RSS iconTwitter iconFacebook icon

The Trek BBS title image

The Trek BBS statistics

Threads: 140,943
Posts: 5,479,274
Members: 25,056
Currently online: 636
Newest member: JeremiahJT

TrekToday headlines

USS Enterprise Press-Out And Build Manual
By: T'Bonz on Nov 28

New QMx USS Reliant Model
By: T'Bonz on Nov 28

Star Trek Thirty-Five Years On 35MM: A Retrospective
By: T'Bonz on Nov 28

Trek Shirt And Hoodie
By: T'Bonz on Nov 27

A Klingon Christmas Carol’s Last Season
By: T'Bonz on Nov 27

Attack Wing Wave 10 Expansion Pack
By: T'Bonz on Nov 27

New Star Trek Funko Pop! Vinyl Figures
By: T'Bonz on Nov 26

QMx Mini Phaser Ornament
By: T'Bonz on Nov 26

Stewart as Neo-Nazi Skinhead
By: T'Bonz on Nov 26

Klingon Bloodwine To Debut
By: T'Bonz on Nov 25


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 September 8 2013, 05:03 AM   #226
yenny
Captain
 
Re: Was the Enterprise A actually the Yorktown?

If you use numbers as reference for different starships design? Which would not really make any since, and that a real space organizing would never have name a spaceship/starship class after a number. They will not name a starship, USS Starship. If a rich person and a few space organization decided together and decided to build the Enterprise 1701? They will build two ships. the USS Constitution and USS Enterprise. Both ships probably would been built at the same time? The Constitution would be LRRMS-1 and the Enterprise would be LRRMS-2. Or Nuclear Cosmologies Craft, Constitution NCC-1 and Enterprise NCC-2.
yenny is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 8 2013, 05:32 AM   #227
Albertese
Commodore
 
Albertese's Avatar
 
Location: Portland, OR
Re: Was the Enterprise A actually the Yorktown?

Darkwing wrote: View Post
Albertese wrote: View Post
Okay, I follow your logic, but I still think it's an unnecessary stretch. Personally, I think I'm still comfortable with Enterprise and series 17 being Constitution-class ships.
I like the Mastercom class/subclass explanation here. Yeah, it's a minor retcon that they're all Connies, but various flavors thereof.
Yeah, I'm actually completely behind the Mastercom stuff. As a spiritual successor to FJ's TM, their take really ties it all together very nicely.

won't bother preaching on behalf of FJ's Star Fleet Technical Manual, as I know many people here simply won't have it, but I always thought his registry numbers (especially for the Enterprise sister ships) seemed more sensible. The way the Status Chart is played in "Court Martial" suggests that those ships are at the Starbase "now" and it always rubbed me the wrong way that nearly all the Enterprise sister ships would be there at once, being worked on.
And as I mentioned before, FJ's registries might be the authorized, intended registries, but the pressures of a war forced them NOT to decom a bunch of 16xx ships that were supposed to make way for new 17xx ships. and after any war, the politicians find a "peace dividend" - they cut the military budget. Ships that ought to get decommissioned and replaced with new ships stay in commission, and more money gets spent keeping them working (just in smaller chunks), exactly as today's navy does, and so has any military since Sargon.
Also makes sense.

On the other hand, I am in favor of MJ notion of ship numbers being DDSS where D is the design series number and S is the individual hull number, which would make the status chart showing ships of three different classes being worked on. Make better sense to me.
If planning out a new verse, ala nu-Trek, sure. Real Trek is too sprawling and messy for that to make sense, and has been since at least the mid-80s.
Oh, allow me to clarify. I should have mentioned this above... in fact I had intended to, but forgot to actually type it. I like the spirit of the MJ DDSS registry format, but I feel the after the start of the 24th Century it is necessarily something else. IMHO, I figure that sometime after the year 2300, maybe around the time that "Starfleet" became one word, they switched to a strictly sequential five-digit number beginning with NCC-10000 and giving every ship from Runabouts on up its own sequential number. This would have to be a fundamentally different system than that suggested by MJ for 23rd Century (and possibly earlier) use.

Then we have Star Trek Enterprise which seems to show us a starfleet which the first part of the registry is in fact a simple letter designation for a ship class more like Yenny seems to be suggesting. This seems to be another totally different system in use.

