RSS iconTwitter iconFacebook icon

The Trek BBS title image

The Trek BBS statistics

Threads: 137,888
Posts: 5,329,962
Members: 24,557
Currently online: 488
Newest member: Mgroup Video

TrekToday headlines

Retro Review: Inquisition
By: Michelle on Jul 12

Cubify Star Trek 3DMe Mini Figurines
By: T'Bonz on Jul 11

Latest Official Starships Collection Ships
By: T'Bonz on Jul 10

Seven of Nine Bobble Head
By: T'Bonz on Jul 9

Pegg The Prankster
By: T'Bonz on Jul 9

More Trek Stars Join Unbelievable!!!!!
By: T'Bonz on Jul 8

Star Trek #35 Preview
By: T'Bonz on Jul 8

New ThinkGeek Trek Apparel
By: T'Bonz on Jul 7

Star Trek Movie Prop Auction
By: T'Bonz on Jul 7

Drexler: NX Engineering Room Construction
By: T'Bonz on Jul 7


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 October 5 2013, 04:09 PM   #76
Bernard Guignard
Captain
 
Bernard Guignard's Avatar
 
Location: Ontario
Re: Where'd This Phase II Cutaway Come From...?

Wow that is some really great work I hope those autocad files are safe and sound.
__________________
Live Long and Prosper Technically
Bernard Guignard
Project Manager TreknoGraphx
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/trekno...yguid=89237652
Bernard Guignard is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 5 2013, 04:40 PM   #77
Boris Skrbic
Commander
 
Re: Where'd This Phase II Cutaway Come From...?

The TOS ship was Constitution-class, the TMP ship was Enterprise-class, but Starfleet in practice conflated the two for obvious reasons — the latter was a 1:1 replacement for the former, to the extent of sometimes being called a ”refit“, even though for all practical purposes, it really was a ground-up redesign. It's an unusual design situation, so we can expect unusual naming as well. I wouldn't reject Probert's intent of Enterprise-class, which also ended up in official sources of the time.
Boris Skrbic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 6 2013, 04:41 AM   #78
Tallguy
Fleet Captain
 
Tallguy's Avatar
 
Location: Beyond the Farthest Star
Re: Where'd This Phase II Cutaway Come From...?

Shane Johnson teased that his Scott's Guide II would have reconciled the Enterprise class / Constitution (II) class conundrum. I want to visit the alternate timeline where it was completed. (And Firefly ran for eight seasons.)

Is he still about these here parts?
__________________
-- Bill "Tallguy" Thomas
"All I ask is a tall ship..."
Tallguy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 6 2013, 06:22 PM   #79
Boris Skrbic
Commander
 
Re: Where'd This Phase II Cutaway Come From...?

But even if it were to be published, it wouldn't become more relevant than, say, Starship Spotter. We have enough information to reasonably reconcile the existing licensed sources. The redesigned ships were Enterprise-class, but they were also Constitution-class, because of the way the TOS class was replaced. Later, Starfleet may've introduced (II) in an attempt to clarify that relationship.
Boris Skrbic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 6 2013, 07:27 PM   #80
Christopher
Writer
 
Christopher's Avatar
 
Re: Where'd This Phase II Cutaway Come From...?

I'm generally content to ignore the whole Enterprise/Constitution II class question, but here's an idle thought: What if the difference between Enterprise class (1701 refit) and latter-day Constitution class (1701-A) comes down to interior configuration rather than exterior? The refit and 1701-A have the same hull design, but notable internal differences. Notably, while the refit's shuttle bay is the rear part of a vast, open cargo complex filling much of the engineering hull, 1701-A's shuttle bay is in almost exactly the same configuration as the TOS shuttlebay and doesn't connect to a forward cargo space. There are also notable differences in the configuration of the bridge, engineering, sickbay, the officer's lounge, etc.

And there is an external difference as well, in that 1701-A doesn't have the pearlescent hull coating of the refit 1701. Apparently there are some other minor physical differences to the vents at the rear of the dorsal and the three "space-energy field attraction sensors" around the deflector dish, plus a change in the window configuration of the secondary hull, according to this thread.

So could that explain the discrepancy? They're different classes because they have major internal differences and slight external ones? (Although I gather those physical changes to the sensors and vents happened around TWOK or so.)
__________________
Christopher L. Bennett Homepage -- Site update 4/8/14 including annotations for Rise of the Federation: Tower of Babel

Written Worlds -- My blog
Christopher is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 6 2013, 07:36 PM   #81
Boris Skrbic
Commander
 
Re: Where'd This Phase II Cutaway Come From...?

