Do you think the Enterprise D was going to be renamed anyway?

Discussion in 'Star Trek: The Next Generation' started by Lance, Feb 14, 2013.

  1. Lance

    Lance Rear Admiral Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    May 9, 2012
    Location:
    The Enterprise's Restroom
    Okay, let me explain that a little better. :)

    According to the Chronology, the Enterprise D was destroyed in the Earth year 2371, and the Enterprise E was launched later in the same year (which was a year prior to the 2372 date of the 24th century sections in "First Contact"). Presumably the Sovereign Class ships were already in the later stages of their development cycle by 2371, for the new Enterprise to have been launched so relatively soon after the previous model was destroyed -- no longer than a couple of months, at least. And they virtually just send the same crew back to spacedock, rebrand the newest ship available with the name 'Enterprise', and send them all back out again (which always seemed odd to me: that Kirk and co commanded two Enterprises, and Picard and co likewise -- can we assume Harriman's command crew launched the Enterprise C, then?).

    Anyway. Obviously the real world reason was that the producers wanted a new ship for the movies and didn't really give much thought to the in-universe explanations. And it isn't beyond the realms of possibility that the above described events were exactly how it happened. That's the only way to explain such a quick turnaround from the destruction of the D to the launch of the E...

    ... but what if, in-universe, the plan was always to launch the Enterprise E anyway, and keep the former Enterprise in service under a different name? Maybe they intended to launch the Sovereign Enterprise the following year, regardless of whether her predecessor was destroyed. What if the changes made to the bridge module in "Generations" (vs the one seen in the series) were because the Enterprise had been recently refitted in preparation for it's rebranding/being handed over to a new crew, while Picard and the rest (and the Enterprise name itself, of course) were going to migrate to a more updated vessel. Under this hypothesis, the 'death' of 1701-D was an unfortunate coincidence, but not a crippling difference to the plan except fo the loss of a Galaxy from the fleet. Because maybe the new Enterprise was already on the starting blocks undergoing final tests, and the crew were readying themselves to move over to the Sovereign Enterprise anyway. The only crew who lost out in this scenario are obviously the ones who might have been intended to take over the former Enterprise-D.

    Thoughts? I hope the above makes some sort of sense, as I was thinking about this at work and it suddenly made a degree more sense to me than the coincidence of one ship being destroyed and then another deployed in it's place so soon. And surely with the new Sovereign's already under construction (presumably), Starfleet would have wanted the flagship and her crew to be on one of those anyway, rather than being stuck on one of the older model Galaxies? :confused:
     
  2. Pavonis

    Pavonis Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2001
    No.

    I'm pretty sure no government or service renames ships during their operation. I've heard of ships being renamed after selling them, or after having been captured, but never in the middle of its use.

    Far easier to think that the E-E was going to be named something else than to think the E-D was going to be renamed.

    Frankly, I don't think the characters in-universe are as attached to the name Enterprise as we, the fans, are. Why should Starfleet care what they call their best ship? The E-E could've been named USS Pansy and it would've still been a top-of-the-line ship.
     
  3. Ar-Pharazon

    Ar-Pharazon Vice Admiral Premium Member

    Joined:
    May 19, 2005
    The Enterprise-A was renamed from Yorktown, Ti-Ho or Atlantis pretty quickly.

    So, no surprise the Ent-E might have had another name and Starfleet decided to keep the tradition alive when Ent-D was destroyed.
     
  4. MickJo1701

    MickJo1701 Commander Red Shirt

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2011
    I'd always believed that the Sovereign class that became the Ent-E was nearing completion when the Ent-D bought it and Starfleet re/named it to continue the tradition. In regards to the refit the Ent-D had received prior to Generations, I assumed it was due to the seriousness of the Dominion threat after the Odyssey was so easily destroyed.
     
  5. Lance

    Lance Rear Admiral Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    May 9, 2012
    Location:
    The Enterprise's Restroom
    I know the real life explanation is obviously that they're not going to change the cast just 'cause the 1701-D got lanced, but it just always bugged me that nearly all of Picard's command staff (and most of the rest of the crew, judging by how Barclay and Ogawa popped up in "First Contact") simply got transplanted to another ship. It just seems too... convenient, somewhow. Worf moving over to DS9 felt more realistic, the kind of thing I'd assume would happen. You'd think TPTB at Starfleet would take the opportunity to at least push a few more of their up-and-comers into prominent staff roles, as well as finally telling Riker to sod off and go Captain another ship. :D

    I can really buy into that explanation. :bolian: After this and Wolf359, I could see them deciding they weren't going to take any chances this time, and just authorised a full upgrade of the entire fleet.
     
  6. C.E. Evans

    C.E. Evans Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2001
    Location:
    Ferguson, MO, USA
    Personally, I thought the interior upgrades the Enterprise-D had in Generations was in preparation for the ship to finally embark on a 10-15 year deep-space exploration mission after spending her first 7 years relatively close to home.
     