Just thought I'd clarify that.

--Alex
__________________
Check out my website: www.goldtoothstudio.squarespace.com
Albertese is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 8 2013, 07:53 AM   #228
CDR6
Lieutenant Commander
 
CDR6's Avatar
 
Re: Was the Enterprise A actually the Yorktown?

CharlieZardoz wrote: View Post
Hi all! Thought I'd throw this one in for general discussion. It was suggested that the Enterprise A could not have been built in so quick a time that the ship was actually the Yorktown renamed. This theory however was put forth by Gene Roddenberry and I actually don't consider him the utmost authority on these matters Tbh lol. He also suggested that only a few Galaxy classes would ever be built and well we know that turned out to be untrue. Also it is very likely that Starfleet had many Constitution refits on the assembly line by the time of Star Trek IV-VI (such as the Endeavor, Ahwahnee and Emden so I'm think it was most likely a new ship and not refurbished as Roddenberry suggested. What say you all?
Old universe Star Trek had a fondness for things WWII-ish. In real life Enterprise CV6 and Yorktown CV9 were sister ships, laid down at about the same time and followed one another into commission. So the possibility of them being tied together in the old "prime" universe is not beyond reason.

Regards
__________________
We're Star Trek fans, weird is just part of the job.
CDR6 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 8 2013, 10:24 PM   #229
Robert Comsol
Commodore
 
Robert Comsol's Avatar
 
Location: USS Berlin
Re: Was the Enterprise A actually the Yorktown?

@ Albertese

Sorry, I do not have the 1970's Star Trek Concordance any more, just the latest one. So please feel free to tell us about that little "tidbit" you noticed.

Praetor wrote: View Post
I think the thing that Bob may not be making fully clear (and do feel free to correct me, pal) is his desire to distinguish original intent of the TOS production from what's been established by the sequel series and her spinoffs. I share his desire to understand these things as separate entities. I don't presume to speak for Bob, but as we've seen he prefers to honor the original intent over what was later established. He prefers the rough draft to the final print, to extend Albertese's earlier metaphor.
Essentially correct. But the "final print" is what the TOS producers had settled for TOS and its Enterprise which is most assuredly "Starship Class" and most likely "Enterprise Starship Class".

This is what applies for the context of 79 episodes and the "microcosm" of TOS, but then came 4 post-TOS episodes shortly relating to events in TOS which supposedly revised, altered and rewrote the original context.

Praetor wrote: View Post
Personally, I would really like to use the Jefferies numbering scheme, but I'm convinced that it's invalidated as early as TWOK, when we see the Reliant, a ship with an almost completely different type of design, with a registry that starts with 18. According to Jefferies, this would mean she's the 18th cruiser design. The only way I think there would be an out is if the Reliant was NCL-1864, or something along those lines.
I'm unable to see the problem. First of all, the original classification was not "starship" but "cruiser" class and I think Matt Jefferies pre-production sketch reflects the original idea.
"Cruiser Class" then became "Starship Class", thus it's credible to assume that we are looking at design series of Federation starships.

Reliant is a Federation starship, obviously of the 18th design.
I do not understand why it should not be NCC-1864.

@ yenny

I think you're making the mistake of applying retroactive thinking.
The original classifications were "Starship Class", "Destroyer Class" and presumably "Scout Class" (ST III) with only alphabetic numbers (e.g. J-Class starship) to provide distinctions next to the obvious design series digits on the ship's exterior hulls.
For all we now "J-Class" could have stood for "Jefferson-Class" or something like that and Constitution Class may have read "C-Class".

But then it was a sub-classification from which we cannot derive that there had to have been a "USS Starship".

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 September 9 2013, 12:09 AM   #230
Albertese
Commodore
 
Albertese's Avatar
 
Location: Portland, OR
Re: Was the Enterprise A actually the Yorktown?