No, because that doesn't account for the redesigned NCC-1701 also being referred to as Constitution-class, starting with Roddenberry's novelization of TMP. I'm trying to be all inclusive.
Boris Skrbic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 6 2013, 08:23 PM   #82
Christopher
Writer
 
Christopher's Avatar
 
Re: Where'd This Phase II Cutaway Come From...?

Boris wrote: View Post
No, because that doesn't account for the redesigned NCC-1701 also being referred to as Constitution-class, starting with Roddenberry's novelization of TMP. I'm trying to be all inclusive.
Well, that's your approach, but I was addressing everyone, suggesting what, as far as I know, is a new approach, one based specifically on canon evidence. I'm asking the readers in general if they think it makes sense for two ship classes to be differentiated mainly by internal variations.

I don't think the TMP novelization is a particularly viable source, given how much about it was later contradicted even by Roddenberry himself. All the early movie novelizations take liberties; studios were a lot less strict about conformity to the finished film back then.
__________________
Christopher L. Bennett Homepage -- Site update 4/8/14 including annotations for Rise of the Federation: Tower of Babel

Written Worlds -- My blog
Christopher is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 6 2013, 08:51 PM   #83
TIN_MAN
Fleet Captain
 
TIN_MAN's Avatar
 
Re: Where'd This Phase II Cutaway Come From...?

^^ this is what I suggested up-thread, when I wrote...

"Therefore there is no contradiction with the "official" blueprints for that "refit",(TMP) or the simulator scene in WOK, this ship was once again "Enterprise class" because this time it was the first (and perhaps only ship) to be uprated to these newer specs. Remember, the "E-A" is not the same ship, full of subtle differences from the original TMP/WOK/TSFS ship and therefore probably is of a different subclass and would be referred to as such, as it was (I believe) in the scene from TUC."

You simply enumerated the subtle differences I was referring to. So yeah, we reach one another brother!
TIN_MAN is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 6 2013, 08:56 PM   #84
Boris Skrbic
Commander
 
Re: Where'd This Phase II Cutaway Come From...?

But you don't need to consider the novelization at all; it's enough to look at the Encyclopedia, which appears to be mandatory reading for every licensed publication these days. It's not safe to disregard such works, since Mike Okuda still has direct influence over the canon. A theory must be developed on solid ground if it is to become more than fan-fiction.

Last edited by Boris Skrbic; October 6 2013 at 09:07 PM.
Boris Skrbic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 6 2013, 09:27 PM   #85
Christopher
Writer
 
Christopher's Avatar
 
Re: Where'd This Phase II Cutaway Come From...?

Boris wrote: View Post
But you don't need to consider the novelization at all; it's enough to look at the Encyclopedia, which appears to be mandatory reading for every licensed publication these days. It's not safe to disregard such works, since Mike Okuda still has direct influence over the canon. A theory must be developed on solid ground if it is to become more than fan-fiction.
Err, how does he still have direct influence over the canon when the only new canon being produced is the Bad Robot film series? The only Trek veteran working on those is John Eaves.

The Okuda references -- the Chronology and the Encyclopedia -- never, ever claimed to be canon. The Chronology contains a clear disclaimer that anything it asserts beyond canonical information is purely conjectural, that the book was meant for entertainment, not be some binding legal document or something. And since the Encyclopedia is from the same authors (et al.), I have no doubt it was written in the same spirit of fun conjecture. (Particularly since it does contain a number of factual errors, e.g. referring to Nella Daren as "Neela.")

Now, for those of us who write licensed tie-in fiction, the policy of Paramount/CBS licensing has usually been that we were expected to use the Okuda references' conjectural dates and assertions except where they had been overwritten by later canon (as a number of them were, such as the year of Cochrane's first flight or the year Kirk's 5-year mission ended). But the very fact that some of its conjectures were ignored by canon is all the proof you need that they are not canon. It makes zero sense to think that a couple of reference books read by, at most, a hundred thousand people or so would carry more weight than TV shows and movies seen by tens of millions of people. Tie-in books are a niche entertainment product aimed at the tiny fraction of a screen franchise's audience that wants more than what they get onscreen and likes to read. "Nonfiction" or technical tie-in books are an even smaller niche within that niche. Assuming that they would dictate the content of screen canon is expecting a very small tail to wag a very massive dog. It simply does not work that way.

