Probert's REAL N.C.C.-1701-C - CLOSED - DO NOT RESTART TOPIC

Discussion in 'Fan Art' started by Patrickivan, Feb 11, 2014.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. beamMe

    beamMe Commodore

    Joined:
    Mar 17, 2011
    Location:
    Europa
    Re: Probert's REAL N.C.C.-1701-C

    From our, the viewer's, perspective the TNG-timeline at the beginning and the end of the episode is the original (well, who can determine what's the actual original universe in Trek, at this point? ;)).

    Anyway, the YE-universe is created at the moment the E-C falls trough time, and that's were the TNG-universe and the YE-timeline interact.
    As the viewer, we only shift or point of view from one timeline to another.

    The YE-universe continues on after the E-C returns to her time, and we shift back to our original point of view.
    The TNG-timeline was never in danger, since the events around the E-C had already happened.

    And, as this is a time loop for the E-C, there can't ever have been a TNG-universe were Tasha Yar wasn't on the E-C during the final stage of the battle for Narendra III.

    That means, Sela was always alive and well on Romulus during all the episodes of TNG prior to her first appearance on screen.


    (BTW: This bunch of nerdy bs should be enjoyed with a generous pinch of salt. :D)
     
  2. blssdwlf

    blssdwlf Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2010
    Re: Probert's REAL N.C.C.-1701-C

    Did they elaborate on what these "serious plotholes" were?

    I'm not following. The beginning of YE shows the Sternbach-E affecting the timeline and also used to restore the timeline. There isn't any room for another conjectural universe to be involved.

    The conference lounge sculptures? Uhm, the movie Enterprise warp nacelle pylons are conspicuously further back and on top of the shuttle bay. The Enterprise-B looks like a stock Excelsior instead of what she looked like in "Generations". And shouldn't there be 2 movie Enterprise/A models? And why is there an aircraft carrier and no space shuttle? And what about those Enterprises that were on display in the TMP lounge?

    Are you also arguing that the movie-Enterprise and Enterprise-B were also "substituted" from a neighboring alternate universe or that the TNG-universe is the alternate universe (which funny enough, I'd agree it is an alternate universe relative to TOS ;) )?

    If there were nothing left of the E-C then the Klingons would have no proof that they died defending Narendra. If they had debris from the E-C and it was not the one native to that universe that'd raise a red flag when the Klingons examined the debris and ask, "Hey, this isn't the Enterprise-C!" and again, we'd have a different history. In other words, to avoid a plothole then the E-C that disappeared and reappeared must be the same and native to that universe. :)
     
  3. Dukhat

    Dukhat Rear Admiral Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2007
    Location:
    Baltimore, MD
    Re: Probert's REAL N.C.C.-1701-C

    At the risk of being dragged back into this silly topic, I must point out that the entire basis of Mr. Comsol's speculation (and that's what it is; speculation) is the conference lounge sculpture of the Enterprise-C, which is the only time that even a hint of the original Probert-inspired design was ever shown on screen. The inherent problem with this speculation however, is that absolutely no attention has been paid on his part to how completely inaccurate the other sculptures on that display are. Where is the huge five page treatise to explain the incorrect Enterprise-B? What about that TMP Connie with its nacelle pylons sticking directly out of the shuttlebay? Where's the NX-01? If Picard really was all that concerned with "truth in advertising," wouldn't he want to know why Jonathan Archer's famous Earth ship Enterprise wasn't glued to that wall?

    Sorry, but using those sculptures as evidence of anything is dubious at best. As I once said before, those ships seem to be nothing more than abstract representations of the real ships they were meant to represent. The closest I'd come to agreeing with Mr. Comsol's speculations is that I'd admit that it is possible that the ship representing the Ent-C in that sculpture could be a variant of the Ambassador class (just like the "real" Enterprise-B is a variant of the original Excelsior class design, which is represented by the sculpture). But that variant is certainly not the Enterprise-C, as we saw the correct design in YE and I'm not swayed by any speculation that it wasn't supposed to be the real McCoy, so to speak.
     
