RSS iconTwitter iconFacebook icon

The Trek BBS title image

The Trek BBS statistics

Threads: 139,657
Posts: 5,428,861
Members: 24,813
Currently online: 501
Newest member: SB118_Pavlova


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 May 15 2013, 01:06 PM   #346
blssdwlf
Commodore
 
Re: Franz Joseph Blueprints Revisited

From the episode, Kirk doesn't go into detail as to what exactly was damaged and what efforts were made to repair them. The damage could have been external AND internal. We are only given information after the fact, that the result was "considerable" damage and Kirk orders a non-scheduled layover at a Starbase. It would be unusual for the crew not to attempt some repairs while en-route to the Starbase, IMO.

Robert Comsol wrote: View Post
From the context of the episode and the naval analogy presented in this episode (e.g. "ashore" for "down on the planet") I understood that the ion storm mostly caused external "considerable damage" that requires "full repairs" and "a couple of days". I would also wonder why Kirk files a log entry at the beginning of the episode and fails to mention any repair effort by the crew. It's not his style to ignore accomplishments by his crew (compare log entries in "Where No Man Has Gone Before").
blssdwlf is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 16 2013, 02:41 AM   #347
Shawnster
Fleet Captain
 
Shawnster's Avatar
 
Location: Clinton, OH
Re: Franz Joseph Blueprints Revisited

GSchnitzer wrote: View Post


Let me add another possibility as to the % COMPLETE idea. Perhaps this isn't % of overall ship efficiency or % of total damage to the ship (0% meaning near destruction and 100% meaning "shipshape and Bristol fashion"). Perhaps the % is the percentage of completion from a list of total repairs needing to be made.

For example, NCC 1709 is listed at 70% complete. Let's say that NCC 1709 came into port with a repair list of 10 items. As of the time of the above screen cap, 7 of the 10 items on that list have been completed. So, the list is % COMPLETE of the requested repairs.

Regardless, one thing is for sure. The graphic represents the same thing for each ship. With as minimal information on the graphic, there isn't enough data to mean different things for different ships. A graphic will compare apples to apples, not apples to Milk Duds. Whatever the % COMPLETE means, it will mean the same thing for every ship on that list. Otherwise, the graphic is pointless and would actually cause confusion to the reader.
Shawnster is online now   Reply With Quote
Old May 16 2013, 11:31 AM   #348
Robert Comsol
Commodore
 
Robert Comsol's Avatar
 
Location: USS Berlin
Re: Franz Joseph Blueprints Revisited

Sean_McCormick wrote: View Post
AFAIK Intrepids NCC number comes from this chart nontheless. Okuda did not have access to images that high in resolution as we have today and misread the eight in NCC-1831 on the chart as a six.
Greg Jein is the one who misread the "1831" as "1631" as the resolution of his film still didn't yield more information back in the 1970's when he wrote his treatise "The Case of Jonathan Doe Starship" (heck, even in HD today I can't determine whether it is "1664" or "1864". Trying to examine the scene still by still in Full HD resolution it changes back and forth between "16" and "18"...).

Bjo Trimble's Star Trek Concordance adopted Jein's numbering proposal, same as the Okudas for their Star Trek Encyclopedia (and during the days of SD resolution, I should add).

However, the Okudas were involved in the TOS-R project and thus had access to the starship status chart in HD before most of us. If there's one thing that has become crystal clear, it's that the number is "1831" and not "1631".

Of course, the Okudas could have decided, not to reveal a new CGI shot of the starship Intrepid with the registry number. The moment they did ("1631"), they practically "pulled" the Intrepid from the starship status chart and changed its possible meaning.

Personally, I don't consider this to be a final word (because I've mentioned other reasons why I doubt the chart reflects repair work), but felt it to be worth mentioning.

