertise in this area, but I seem to recall reading that the two displays were not in fact the same. And that clip I posted a link to above would seem to confirm that. It doesn't appear to be the phaser schematic.
aridas sofia is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 24 2013, 09:23 PM   #206
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: Franz Joseph Blueprints Revisited

aridas sofia wrote: View Post
As has been discussed on this board, the "Trouble with Tribbles" diagram actually is from "Space Seed." It was originally made for the script direction of Scene 44 where Khan is reviewing diagrams for a Constitution Class Starship." The close-up of the graphic ended up on the cutting room floor, but the drawing was dusted off and repurposed later for "Tribbles."
Are you sure about that, Greg? I bow to your expertise in this area, but I seem to recall reading that the two displays were not in fact the same. And that clip I posted a link to above would seem to confirm that. It doesn't appear to be the phaser schematic.
Surely you jest!

Try here:

http://www.startrekhistory.com/article4.html
__________________
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 April 24 2013, 09:31 PM   #207
GNDN18
Ensign
 
Re: Franz Joseph Blueprints Revisited

aridas sofia wrote: View Post

Are you sure about that, Greg? I bow to your expertise in this area, but I seem to recall reading that the two displays were not in fact the same. And that clip I posted a link to above would seem to confirm that. It doesn't appear to be the phaser schematic.
http://startrekhistory.com/article4.html explains it all.
GNDN18 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 24 2013, 09:33 PM   #208
aridas sofia
Rear Admiral
 
Re: Franz Joseph Blueprints Revisited

That is where I saw it! Thanks! It was a wing diagram and not the hydraulic reservoir diagram used in "Trouble With Tribbles"!

I see what you mean, however. The art used in the episode was not the same, however the art used in "Tribbles" had been prepared for "Space Seed" and not used.
aridas sofia is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 24 2013, 09:39 PM   #209
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: Franz Joseph Blueprints Revisited

aridas sofia wrote: View Post
That is where I saw it! Thanks! It was a wing diagram and not the hydraulic reservoir diagram used in "Trouble With Tribbles"!

I see what you mean, however. The art used in the episode was not the same, however the art used in "Tribbles" had been prepared for "Space Seed" and not used.
Yes--like I said: it was cutting room floor stuff (until it was dusted off, colorized, repurposed, and used in "Tribbles").
__________________
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 April 24 2013, 11:36 PM   #210
Warped9
Admiral
 
Warped9's Avatar
 
Location: Brockville, Ontario, Canada
Re: Franz Joseph Blueprints Revisited

The notation on the graphic is for a MK-IX/01 Constitution-class starship. I think the idea for the graphic was to show Khan reading up about the kind of ship he finds himself aboard. If that's what the graphic was meant to convey than at least as far back as "Space Seed" the Enterprise is supposed to be a Constitution-class ship. And the /01 added to the MK-IX might be supposed to mean the graphic is of the Enterprise's primary phaser. The same thinking could be in effect when the graphic finally shows up onscreen in "The Trouble With Tribbles."
__________________
STAR TREK: 1964-1991, 2013-?
Warped9 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Tags
blueprint, bridge, franz joseph, plans

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 10:01 PM.

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