  4. STRenegade

    STRenegade Lieutenant Commander Red Shirt

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2012
    Location:
    What? You rapist!
    Re: Probert's REAL N.C.C.-1701-C

    And to add to your point, how do we not know if the sculpture was a gift from an artist (who was not a member of Starfleet and/or made a few errors if you want to add that) to Picard during the Enterprise-D's launch?
     
  5. Mytran

    Mytran Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2009
    Location:
    North Wales
    Re: Probert's REAL N.C.C.-1701-C

    I think you're right that the concept of the YE-universe works best as a separate entity from the standard universe, as it eliminates some of the weirder issues I mentioned upthread. It also gives Tasha somewhere permanent to originate from!

    However, I don't see how the YE-universe can continue on once the E-C returns to her own time and does the noble sacrifice thing. Wasn't the act supposed to STOP the Klingon war? You may be right that it failed to change anything, but there's a depressing thought for the war-torn crew of the E-D, they all died for nothing! Then again, if the return of the E-C wasn't enough to restore relations with the Klingons, why would her absence be enough to trigger the war in the first place?

    Also, if the E-C was always going to go into the future and return, then why would there be any changes to the timeline at all? Her movement is just an established part of history, right?

    This time travel stuff is getting weird, I'm off to fetch the salt ;)

    Funny, I always saw that little jaunt as ending up with TWO Enterprises flying round the galaxy, for those 3 days anyway. There's nothing to suggest they replaced their earlier selves in the timeline.
    The net result of their time-warp adventure - Enterprise turns up at her next assignment 3 days early, whilst simultaneously carrying out her mission to Psi-2000
     
  6. Robert Comsol

    Robert Comsol Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2012
    Location:
    USS Berlin
    Re: Probert's REAL N.C.C.-1701-C

    ^^ I concur. One TOS Enterprise had travelled back in time but was never seen by the other still orbiting Psi 2000.

    That's what the Novikov self-consistency principle states, but what the producers of "Yesterday's Enterprise" apparently opted for instead was this:

    The question, where magic gets involved, is who (Q?) or what created the YE-universe and gave the protagonists a different memory of 20 years past? I addressed the issue (and the first dialogue plotholes for blssdwlf) in this part of the original thread / treatise.

    "This time line will cease to exist and a new future will have been created. I've considered the alternatives. I'll go with Guinan's recommendation."
    (Michael Piller: "Picard sends a hundred people into their deaths upon the word of a bartender. Come On." Another plothole, according to Michael Piller, for blssdwlf)

    There is after “Redemption II”, but you and some others simply won’t acknowledge that possibility. And from a strictly in-universe point of view, the only thing suggesting it’s just a changed timeline (and not a parallel universe) are the “universe at war” protagonists of the alternate reality. Heck, already the crew of our Enterprise-D (a ship of exploration) was unable to define the properties of the “temporal rift” but the crew of the Battleship Enterprise-D (a ship of war) has all the answers?
    The only thing they could verify beyond a doubt was that the Sternbach-C was the “immediate predecessor” to the Battleship “D” within their alternate reality.

    First, I think you’re violating your own Thermian principles. I’m not aware that we have a good onscreen shot of the movie Enterprise with the odd warp pylons. This is a behind-the-scenes production picture I provided, but since you admittedly ignore that kind of information, you shouldn’t make use of it, now. :p

    Second, I’ve already addressed the issue first thing in the original thread / treatise and think I provided a reasonable explanation. I can’t see what’s possibly wrong or inaccurate about the sculpture display other than a warp pylon being misaligned while the basic proportions of the ships’ components on display are correct. Instead of splitting hairs we are now splitting warp pylons?

    In that case that would be the Probert-C and the sculpture display on the “E” is just a presentation of an evolution lineage of a Starfleet design with its more popular representatives. ;)

    But seriously, we don’t have sufficient information of what actually happened at Narendra III in 2344 in the various realities. Did the Enterprise-C save the outpost from destruction (“other” Picard’s speculation) or didn’t she (“other” Riker)? Did she just distract the Romulans long enough to enable the escape of one or some Klingon survivors to tell the story that a Federation starship came to their rescue? Did the Enterprise-C from “Yesterday’s Enterprise” collide head-on with a Romulan warbird (DATA: There is a high degree of probability that the temporal rift is symmetrical, Captain.)? Did the re-appearance of another Enterprise-C make the Romulans believe they were dealing with several “cloaked” Federation starships and therefore decided to break off the attack? Did the returning Enterprise-C suffer a warp core breach vaporizing the ship (and leaving no trace?)?