Bob
__________________
"The first duty of every Starfleet officer is to the truth" Jean-Luc Picard
"We can't solve problems by using the same kind of thinking we used when we created them."
Albert Einstein
Robert Comsol is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 16 2013, 11:49 AM   #349
Robert Comsol
Commodore
 
Robert Comsol's Avatar
 
Location: USS Berlin
Re: Franz Joseph Blueprints Revisited

Shawnster wrote: View Post
For example, NCC 1709 is listed at 70% complete. Let's say that NCC 1709 came into port with a repair list of 10 items. As of the time of the above screen cap, 7 of the 10 items on that list have been completed. So, the list is % COMPLETE of the requested repairs.
But that still doesn't answer the question why Commodore Stone is pulling section 18 from the (unfinished) repair work on the Intrepid and diverts it to work on the Enterprise.

Section 18 may be a specialized repair unit to finish the remaining 13% repairs on the Enterprise but wouldn't they have work sheets and plans for that in the 23rd Century?

Stone is a former Starship commander and now he has to move the repair crews to their next assignment because without his order, they'd just be sitting around?

Shawnster wrote: View Post
Whatever the % COMPLETE means, it will mean the same thing for every ship on that list. Otherwise, the graphic is pointless and would actually cause confusion to the reader.
Finally something we can all agree on, right?

Bob
__________________
"The first duty of every Starfleet officer is to the truth" Jean-Luc Picard
"We can't solve problems by using the same kind of thinking we used when we created them."
Albert Einstein
Robert Comsol is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 16 2013, 01:16 PM   #350
blssdwlf
Commodore
 
Re: Franz Joseph Blueprints Revisited

Stone answers that in his dialogue. Enterprise is on priority one.
STONE: Maintenance Section Eighteen. The section is working on the Intrepid. Reschedule. The Enterprise is on priority one.
The reason for priority one is unknown, but that apparently means either Section 18 is additional manpower to existing section(s) working on the Enterprise or the Enterprise just settled into orbit and was waiting for a starbase section to be assigned to her. Intrepid just got short-changed.

Robert Comsol wrote: View Post
But that still doesn't answer the question why Commodore Stone is pulling section 18 from the (unfinished) repair work on the Intrepid and diverts it to work on the Enterprise.

Section 18 may be a specialized repair unit to finish the remaining 13% repairs on the Enterprise but wouldn't they have work sheets and plans for that in the 23rd Century?

Stone is a former Starship commander and now he has to move the repair crews to their next assignment because without his order, they'd just be sitting around?
blssdwlf is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 16 2013, 02:57 PM   #351
Warped9
Admiral
 
Warped9's Avatar
 
Location: Brockville, Ontario, Canada
Re: Franz Joseph Blueprints Revisited

Who decided Intrepid was supposed to be 1631 or 1831 anyway? It certainly wasn't onscreen. Was it written down anywhere like on a script draft? It's been a very long time since I read Jein's article.

The only registries TOS ever established were the Enterprise (1701), Republic (1371), Constellation (1017) and Galileo (1701/7). Anything else is pure conjecture or arbitrary unless someone knows of any notes somewhere.

Otherwise based on what we know I give the nod to FJ's reasoning.
__________________
STAR TREK: 1964-1991, 2013-?
Warped9 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 16 2013, 03:29 PM   #352
Timo
Admiral
 
Re: Franz Joseph Blueprints Revisited

Jein's reasoning was fairly straightforward:

1) This chart shows the Enterprise (the registry is there)
2) This chart probably shows the Intrepid (Stone makes decisions concerning her)
3) Both of these are starships ("Immunity Syndrome" supports this)
4) Thus, all of these are starships (a leap of faith, but then again, it sez so on top)
5) There is a list of starship names for TOS (several in fact, but whatever, he picked one)
6) The only thing remaining, then, is to put them in order of some sort...

...And he picked alphabetical order! This caused the Intrepid to fall in the 1831 or 1631 slot, and that was that.

The numbers aren't in ascending or descending order, nor are the percentages, so clearly something else is ruling the ordering. One could still pick from two other fairly rational governing parameters: order of arrival at the starbase (1701 is near the top, and perhaps this is a busy place) or order of repair docks (Dock 1 atop, Dock 2 below etc.).