  7. SonOfMogh

    SonOfMogh Commander Red Shirt

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2004
    Location:
    UK
    I think the only other issue with this theory is that the conversation on the destroyed bridge of the D between Picard and Riker made it clear they did not know anything about a new Enterprise, (do you think they'll build another? Or something to that effect).
     
  8. Cr031k

    Cr031k Lieutenant Red Shirt

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2009
    Take it how you will but I presume the conversation between Riker and Picard at the end gave no mention to knowing they had a new ship waiting for them back home.

    RIKER: I always thought I'd have a crack at this chair one day.

    PICARD: You may still... somehow I doubt this will be the last ship to carry the name Enterprise.
     
  9. Kirks_Flying_Wig

    Kirks_Flying_Wig Commander Red Shirt

    Joined:
    Nov 13, 2006
    Location:
    England
    "Do you think they'll build another?" was Beverly's line in First Contact after she, Worf and Picard activated the self destruct. In Generations, Riker said he thought he'd "have a crack at this chair [the -D's captain's chair] one day". Picard replied "Somehow I doubt this will be the last ship to carry the name Enterprise."

    IU, it could be interpreted that Picard already knew an existing ship would be renamed Enterprise (who knows for how long the crew were salvaging components and photo albums -- a quick chat with a friendly admiral could have lead to a new name being slapped on a Sovereign-class ship that's having the final touches put to it in spacedock). As for all of the command staff transferring to the E, surely that is the captain's prerogative?
     
    Last edited: Feb 15, 2013
  10. Pavonis

    Pavonis Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2001
    Bah, Picard would know that another Enterprise would be around as soon as he knew his was destroyed. He was already commanding the fifth Enterprise; why would anyone think that they'd stop at -D? Of course there'd be another Big E. No need to discuss it with an admiral.
     
  11. inflatabledalek

    inflatabledalek Fleet Captain Fleet Captain

    Joined:
    Jun 7, 2011
    Considering Enterprise was retroactively made the name of Earth's first Starship it would actually made sense if it was made a tradition to try and keep a ship of that name in service at all times (with maybe the same courtesy being extended to the other ships in the NX class?), or at least as much as realistically possible allowing for outside factors where unexpected destructions crossover with not having any sufficiently prestigious ships worthy of the name ready to go from the shipyard.

    Indeed, assuming the constitution class was the first to follow this tradition, the gap between C and D is the only one really long enough to not follow the idea of naming a new Enterprise as soon as possible after a previous one goes out of service. And that could easily be explained by it being a tradition that waned for a while before some Admiral decided to bring it back.

    I should say, I have no idea how that idea fits with either the wider canon or real military practice (though as always with Trek, it has the get out of "It's the future! We don't do thing exactly the same" which gets used for things like the reused registration number for the various Enterprises...) but I like it and it works for me.
     
  12. GameOn

    GameOn Lieutenant Commander Red Shirt

    Joined:
    Jul 27, 2012
    It's entirely possible that the Enterprise-E was built and launched with a different name and wasn't renamed until Picard took command. The same thing happened when Sisko took command of the Sao Paulo and had permission to change the name to Defiant.
     
  13. heavy lids

    heavy lids Lieutenant Commander Red Shirt

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2013
    Location:
    Denver
    That was so dumb though. Totally unnecessary. And I like the name Sao Paulo more than Defiant.
     
  14. Infern0

    Infern0 Captain Captain

    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2008
    Does anyone know what happened to the Enterprise B?

    Excelsior class was still commonly in service as late as the 2370's, so unless it was destroyed it was probably still around, but maybe under another name?
     
  15. USS Firefly

    USS Firefly Captain Captain

    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2013
    I believe it had to do with that the FX would be too expensive to change the new name.


    It was never mentioned in the series or movies
     
  16. MarsWeeps

    MarsWeeps Fleet Captain Premium Member

    Joined:
    Sep 5, 2011
    Location:
    SubSpace
    Fixed it for ya! :)
     
  17. C.E. Evans

    C.E. Evans Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2001
    Location:
    Ferguson, MO, USA
    There's no canonical answer. The only thing we can surmise is that she was no longer in service by 2344.
     
  18. Squiggy

    Squiggy FrozenToad Admiral

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2006
    Location:
    Trump Tower
    "Men, we're facing a grave threat. The Odyssey was destroyed. Take the Enterprise and turn down the lights. That way no one will think we're home."

    "But, sir. Should we take the hide the shield frequency...or at least not display on monitors?"

    "No...but better add a couple of extra stations to the bridge just in case."
     
  19. heavy lids

    heavy lids Lieutenant Commander Red Shirt

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2013
    Location:
    Denver
     
  20. C.E. Evans

    C.E. Evans Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2001
    Location:
    Ferguson, MO, USA
    Aside from the residents of Sao Paulo, you're probably in the minority that do.

    But renaming the ship the Defiant was both a morale-raising move for Starfleet forces as well as a message (i.e., raised middle finger) to the Dominion, IMO.