    Why did the Romulans take captives? Where they interested to gain strategic information on that starship design? Where they interested to learn about the disappearance effect? Where they interested to learn about a possible new Federation cloaking device?

    Like I said, being probably deprived of their long-range scanning equipment the Klingons might just have had audio and no visual confirmation what the re-appearing Enterprise-C might have looked like (it only stands to reason that the Romulans knew). The only thing we can know from “Yesterday’s Enterprise” is that the Enterprise-C was “last seen near Narendra III” (and apparently before the Romulan attack on the outpost).

    No one dragged you back. Yes, it’s the conference lounge sculpture of Andrew Probert’s Enterprise-C, nicely visible in almost all conference lounge scenes of the first four TNG seasons and fleshed out by the artist as a painting (see my avatar) which some members of “my” generation back in 1988 had therefore come to accept as the real thing and part of an unseen story.

    And before I have the audacity to declare his design as “fanwank” or “apocrypha” I feel it’s necessary to examine all the facts / give his design the benefit of a doubt to be certain beyond a shred of doubt that Rick Sternbach’s Enterprise-C actually did “erase” or “overwrite” it.

    If “Yesterday’s Enterprise” was really just a changed timeline of “our” universe, I would have to agree, but with the apparent relocation of these events into a “parallel universe” (and by the same screenplay writer and director of “Yesterday’s Enterprise” for several good reasons I’ve already presented), we are looking at quite a different outcome, i.e. multiple configurations of multiple Enterprises-C in multiple universes.

    Contrary to your claims, in both threads I have now abundantly addressed the presentation of the golden ships on the conference lounge wall of the Enterprise-D. But however rough, raw, simple or crude these may be (“starships named Enterprise and their equivalent in previous centuries”), their proportions allow a quick and easy distinction – however, the Enterprise-C on display is obviously not the one featured in “Yesterday’s Enterprise”.

    Everyone is entitled to assume or believe whatever he or she thinks works best.

    I admit that my original treatise was speculation, but already the plotholes and prop oddities of “Yesterday’s Enterprise”, not to forget the possibility that we were looking at a stage created by Q to put Guinan between a rock and a hard place for what she did to him two episodes earlier (!), suggested that we might be looking at parallel events in a parallel universe.

    I think it’s fair to say that neither Ronald Moore or David Carson cared about starship designs as we do, obviously. :rolleyes:

    What mattered to them (and rightly so) were the characters and apparently the only solution to have Tasha keep her meaningful death in the aftermath of “Yesterday’s Enterprise” was to relocate its events into a “parallel universe” (Carson) so that another Tasha (from another parallel universe) could be captured, give birth to Sela but finally die a meaningless death being executed because of a failed escape attempt.

    This conclusion can be deducted from the statements of Moore, Carson, Guinan and Sela and constitutes a different “canon” than the one previously assumed, regardless whether you like it or not. You can choose to ignore it, but please give me a break making absolute statements like “there is only one correct Enterprise-C” or “there is only one canon Enterprise-C” (which was the reason why I started the original thread / treatise, BTW).

    Bob
     
  7. sojourner

    sojourner Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2008
    Location:
    A Long Time Ago...
    Re: Probert's REAL N.C.C.-1701-C

    The gold model is not a canon starship. It's a canon model.
     
  8. BK613

    BK613 Fleet Captain Fleet Captain

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2008
    Location:
    BK613
    Re: Probert's REAL N.C.C.-1701-C

    Seriously, these models are what you are double-down on?

    http://tng.trekcore.com/hd/albums/1x05/thelastoutpost_hd_207.jpg

    I guess in the ST Universe, CVN-65 doesn't have a canted flight deck either? :lol:

    As for the War Universe, Trek had already provided an example where one timeline is replaced by another do to a change in significance (in fact on the broad strokes, COTEOF and YE are similar; we the viewers just get to see the changes in the latter).
     