Timo Saloniemi
Timo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 16 2013, 04:03 PM   #353
Robert Comsol
Commodore
 
Robert Comsol's Avatar
 
Location: USS Berlin
Re: Franz Joseph Blueprints Revisited

@ blssdwlf

Exactly my point. If the Enterprise's repair jobs are already 83% "complete", why the sudden rush to a) put her on "Priority One" and b) withdraw the repair crew from the Intrepid?

There is no indication in the episode that the Enterprise is in a hurry to go somewhere and - sorry - I don't believe that Kirk's demand to have an immediate "Court-Martial" is because he wants to keep an appointment we or Commodore Stone are unaware of.

@ Timo

But because the Intrepid had fallen into the 1X31 slot and was "complete" Jein concluded this couldn't be Starbase 11's repair progress chart - the fact that Stone pulled the repair crew from the Intrepid was clear evidence that work on her hadn't been finished, yet.

The ramifications are interesting. If you seriously believe this is the repair progress chart of Starbase 11, then you should also disregard the NCC registries from the Concordance, Encyclopedia and TOS-R.

@ Warped9

Greg Jein proposed and Bjo Trimble and the Okudas decided.

Yes, it's pure conjecture (as an adolescent, however, I believed it to be official. The stuff I still have to "unlearn" is amazing) but if you give a nod to FJ - is his registry number for the Intrepid on the starship status chart?

Bob
__________________
"The first duty of every Starfleet officer is to the truth" Jean-Luc Picard
"We can't solve problems by using the same kind of thinking we used when we created them."
Albert Einstein
Robert Comsol is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 16 2013, 04:06 PM   #354
Warped9
Admiral
 
Warped9's Avatar
 
Location: Brockville, Ontario, Canada
Re: Franz Joseph Blueprints Revisited

And he's also assuming they're all heavy cruisers like the Enterprise rather than a mix of classes. I reject that simply because it takes a small and simplistic view of Starfleet's makeup.
__________________
STAR TREK: 1964-1991, 2013-?
Warped9 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 16 2013, 04:10 PM   #355
Warped9
Admiral
 
Warped9's Avatar
 
Location: Brockville, Ontario, Canada
Re: Franz Joseph Blueprints Revisited

Both Jein and FJ are flawed in their reasoning I think, but I find less flaw in FJ. And, no, I don't care what supposedly "official" since it isn't onscreen.
__________________
STAR TREK: 1964-1991, 2013-?
Warped9 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 16 2013, 04:41 PM   #356
Robert Comsol
Commodore
 
Robert Comsol's Avatar
 
Location: USS Berlin
Re: Franz Joseph Blueprints Revisited

@ Warped9

I concur, though I hate to say it (considering Greg Jein did benchmark research and concluding in the first part of his treatise) it's Franz Joseph's numbering that is more compatible with what Matt Jefferies had intended in the first place.

We do know that had we examined the sister ships of the Enterprise in TOS close-up we'd noticed they are all identical externally and all carried a "17" prefix (since it was the same model ).

Bob
__________________
"The first duty of every Starfleet officer is to the truth" Jean-Luc Picard
"We can't solve problems by using the same kind of thinking we used when we created them."
Albert Einstein
Robert Comsol is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 16 2013, 04:48 PM   #357
Warped9
Admiral
 
Warped9's Avatar
 
Location: Brockville, Ontario, Canada
Re: Franz Joseph Blueprints Revisited

If I recall correctly FJ listed the Intrepid as 1708 or 1709 and 1709 is on that chart in Stone's office.
__________________
STAR TREK: 1964-1991, 2013-?
Warped9 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 16 2013, 07:50 PM   #358
Timo
Admiral
 
Re: Franz Joseph Blueprints Revisited

And he's also assuming they're all heavy cruisers like the Enterprise rather than a mix of classes. I reject that simply because it takes a small and simplistic view of Starfleet's makeup.
Not really. It only indicates that this particular display covers the Star Ships currently under repair; another display titled "Star Destroyer Status" would then obviously cover the destroyer-class vessels, and so forth.