Robert Comsol wrote: View Post
@ Albertese

Sorry, I do not have the 1970's Star Trek Concordance any more, just the latest one. So please feel free to tell us about that little "tidbit" you noticed.
Enjoy:

Star Trek Concordance (1976), Bjo Trimble wrote:

NCC-1701: the identifying number used for the starship Enterprise. Originally thought to be a memorial reference to the early twentieth-century Earth amphibious aircraft, the Navy Curtis Craft, it has recently been revealed that the numbering system for starships was the responsibility of two men: Matt Jefferies (See Jefferies Tube), a twentieth-century inventor responsible for the design of early starships, and the Constitution-type ship, including the Enterprise and Gene Roddenerry, an inventive television executive. They used "N" because it was a 1928 adoption by the United States as an identifying letter, "C" for "commercial," and the second "C" for esthetic balance--hence "NCC" as the call-letter identification for all Enterprise-class starships.
I thought it interesting that both Constitution and Enterprise are used here as the class type of our favorite starship in the same paragraph. What's THAT all about?

--Alex
__________________
Check out my website: www.goldtoothstudio.squarespace.com
Albertese is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 9 2013, 12:34 PM   #231
Robert Comsol
Commodore
 
Robert Comsol's Avatar
 
Location: USS Berlin
Re: Was the Enterprise A actually the Yorktown?

Albertese wrote: View Post
I thought it interesting that both Constitution and Enterprise are used here as the class type of our favorite starship in the same paragraph. What's THAT all about?
Must be the "Question Mark IX/01 Starship Class".

That paragraph is obviously written from a weird in-universe point of view.
Today, we know from Matt Jefferies that the extra "C" was derived from the third "C" in Soviet designations, so the "esthetic balance" has a rather interesting ring to it.

So apparently the Enterprise and her sister ships (the only TOS vessels seen with an "NCC" registry) belong to the "Enterprise Class" (correct) - but are "Constitution-type" space cruisers?!?

So Bjo Trimble considered [then] undisputed information from The Making of Star Trek but discarded it later on behalf of Constitution Class exclusively.

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 September 9 2013, 02:41 PM   #232
137th Gebirg
Rear Admiral
 
137th Gebirg's Avatar
 
Location: Who is John Galt?
Re: Was the Enterprise A actually the Yorktown?

Yeah...

This all muddies the waters quite nicely.

Starship/Constitution/Enterprise Class - very close to the source. Anyone still not think that a couple of these things should be forceably decanonized like "Vulcanians"? Personally, I think "starship" should not ever be considered a class-name again, but rather a generic ship type, like "xxxx-class starship" is fine. We've heard this combination of words in relation to space-faring vessels for a much longer duration than "starship class" (a phrase which has never been voiced on-screen in dialog). Think about it - is anyone ever REALLY going to call the Enterprise a "Starship-Class Starship"? That's like calling today's Enterprise a "Carrier-Class Carrier"! Are we going to say that one piece of set dressing (original bridge plaque w/ "Starship Class") that was never meant to be seen that clearly is any more or less authoritative than another piece of set dressing (technical journal w/ "Constitution Class")? It's time to collectively kill "Starship Class" once and for all. It is a meaningless pairing of words. At least "Constitution Class" makes sense and, even though never spoken on-screen in TOS, it was spoken on screen (satisfying most people's definition of the word "canon") in relation to that specific type of vessel in TNG and beyond. Any confusion or debate about what class the TOS Enterprise belonged to should have evaporated with that.

I kind of miss the old days of debating whether or not the refit was called a Connie or its own new "Enterprise Class" (based on the TWOK bridge simulator signage). I'm an "Enterprise-class" guy m'self.
__________________
Gebirgswick - Ind, Tra, Sec & Env.
137th Gebirg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 9 2013, 03:03 PM   #233
Robert Comsol
Commodore
 
Robert Comsol's Avatar
 
Location: USS Berlin
Re: Was the Enterprise A actually the Yorktown?

137th Gebirg wrote: View Post
I kind of miss the old days of debating whether or not the refit was called a Connie or its own new "Enterprise Class" (based on the TWOK bridge simulator signage). I'm an "Enterprise-class" guy m'self.
Apparently and according to ST II NCC-1701 was a member of the "Enterprise Starship Class" (the refit according to the Official TMP Blueprints was a "Starship II Class" Enterprise) and NCC-1701-A was a member of the "Constitution Starship [II] Class" according to ST VI.

I think it's rather simply and there's really nothing wrong with the TOS dedication plaque, as it contains the vital information: "(U.S.S.) Enterprise Starship Class".
I don't know what the dedication plaque of the sister ships would read, but for the class leader all the information is contained.

All we have on the "Consitution Class" in TOS is a screen schematic belonging to one manual of several starships.