  9. Potemkin_Prod

    Potemkin_Prod Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2010
    Location:
    Metro-Birmingham, Alabama
    Re: Probert's REAL N.C.C.-1701-C

    Those models, frankly, are crap. LOL :))
     
  10. beamMe

    beamMe Commodore

    Joined:
    Mar 17, 2011
    Location:
    Europa
    Re: Probert's REAL N.C.C.-1701-C

    I'm afraid, from their pov they did die for nothing.
    That's a weakness in the narrative of that story.

    The "change" we saw was only our shifting pov from observing our TNG heroes to witnessing the time-travel-adventure of the Enterprise-C, where she arrived in a universe were she went missing. That she arrives and then returns to her original timeline doesn't affect the "war"-timeline as the event that created that universe had already happend.
    But our pov shifts from the E-C back to TNG at the end.
    Had our pov stayed with "our" TNG the episode would have been over in a few seconds and Guinan's sudden interest in Tasha Yar wouldn't have made sense to us.

    Mhmm, maybe we see it from Guinan's pov, come to think of it.

    To make this short: It's all a bit timey-wimey.

    :)
     
  11. Robert Comsol

    Robert Comsol Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2012
    Location:
    USS Berlin
    Re: Probert's REAL N.C.C.-1701-C

    You are probably righht - and all the ships only consist of 60% of the starboard side, so the crews can always have a nice and unobstructed view from the sliced off port side :rolleyes:

    And while everybody seems stuck in "discrediting mode" let's speed it up:

    [​IMG]

    Notice how the stardrive section of the "D" is not parallel to the saucer section. :ack: And what's up with the connecting dorsal of the TOS Enterprise? :thumbdown: A useless piece of crap and garbage and Comsol is the only one who believes he can still tell the various starships apart from each other.

    Bob :rolleyes:
     
  12. Mytran

    Mytran Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2009
    Location:
    North Wales
    Re: Probert's REAL N.C.C.-1701-C

    Yep, not one accurate representation of a known starship among that lot!

    I wonder, is this one of the reasons why Picard hates children so much? They've cobbled together this piece of crap in Junior Arts Class and some high ranking Admiral (probably one of the kids' fathers) has ordered Picard to display it in his board room, as it gives the ship a more "family feel".

    [​IMG]
    "We are not amused"

    [LEFT]It was with great regret that he had to have it replaced following the destructive actions of a certain Gul. Awwwww.
    [/LEFT]
     
  13. BK613

    BK613 Fleet Captain Fleet Captain

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2008
    Location:
    BK613
    Re: Probert's REAL N.C.C.-1701-C

    Oh yes this flight deck is exactly the same as the one in the model...nice to see the proportions are also correct on the size of the island compared to the hull.:rolleyes:
    Can I tell it represents the aircraft carrier? Sure, enough abstracted elements are there. But I sure as hell would not use it as a basis for claiming Star trek's CVN-65 is a straight-deck carrier...you know, like CV-6.
     
  14. Rarewolf

    Rarewolf Rear Admiral Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2002
    Location:
    Devon, England
    Re: Probert's REAL N.C.C.-1701-C

    Perhaps all of them were cast from the first concept models for each class, rather than the final commissioned ships.

    Or, could the C in YE have been a Ambassador refit? Yes they are completely different, but more different than the Connie and Connie refit?
     
  15. Starship

    Starship Commander Red Shirt

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2004
    Location:
    São Paulo, Brasil
    Re: Probert's REAL N.C.C.-1701-C

    OR... they just don´t put to much effort doing the right shapes cause it could be seen just for a few seconds in a few episodes, and vitually no one (except the hardcore fans, of course!) would pay attemption to them. :)
     
  16. Mytran

    Mytran Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2009
    Location:
    North Wales
    Re: Probert's REAL N.C.C.-1701-C

    But the towers on those two carriers are quite distinctly different, aren't they?

    I don't think anyone is suggesting that the models are supposed to be lifelike representations - they're clearly (poorly made) abstract sculptures with just enough recognisable details to interpret the vessels of origin.

