Where did the Enterprise NCC-1701A come from?

[Shat Happens]

the Enterprise-A holds the distinction of being the only starship that was pulled out of an ass.

Maybe I should say 'the first' instead of 'the only'

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xwhAq3F8NCE

 

[Dukhat]

All I did return what I was given.

My observation about that differs.

Then your arguing over it doesn't make sense as from the start (and said more than a few times in this thread) it was just a case of people choosing an idea that best works for them.

Not sure why you're not getting this, so let me be as precise as possible. My point had nothing to do with what Roddenberry thought, or what anyone else thinks based on what Roddenberry thought. My question was, why would the Ent-A have to be the Yorktown based only on the scene with the Yorktown's captain describing his ship being disabled? The Potemkin could have been just as disabled off-screen, and then chosen to become the new Enterprise. My point was that there was no reason whatsoever to assume the Ent-A was originally the Yorktown based only on what we saw in the film.

 

[urbandefault]

^^It doesn't have to be any pre-existing ship. It doesn't matter anyway, because.

 

[Dukhat]

^^It doesn't have to be any pre-existing ship. It doesn't matter anyway, because.

It apparently matters to the OP who started this thread and whoever replied to it, or we all wouldn't be discussing it now.

 

[C.E. Evans]

All I did return what I was given.

My observation about that differs.

It differs from what it actually is.

Then your arguing over it doesn't make sense as from the start (and said more than a few times in this thread) it was just a case of people choosing an idea that best works for them.

Not sure why you're not getting this, so let me be as precise as possible.

You're being snippy again.

My point had nothing to do with what Roddenberry thought, or what anyone else thinks based on what Roddenberry thought.

And my point is that was the reason. It was just an idea he floated about that some people didn't have a problem with.

Once more I have to repeat this to you that people can pick whatever idea (and rationale) they want that works for them. I said that from the very beginning and it was the most straightforward and simplest explanation for the question you asked for why some people chose the Yorktown idea. Now, that might not be an answer you like, but that's your problem. I also have to tell you again that it isn't the only idea out there that people can choose from. Heck, I even heard an idea the ship was always meant to be the Enterprise-A and that the events in both Star Treks III and IV just accelerated things.

My question was, why would the Ent-A have to be the Yorktown based only on the scene with the Yorktown's captain describing his ship being disabled? The Potemkin could have been just as disabled off-screen, and then chosen to become the new Enterprise. My point was that there was no reason whatsoever to assume the Ent-A was originally the Yorktown based only on what we saw in the film.

See earlier responses about the idea originating with Roddenberry.

 

[TREK_GOD_1]

Heroes or not, I can't imagine Starfleet taking a ship away from its crew just to hand it off to Kirk and company.

Why not? They saved earth. What other crew would take priority over the 1701 group when a ship was needed as part of Kirk's punishment?

 

[Trimm]

Heroes or not, I can't imagine Starfleet taking a ship away from its crew just to hand it off to Kirk and company.

Why not? They saved earth. What other crew would take priority over the 1701 group when a ship was needed as part of Kirk's punishment?

We've seen in many iterations of Trek that Starfleet has plenty of politics going on, and while Kirk and co. may have been heroes (again) I can't see all those admirals wanting to deal with the number of people who would have been miffed by just handing Kirk someone elses ship.

That being said, I also tend to think that regardless of the above the quirks the Ent-A displays in TFF are indicative of a new build or a very freshly minted refit rather than an old ship.

 

[Timo]

I can't see all those admirals wanting to deal with the number of people who would have been miffed by just handing Kirk someone elses ship.

It's not somebody else's ship. It's Starfleet's. If some "crew" or "officer" is delusional enough to think of the ship in terms of ownership, Starfleet will have them shot.

Really, there's no real-world basis for a military organization minding the sentiments of somebody it wants to reassign. But if somebody does complain, there would be plenty of precedent for the military organization to go medieval on that somebody...

Timo Saloniemi

 

[SicOne]

^ Yeah, but...it's KIRK, man. You know the rules don't apply...

 

[SicOne]

So this means it's gotta be a newbuild without a captain, or a refit in which the previous captain was reassigned as well as his entire command crew. And what are the odds of the latter?

 

[BillJ]

Heroes or not, I can't imagine Starfleet taking a ship away from its crew just to hand it off to Kirk and company.

Why not? They saved earth. What other crew would take priority over the 1701 group when a ship was needed as part of Kirk's punishment?

They may have been exonerated but it doesn't mean that Starfleet doesn't hold a grudge. Kirk and Company made them look like fools over and over on the whole. Exposed they had only sent an underpowered science vessel to Genesis with no protection, broke their newest toy and made Starfleet security look terrible.

I'm sure the 1701-A was probably something that was broken down and headed to the scrap heap when word came down.