As for the post-TOS canon "evidence" I tried to illustrate how conjectural it basically is. We might just go for the producers' intentions, instead, and then we'd have their word from The Making of Star Trek versus statements to the opposite from the post-TOS producers I am not aware of, yet.

We could then discuss whether the authority of the TOS producers regarding one of their creations can possibly be revised, altered or overwritten by the post-TOS producers.

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 September 9 2013, 03:28 PM   #234
FKnight
Commander
 
FKnight's Avatar
 
Re: Was the Enterprise A actually the Yorktown?

Robert Comsol wrote: View Post
As for the post-TOS canon "evidence" I tried to illustrate how conjectural it basically is. We might just go for the producers' intentions, instead, and then we'd have their word from The Making of Star Trek versus statements to the opposite from the post-TOS producers I am not aware of, yet.

We could then discuss whether the authority of the TOS producers regarding one of their creations can possibly be revised, altered or overwritten by the post-TOS producers.

Bob
Picard referring to the ship as "Constitution Class" in The Naked Now (first run computer FX production error notwithstanding), and referring to the Enterprise bridge in Relics as "Constitution Class", and Sisko referring to the actual NCC-1701 as "Constitution Class" aren't just "evidence" of canon. They're the very definition.

I forgot what this has to do with whether the -A was the Yorktown.
__________________
"You have been examined. Your ship must be destroyed. We make assumption you have a deity, or deities, or some such beliefs which comfort you. We therefore grant you ten Earth time periods known as minutes to make preparations."
FKnight is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 9 2013, 06:15 PM   #235
Robert Comsol
Commodore
 
Robert Comsol's Avatar
 
Location: USS Berlin
Re: Was the Enterprise A actually the Yorktown?

FKnight wrote: View Post
Picard referring to the ship as "Constitution Class" in The Naked Now (first run computer FX production error notwithstanding), and referring to the Enterprise bridge in Relics as "Constitution Class", and Sisko referring to the actual NCC-1701 as "Constitution Class" aren't just "evidence" of canon. They're the very definition.

I forgot what this has to do with whether the -A was the Yorktown.
Because I adressed ALL these issues in post 222 I have to assume that you didn't read it.

But using the occasion here is an addendum to the particular issue of "Relics":

COMPUTER: Please enter programme.
SCOTT: The android at the bar said you could show me my old ship. Let me see it.
COMPUTER: Insufficient data. Please specify parameters.

(this makes it clear for Scotty and the audience that the ship’s computer cannot read Scotty’s mind and what ship he is thinking of. He has to provide specifications)

SCOTT: The Enterprise. Show me the Bridge of the Enterprise, you chattering piece of…
COMPUTER: There have been five Federation ships with that name. Please specify by registry number.
SCOTT: NCC-1-7-0-1. No bloody A, B, C, or D.
COMPUTER: Programme complete. Enter when ready.

What’s missing here? THIS:

COMPUTER: There have been several modifications of the Bridge of Enterprise NCC-1701. Please specify era by captaincy.
SCOTT: Up your shaft! Captain James T. Kirk. No Captain April, Pike, Decker, … or Spock.


Because the ship’s computer did not require the necessary specifications to show Scotty the TOS bridge (Scotty could have also wanted to see the bridges from “The Cage”, TMP or ST II for all the computer could know) the logical conclusion has to be, that these bridges were not stored in the holodeck memory banks.

The ship’s computer just provided Scotty with what was available and the closest approximation was a Constitution Class bridge because what we saw in the episode was obviously not a correct replica of the Enterprise’s TOS bridge.

I don’t know how drunk Scotty was, but I give him the benefit of a doubt that the moment he realized that the ship’s computer was not capable to read his mind, but required specifications, he understood these were necessary to give him what he wanted.

After stating the registry “NCC-1701” and getting a result (without providing specifications of captaincy to help determine which bridge) he probably just went along whatever the computer had come up with and was happy with what he got.

Obviously not the Enterprise TOS bridge, but at least one (Constitution Class) that resembled it far more closely than the one of Pike’s, Decker’s or Spock’s Enterprise!

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 September 9 2013, 08:05 PM   #236
Manticore
Rear Admiral
 
Location: Manticore
Re: Was the Enterprise A actually the Yorktown?