    It is (as always) the interpretation that people have differing opinions on.

    But what I want to know is, which one is the Ringship Enterprise? :confused:
     
  17. STRenegade

    STRenegade Lieutenant Commander Red Shirt

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2012
    Location:
    What? You rapist!
    Re: Probert's REAL N.C.C.-1701-C

    It's alright. Robert's entire speculation seems based on very questionable so called 'evidence'.

    This is how it is presented in the show, no matter outside opinion:
    The Enterprise-C accidentally went into the future, creating the parallel 'War-timeline' and temporarily erasing/displacing Prime Timeline.
    After some time there, it went back to the past with an additional passenger - 'War Tasha'
    The Enterprise-C was destroyed by the Romulans.
    (Debris from the Enterprise-C and/or the possibility of a black box would give evidence to the Klingons. Also it was never noted whether or not any communications between the Enterprise-C, Romulans, and/or Klingons took place.)
    The Romulans took survivors, one happening to be War Tasha.
    War Tasha had a child with a Romulan; this was Sela (a year after the C's destruction).
    War Tasha was executed 4 years later.

    Sela was corrupted.

    -There was no other Enterprise-C from any other timeline (again lack of evidence on the nature of the vortex, whether it opened only two ways or spilled into other universes/dimensions/etc, although we do know it's at least symmetrical).
    -The sculpture on the wall is in no way evidence of any nature. The nature of the sculpture or who even made it would bring into question whether it was suppose to be accurate. Especially with the NX-01 missing as well as the Ringship (if the Rinship wasn't an Enterprise why did it appear on the TMP Enterprise? Where was it on the other Enterprises if it was?). And the NX-01 was missing in the Enterprise-E's display case (STE came out 5 years after FC).
    -Using opinions of writers/directors is unfortunately invalid evidence, whether you like it or not.
    -Whether the War Timeline continued on is 50/50. Evidence supports either outcome; personally I find it most reasonable the War Timeline ended when the Enterprise-C returned to its own time (War Tasha's continued existence could be explained like First Contact when the crew of the Enterprise-E were protected from the Borg's assimilation of 2063 Earth by the temporal vortex). However, there is room for both assumptions based on War Tasha's continued existence.
    -Who says War-Tasha's death was meaningless? For all we know she could be attempting to return to the Federation with information on the Romulans and/or to protect her child from being corrupted by the Romulans, neither are which meaningless.

    All attempts to say 'you can have your cake and eat it to' are unfortunately ill attempts of compromising and pleasing everyone.

    To this end I request that this thread be closed as it has seem to veer off in another direction than the poster had originally intended.
     
  18. beamMe

    beamMe Commodore

    Joined:
    Mar 17, 2011
    Location:
    Europa
    Re: Probert's REAL N.C.C.-1701-C

    The war timline still goes on. We are just not following what happens in that universe.

    The AbramsUniverse didn't get winked out of existence just because Nero fell into a black hole. The MirrorUniverse also still goes on as infrequent visits showed.
     
  19. Robert Comsol

    Robert Comsol Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2012
    Location:
    USS Berlin
    Re: Probert's REAL N.C.C.-1701-C

    I stand corrected, obviously I was focusing too much on the port side, but now I see what you meant.

    Almost looks like the artist merged WWII USS Enterprise CV-6 (straight deck) with USS Enterprise CVN-65 (cubical conning tower).

    Could be an explanation because otherwise it would beg for explanation why CVN-65 qualified as the equivalent for the later starships, but CV-6 didn't.

    Bob
     
  20. STRenegade

    STRenegade Lieutenant Commander Red Shirt

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2012
    Location:
    What? You rapist!
    Re: Probert's REAL N.C.C.-1701-C

    What are you talking about?
    This comment was only for the altenate War Timeline, since it is unknown whether or not it continued. It has nothing to do with the Mirror Universe (already established as a parallel universe despite any interactions with the Prime one) or the JJverse (how you came to that conclusion is beyond me) which exists because Prime Spock and Nero went backwards in time (only way to rectify that timeline is if Spock and Nero were pulled back to their time the second they arrived in the past).
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.