We have no real idea of the scope of this SB11 thing. The bar we visit is small, but the base currently hosts several of Kirk's old acquaintances - something we can interpret as defending the idea that Starfleet is a teeny weeny organization, or the completely opposite idea that SB11 is a vast facility processing hundreds of ships. If the latter, having a dozen Star Ships there wouldn't be all that unlikely, and the scattershot registries would support the idea that Kirk's ship and her 11-12 sisters (in the 17XX range) represent only a tiny fraction of the Star Ship force.

the fact that Stone pulled the repair crew from the Intrepid was clear evidence that work on her hadn't been finished, yet.
Far from clear IMHO. We've seen the dialogue quoted, on the previous page: Stone believes a team is currently working on the Intrepid. Yet a display listing work on the Intrepid already completed would not be in contradiction of this, because the display would then merely confirm what Stone has already decided and now orders his underlings to execute. That is, Stone first sets the degree of completion on the Intrepid at 100%, then informs his underlings of the matter...

The same argument would naturally enable us to believe the Intrepid is not on the chart: Stone would have removed her before calling the team. Thus both the 1831 and 1631 identities can be defended.

Timo Saloniemi
Timo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 16 2013, 09:49 PM   #359
EliyahuQeoni
Commodore
 
EliyahuQeoni's Avatar
 
Location: Redmond, Oregon, United States of America, North America, Earth, Sol System, Milky Way, Universe
View EliyahuQeoni's Twitter Profile
Re: Franz Joseph Blueprints Revisited

Warped9 wrote: View Post
And he's also assuming they're all heavy cruisers like the Enterprise rather than a mix of classes. I reject that simply because it takes a small and simplistic view of Starfleet's makeup.
Exactly. I also think it can be possible for a ship to have multiple classifications. For instance:

  • Starfleet Vessels
    • Star Ship Class
      • Cruiser Class
        • Heavy Cruiser Class
          • Constitution Class
          • Achernar Class
          • Bonhomme Richard Class
          • Tikopai Class
          • Enterprise Class
          • Excelsior Class
        • Light Cruiser Class
          • Miranda Class
      • Scout Class
        • Hermes Class
        • Oberth Class
      • Destroyer Class
        • Saladin Class
      • Dreadnaught Class
        • Federation Class
    • Space Ship Class
      • Servey Class
        • Antares Class
        • Beagle Class
      • Tug Class
        • Minnow Class
Those are just off the top of my head, but it show how
  1. The Enterprise could be Star Ship Class, Heavy Cruiser Class and Constitution Class all at the same time.
  2. All of the ships on the chart could be Star Ship and not all be Constitution Class Starships.
__________________
"Canon is only important to certain people because they have to cling to their knowledge of the minutiae. Open your mind! Be a Star Trek fan and open your mind and say, 'Where does Star Trek want to take me now'." - Leonard Nimoy
EliyahuQeoni is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 17 2013, 01:25 AM   #360
ZapBrannigan
Fleet Captain
 
ZapBrannigan's Avatar
 
Location: New York State
Re: Franz Joseph Blueprints Revisited

EliyahuQeoni wrote: View Post
Exactly. I also think it can be possible for a ship to have multiple classifications. For instance:

  • Starfleet Vessels
    • Star Ship Class
      • Cruiser Class
        • Heavy Cruiser Class
          • Constitution Class
          • Achernar Class
          • Bonhomme Richard Class
          • Tikopai Class
          • Enterprise Class
          • Excelsior Class
        • Light Cruiser Class
          • Miranda Class
      • Scout Class
        • Hermes Class
        • Oberth Class
      • Destroyer Class
        • Saladin Class
      • Dreadnaught Class
        • Federation Class
    • Space Ship Class
      • Servey Class
        • Antares Class
        • Beagle Class
      • Tug Class
        • Minnow Class
Those are just off the top of my head, but it show how
  1. The Enterprise could be Star Ship Class, Heavy Cruiser Class and Constitution Class all at the same time.
  2. All of the ships on the chart could be Star Ship and not all be Constitution Class Starships.
That's some good stuff right there.
ZapBrannigan 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 12:28 AM.

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