Which completely goes against the creator intent here. They clearly intended it to be the Enterprise's bridge, and budgetary concerns prevented it from being wholly accurate.

The rationalizations to justify it as a rationalization are most amusing though.

Speaking for myself, I have an easier time dismissing background details from when the series and its universe was still in flux (UESPA vs. Star Fleet, Earth vs. the Federation, and exactly what the devil "class" actually meant) than I do when the universe was fully developed and realized. In the early days of the show, they didn't have these details settled at all, and I find it faintly ridiculous to uphold the unsettled details as divine truth over the settled ones.
__________________
Lord Vorkosigan does not always get what he wants.
Manticore is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 9 2013, 09:33 PM   #237
Robert Comsol
Commodore
 
Robert Comsol's Avatar
 
Location: USS Berlin
Re: Was the Enterprise A actually the Yorktown?

Manticore wrote: View Post
Which completely goes against the creator intent here. They clearly intended it to be the Enterprise's bridge, and budgetary concerns prevented it from being wholly accurate.
Agreed, the TNG producers (none from the original production) probably intended this to be the TOS Enterprise's bridge, but since the intentions of the original creators are considered null and void because onscreen "canon" takes precedence, so are the intentions of the next-gen producers.

Or would you seriously say, that your kids know better than yourself why you were doing something when they were still babies in the cradle?

Next-gen canon did not deliver the evidence that the TOS Enterprise is a Constitution Class ship, just more conjectural assumptions.

Manticore wrote: View Post
The rationalizations to justify it as a rationalization are most amusing though.
I'm glad you had a good time. It's nitpicky, yes, but if we are made to believe an assumption becomes "fact" than an in-depth analysis is warranted, IMHO.

Manticore wrote: View Post
Speaking for myself, I have an easier time dismissing background details from when the series and its universe was still in flux (UESPA vs. Star Fleet, Earth vs. the Federation, and exactly what the devil "class" actually meant) than I do when the universe was fully developed and realized. In the early days of the show, they didn't have these details settled at all, and I find it faintly ridiculous to uphold the unsettled details as divine truth over the settled ones.
There is a new an interesting thread that deals exactly with these issues and suggests we are looking at an evolution into what becomes Star Fleet. All the details had admittedly not been settled yet, but one that had been settled from the very first episode on is that the TOS Enterprise belonged to the "(Enterprise) Starship Class" according to the bridge plaque.

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 September 10 2013, 03:02 AM   #238
Darkwing
Commodore
 
Location: This dry land thing is too wierd!
Re: Was the Enterprise A actually the Yorktown?

Life is messy. I like "Vulcanian" as an early form, no longer used. Language changes over time, so I think such terms should be acknowledged, and even used in appropriate context.
I also dislike retcon vocabulary, such as "warp core" in relation to pre-TNG-era ships. It makes a lot of sense, gets the idea across easily and succinctly, but should never be used in-universe much before 2364.

It's all a matter of what makes sense in what context. Fans discussing the warp core of Archer's Loknarprise? Sure! Scotty discussing the warp core of the Antares from Charley X? Hell no, that's as anachronistic as a 1940's PI saying "LOL, doll! LMAO while yer on yer way to the pen!". Harry Mudd calling Spock a Vulcanian, yes. The Outrageous Okona saying it, no.
__________________
If you don’t drink the kool-aid, you’re a baaad person - Rev Jim Jones
Almond kool-aid, anyone? Or do you prefer pudding?- Darkwing
Darkwing is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 10 2013, 06:17 AM   #239
Avro Arrow
Fleet Captain
 
Avro Arrow's Avatar
 
Location: Secret Arctic Base
Re: Was the Enterprise A actually the Yorktown?

Robert Comsol wrote: View Post
This is (correct) evidence that NCC-1701-A is a Constitution Class Starship and that’s what we clearly saw in ST VI. (but what’s up with these red marks Scotty put on the blueprint?)
Think about it... what does Scotty need with a outboard profile of his ship while conducting a search of the interior? As he has said himself, he knows this ship like the back of his hand. The pictures can't actually be helping with his search. And it's even on *paper*, no less. So the red marks are all over the page because... in this scene, Scotty is critiquing fan art of the Enterprise that someone has sent him! He just hasn't yet got to the part where he scratches out the title and writes in "the refit design is Enterprise class"... and he gets distracted by the air vent before he can get to it!