 

[Trimm]

I can't see all those admirals wanting to deal with the number of people who would have been miffed by just handing Kirk someone elses ship.

It's not somebody else's ship. It's Starfleet's. If some "crew" or "officer" is delusional enough to think of the ship in terms of ownership, Starfleet will have them shot.

Really, there's no real-world basis for a military organization minding the sentiments of somebody it wants to reassign. But if somebody does complain, there would be plenty of precedent for the military organization to go medieval on that somebody...

Timo Saloniemi

As I said, we've seen plenty of examples of Starfleet politics in action, and lord knows politics are a reality of the real military. I'm sure there are plenty of Admirals that would be miffed at Kirk for what he pulled in TSFS, and plenty of other very influential Captains with enough clout to make some waves about one of their brother officers getting booted out of his command to make way for the hero of the month.

 

[Ithekro]

Considering that Kirk had been an admiral up until recently, he probably had a bunch of people he had been in command of, or at least above in rank that now have him under them. Quite an oppotunity some would say.

 

[doubleohfive]

I disagree. I think there were probably a bunch of Starfleet officers and higher-ups who were probably justifiably pissed off with Kirk after what he and his peeps pulled off during Star Trek III, but probably also had to suck it up after that same group of troublemakers saved all their asses in Star Trek IV.

In the court of public opinion, Kirk and company are untouchable. Anything Starfleet does from then on would look petty.

 

[Nebusj]

Why not? They saved earth. What other crew would take priority over the 1701 group when a ship was needed as part of Kirk's punishment?

Well, because the USS Indefeasible had just that same week sealed closed a polaron fracture in the fabric of space and time that was threatening to explode every star in a line from Rigel to Deneva, thus saving dozens of Federation worlds --- not to mention three strategically important Romulan planets --- from a gruesome death.

Meanwhile, the USS Haertel found at the last minute a cure to the plague that threatened to wipe out all Vulcans and Vulcanoid life forms; and in a comic week for that ship, the USS Amalfi reunited the telepathic space-goat of Altair VI with its mother, thus ending its unsettling influence where leaked psionic powers caused people to form passionate bonds with anyone in the room.

I mean, Kirk's good and all, but the galaxy's not just sitting around waiting on him, you know?

 

[Timo]

a refit in which the previous captain was reassigned as well as his entire command crew. And what are the odds of the latter?

About one out of one, I guess. Why wouldn't entire command crews be quite regularly reassigned? Indeed, our heroes are a good example of Starfleet doing exactly that!

...plenty of other very influential Captains with enough clout to make some waves about one of their brother officers getting booted out of his command to make way for the hero of the month.

And if they open their mouths, they lose their "influence" overnight and get booted out of their commands. Militaries rule with fear - that's the job description.

Why would getting booted out of a decrepit old Constitution be a bad thing for a skipper's career, though? As far as the other skippers are concerned, Kirk was "rewarded" with one as a form of suitably sadistic punishment. Whoever vacated the center seat could only have moved to better things...

If Starfleet had good officers it wanted to employ, it would give them the Excelsior. Kirk is being put in a display case shaped like a starship, and Starfleet is no less capable for the loss of that case and that officer.

Timo Saloniemi

 

[TheSubCommander]

Visual evidence: At the end of TVH, the ship has a bridge reminiscent of the older TMP Enterprise bridge. At the beginning of TFF, it has a brand-spanking new bridge. I take this to mean that the ship was an older vessel which had been upgraded at some point between the two films.

Yeah, that's why I don't like the theory the E-A is a brand new ship. I like the idea of it being either the Yorktown, or another ship that was was decommissioned but then pulled out of mothball. In TSFS, they were decommissioning the Enterprise, so that implies to me the Connies were being decommissioned across the board.

However, as a thank you for saving Earth, the E-A was specially commissioned for Kirk and crew. I think that being a ship that had been recently pulled from mothball better explains all the technical issues E-A had in TFF.

 

[doubleohfive]

Obviously, it certainly helps this theory that apart from Star Trek V and Star Trek VI, we never saw a Constitution-class refit starship in the official productions again, (apart from TNG's aborted idea to make the Stargazer that same class, and since ultimately they changed it, the theory still holds).

 

[Dukhat]

You're being snippy again.

Well, since this discussion has apparently devolved into a dick-measuring contest, I'll be the bigger man, bow out, and admit you've got the bigger dick. Happy now?

 

[Vger23]

A couple of things on this one-

1. It's true, there's really no canon explanation, so everything is pretty much just speculation.
2. The U.S.S. Ti-Ho could be an alien name, perhaps from the history of another Federation member world.
3. I've always wondered about why the "A" had 3 distinctly different bridge modules. The bridge in Trek VI is even more puzzling, as the turbo lift doors are aligned differently, which would require that the tubes themselves would have been moves (which is obviously a major undertaking).