Yes, as a Trek novelist I had to respect the Okudachron and the Encyclopedia. But as a Trek novelist, I know that while those books are a tier above mine in their "canon value," they're still just a tiny sidebar to the canon and could be swept away or disregarded by canon just as easily as anything I wrote. Mike Okuda was never an executive producer on the franchise. He was a senior illustrator and technical consultant, and that's very, very low on the totem pole. The producers were perfectly free to ignore his suggestions even when he was working on the show, which is why we got so much inane technobabble like Demon-class planets and deuterium shortages. And he has no role at all in the production of the Bad Robot movies, so there is no possible way in which he would have "direct influence" over them. Maybe some of the creators of those films respect his work enough to reference it or maybe ask him a few questions, but he has no authority to dictate their decisions in any way.
__________________
Christopher L. Bennett Homepage -- Site update 4/8/14 including annotations for Rise of the Federation: Tower of Babel

Written Worlds -- My blog
Christopher is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 6 2013, 10:08 PM   #86
Boris Skrbic
Commander
 
Re: Where'd This Phase II Cutaway Come From...?

He has direct influence over some of the Okudagrams on TNG-R (which override the previous canon), while Orci obviously used the conjectures to come up with dates like 2230 or 2233 in STXI. Before that, TOS-R had confirmed Greg Jein's conjectural registry number scheme, also adopted by Mike Okuda.

I'm not saying his and Rick Sternbach's works are canon, only that it makes no sense to ignore them, since you never know how much of that will eventually become canon. Those works are that close to canon-makers, aside from their obvious influence on licensed publications.

Why adhere to one interpretation when you're writing a tie-in novel and are bound by Okuda's conjectures, another when you're not? Star Trek should be more integrated than that. So we start with the official interpretation and add the Enterprise-class bit, which is also supported by the simulator door label. There is no need to ignore evidence, canon, near-canon or only licensed.
Boris Skrbic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 6 2013, 10:34 PM   #87
King Daniel Into Darkness
Admiral
 
King Daniel Into Darkness's Avatar
 
Location: England again
Re: Where'd This Phase II Cutaway Come From...?

Boris wrote: View Post
But you don't need to consider the novelization at all; it's enough to look at the Encyclopedia, which appears to be mandatory reading for every licensed publication these days. It's not safe to disregard such works, since Mike Okuda still has direct influence over the canon. A theory must be developed on solid ground if it is to become more than fan-fiction.
Shane Johnson's old Mr. Scott's Guide to the Enterprise was referenced in the last movie (the Enterprise's shield technology seen in display graphics). Okuda's books weren't.
__________________
Star Trek Imponderables, fun mashups of Trek's biggest continuity errors! Ep1, Ep2 and Ep3
King Daniel Into Darkness is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 7 2013, 01:37 AM   #88
Christopher
Writer
 
Christopher's Avatar
 
Re: Where'd This Phase II Cutaway Come From...?

Boris wrote: View Post
He has direct influence over some of the Okudagrams on TNG-R (which override the previous canon)
He has "direct influence" because he was hired to work on the production. That's all. He's a paid staffer making decisions that are limited to artistic and visual matters. He's not a studio executive dictating the direction of the franchise.

It's not like there's some master Star Trek policy office at CBS handing down dictums that control canonical productions. Yes, CBS Consumer Products has a couple of employees whose job it is to oversee the tie-ins and make sure they stay consistent with canon, but you're mistaken if you think that the makers of actual screen productions are subject to similar oversight. The screen productions set the course of the franchise, and their makers decide for themselves what the continuity will be. The licensing people just make sure that folks like me follow that lead.


while Orci obviously used the conjectures to come up with dates like 2230 or 2233 in STXI.
Because he's a fan and he wanted to. If he'd wanted to contradict those dates instead, Mike Okuda would've had no ability to stop him. Producers tell the art department what to do, not the other way around. And someone who was in the art department of a previous production would have even less ability to influence decisions.


Before that, TOS-R had confirmed Greg Jein's conjectural registry number scheme, also adopted by Mike Okuda.
Again, that's because Mike was actually hired to work directly on that project and was paid to create those visual effects shots. He hasn't been paid to make decisions about the Abrams films.


I'm not saying his and Rick Sternbach's works are canon, only that it makes no sense to ignore them, since you never know how much of that will eventually become canon.
If you decide to exclude something without even considering it, that's ignoring it. But if you do consider it, take it into account, and decide that it's non-binding and unlikely to matter, that's not ignoring, it's making an informed choice. "We don't know it won't be canon someday" is a rather weak standard, and one that could become quite a straitjacket on the imagination.