Albertese wrote: View Post
Actually, I'm more for rejecting Jein's numbers all together. I realize later day Trek went with them and enshrined many of them in the on-screen canon, but I'm willing to ignore such business.
Yeah, this is pretty much how I feel as well.

Albertese wrote: View Post
I won't bother preaching on behalf of FJ's Star Fleet Technical Manual, as I know many people here simply won't have it, but I always thought his registry numbers (especially for the Enterprise sister ships) seemed more sensible.
I like FJ's numbers as well, with a slight modification for Intrepid so that her number actually appears on the "Court Martial" chart. The only major sticking point for me is that darn 1017, which makes even less sense than Jein's 16xx numbers. That's why I tend to think that Constellation was an older, smaller ship that only superficially looked like the Constitution class. The old AMT model kit in the original version helped with this. Of course, TOS-R *didn't* help with this, but if I'm already ignoring the Jein registries used in TOS-R...

Albertese wrote: View Post
The way the Status Chart is played in "Court Martial" suggests that those ships are at the Starbase "now" and it always rubbed me the wrong way that nearly all the Enterprise sister ships would be there at once, being worked on.
Agreed.

Darkwing wrote: View Post
Albertese wrote: View Post
Actually, I'm more for rejecting Jein's numbers all together. I realize later day Trek went with them and enshrined many of them in the on-screen canon, but I'm willing to ignore such business.
I don't see a need for that at all. Just using what SOTSF gave us, with the refits, allows Jein's 16xx ships to be something Other-than-Connies that were remade into Connies.
From an in-universe perspective, why would Starfleet bother remaking these older ships to look like Constitution class ships, rather than just installing upgraded weapons/sensors/whatever into their existing spaceframes?

137th Gebirg wrote: View Post
Starship/Constitution/Enterprise Class - very close to the source. Anyone still not think that a couple of these things should be forceably decanonized like "Vulcanians"? Personally, I think "starship" should not ever be considered a class-name again, but rather a generic ship type, like "xxxx-class starship" is fine. We've heard this combination of words in relation to space-faring vessels for a much longer duration than "starship class" (a phrase which has never been voiced on-screen in dialog). Think about it - is anyone ever REALLY going to call the Enterprise a "Starship-Class Starship"? That's like calling today's Enterprise a "Carrier-Class Carrier"! Are we going to say that one piece of set dressing (original bridge plaque w/ "Starship Class") that was never meant to be seen that clearly is any more or less authoritative than another piece of set dressing (technical journal w/ "Constitution Class")? It's time to collectively kill "Starship Class" once and for all. It is a meaningless pairing of words. At least "Constitution Class" makes sense and, even though never spoken on-screen in TOS, it was spoken on screen (satisfying most people's definition of the word "canon") in relation to that specific type of vessel in TNG and beyond. Any confusion or debate about what class the TOS Enterprise belonged to should have evaporated with that.
I'm on board with this. "Starship Class" works much better as a generic type designator. Starfleet just went from using the generic type class on their plaques in the 2240s, to using the actual nominal class of the ship on their plaques by whenever the Defiant was commissioned.

137th Gebirg wrote: View Post
I kind of miss the old days of debating whether or not the refit was called a Connie or its own new "Enterprise Class" (based on the TWOK bridge simulator signage). I'm an "Enterprise-class" guy m'self.
Avro Arrow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 10 2013, 12:05 PM   #240
Robert Comsol
Commodore
 
Robert Comsol's Avatar
 
Location: USS Berlin
Re: Was the Enterprise A actually the Yorktown?

@ Albertese & Avro Arrow

Is there any good reason to assume that the starship status chart from "Court Martial" only shows starships being repaired in orbit of the starbase?

NCC-1831 (formerly assumed to be Intrepid) is almost done, so why pull the repair crew off to start work on the Enterprise?

For all we know this is just the general Starfleet chart to indicate all starships that are still in need to receive essential upgrades.

Commodore Stone may be well aware of Intrepid's condition but a look at the "upgrade" chart tells him Enterprise badly needs these in addition to the repair work following the severe "ion storm".

I don't believe Mike Okuda was making a conscious decision showing Intrepid as NCC-1631 in TOS-R, but the moment he did he accidentally gave this starship status chart a different and, IMHO, better meaning.

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
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 06:00 PM.

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