And let's not forget, this is all just imagination. Canon itself is not some absolute standard of truth -- it's fraught with massive inconsistencies and contradictions and mistakes, because it's made by a bunch of different people making different assumptions. Any attempt to craft the pretense of a consistent set of rules underlying it all requires glossing over a few details here and there. Bottom line, the conflict between the "Enterprise Class" and "Constitution Class" references in the movies is simply a mistake. We can try to make up imaginary fixes for the continuity error, but there's no explanation that's completely consistent, because it's really just an attempt to handwave an inconsistency. So whatever the case, we have to "ignore" -- or rather, make an informed choice to disregard -- something, somewhere. That's how handwaves work.


Why adhere to one interpretation when you're writing a tie-in novel and are bound by Okuda's conjectures, another when you're not?
When you go home from work, do you only do things that you're allowed to do in the office?

Besides, it's been quite a few years since the Chronology and Encyclopedia were updated, so I don't think the old rule about following their lead is really in place anymore. These days Memory Alpha is probably considered the go-to reference. After all, the reason for respecting those sources is that at the time, their authors were actually working on the shows and so it was possible that their ideas might end up in an episode someday -- although, as stated, many of their conjectures were instead contradicted, so that was simply about the licensing people hedging their bets. But now, the Okudas are no longer employed on Trek productions except for the remastered home-video releases, so they're not as "close to canon" as they were. Sure, Orci or the Bad Robot people could draw on those books for reference, but they could also draw on any other tie-in, like the way they got Kirk's parents' first names from the novel Enterprise: The First Adventure. And they're totally free to disregard them if they want.


There is no need to ignore evidence, canon, near-canon or only licensed.
Except that canon ignores the last two of those quite casually, and sometimes ignores the first as well.
__________________
Christopher L. Bennett Homepage -- Site update 4/8/14 including annotations for Rise of the Federation: Tower of Babel

Written Worlds -- My blog
Christopher is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 7 2013, 05:57 AM   #89
Boris Skrbic
Commander
 
Re: Where'd This Phase II Cutaway Come From...?

Where did I said that Okuda was dictating the direction of the franchise? I'm talking about the ability to canonize one word onscreen. And if something different happens, then it happens; analysis deals in probabilities, and there is great likelyhood of the TMP ship being canonized as Constitution-class (assuming it wasn't already, in a screen graphic I'm not aware of).

I'm not trying to be imaginative or creative, since I don't have the legal license for that; tie-in writers get it to a degree, and the series/movie writers to a much greater degree. The shows and the movies can absolutely disregard a lot, but when we're analyzing existing evidence, it's about reading the text and making conclusions based on it: stitching the pieces together in a research exercise, which prioritizes evidence based on its proximity to the canon. If the evidence changes, the analysis changes: no pressure. If the analysis is sufficiently consistent with what came before, it may even end up in licensed to highly-official works (think Star Charts), since the people responsible can see that you've been taking into account their previous work.

However, if you'd like to splinter Star Trek into work and home versions, that's your approach. I see only a continuum of sources, some more reliable than others.
Boris Skrbic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 7 2013, 10:13 AM   #90
Robert Comsol
Commodore
 
Robert Comsol's Avatar
 
Location: USS Berlin
Re: Where'd This Phase II Cutaway Come From...?

Christopher wrote: View Post
Bottom line, the conflict between the "Enterprise Class" and "Constitution Class" references in the movies is simply a mistake.
Not a mistake, just a misunderstanding.

Bottom line, all the three decisive TOS creators / producers had settled for the TOS Enterprise to be a member of the "Enterprise Class", the evidence is Matt Jefferies pre-production sketch (and later interviews) according to which the Enterprise was "the first bird" and the "first of the series", Bob Justman's reference to "Enterprise Starship Class" and Roddenberry's / Whitfield's "Enterprise Class Starships" in The Making of Star Trek.

Whether Roddenberry's reference to "Constitution Class" starships in the TMP novelization refers to the TMP Enterprise is inconclusive. On the other hand, the Official TMP Blueprints, approved by Gene Roddenberry, refer to the TMP Enterprise as the "new Enterprise Class".

You correctly observed yourself the internal differences between NCC-1701 (Enterprise Class) and NCC-1701-A (Constitution Class) and therefore provided a clue to solve the riddle, IMHO.

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 08:00 AM.

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