UFS sounds better.
Starship Registry Numbers
- Thread starter Eronai
- Start date
Starborn Dragon
Captain
Except in star Trek they go before the number and the number goes above and before the ship's name.
At least UFS wouldn't be as ambiguous - everyone would know it stands for United Federation Ship. Not only is it distinctive, but it also makes more sense - to have the name 'Federation' be reflected in the prefixes it uses for its ships.
(Kinda wishing the ENT ships had used something like UES - United Earth Ship?)
Not sure I understand
USA
USS Enterprise
CVN-65
vs
UFP
USS Enterprise
NCC-1701
What are you saying is different?
Starborn Dragon
Captain
Sorry, but I am in error with my last post.
Here's what Memory Alpha has to say on the matter:
http://en.memory-alpha.wikia.com/wiki/Registry
And remember, in the earliest episodes the Enterprise was working for the UESPA.
Here's what Memory Alpha has to say on the matter:
http://en.memory-alpha.wikia.com/wiki/Registry
And remember, in the earliest episodes the Enterprise was working for the UESPA.
They also reported to Space Central. I just chalk those things up to the show starting up (like Vulcanian). In my mind, Kirk (and Pike before him) and company always reported to Starfleet.
Also check out http://www.ex-astris-scientia.org/articles/registries.htm
Kind of like the tombstone that reads James R Kirk or Data being part of the "class of '78" or Troi calling Riker "Bill". Take stuff from early episodes with a grain of salt.
For the win!
Easy one: upgrade from a different class ship to Constitution standards with the ship retaining her original registry.
Correct. The new Enterprise will be CVN-80 or 81 IIRC.
By the way, we absolutely do know what "USS" stands for. Kirk says it in "Court Martial":
Last edited:
And yet, it's also been referred to as United Space Ship before and after that episode.
- "Captain Christopher Pike, United Space Ship Enterprise"--Captain Pike, "The Menagerie"
- "You're aboard the United Space Ship Enterprise."--Doctor McCoy, "Space Seed"
- "I'm Captain James Kirk of the United Space Ship Enterprise."--Captain Kirk, "Patterns of Force"
After going through the registry numbers of Constitution-class starships I came to a conclusion that perhaps the numbers do have meaning, but it is not what we would normally think. I'm of the opinion that the first digits of the number are code for the system the vessel was built followed by the number of ship built in that system. A new code gets assigned to that system when they reach the end of their contract code.
An example would be NCC-17xx. The 17s are built in the Sol System. All the Enterprises were built in Sol. Defiant (NCC-1764) was built in Sol.
When the 17xx contract codes ran out, Sol was assigned a new number. Perhaps 18xx or 19xx, but certainly 20xx for USS Excelsior.
I would add to the speculation of say NCC-16xx were built at say Vulcan. The NCC-10xx were built say at Tellar. The NCC-9xx at Alpha Centauri . NCC-13xx at Andor. Things like that.
This way ships of the same class with widely spread apart numbers could be built at roughly the same time period, just in different star systems with separate shipyards.
By the mid-24th century, Starfleet may have increased the number to NCC-71xxx or perhaps stayed with each contract at a hundred ships each with something like NCC-718xx (Much of the Galaxy-class). Depends on just how large a contract is expected to be within the expanding Federation and how many new worlds and colonies have shipyards for even things as small as runaboats that are given a contract code.
An example would be NCC-17xx. The 17s are built in the Sol System. All the Enterprises were built in Sol. Defiant (NCC-1764) was built in Sol.
When the 17xx contract codes ran out, Sol was assigned a new number. Perhaps 18xx or 19xx, but certainly 20xx for USS Excelsior.
I would add to the speculation of say NCC-16xx were built at say Vulcan. The NCC-10xx were built say at Tellar. The NCC-9xx at Alpha Centauri . NCC-13xx at Andor. Things like that.
This way ships of the same class with widely spread apart numbers could be built at roughly the same time period, just in different star systems with separate shipyards.
By the mid-24th century, Starfleet may have increased the number to NCC-71xxx or perhaps stayed with each contract at a hundred ships each with something like NCC-718xx (Much of the Galaxy-class). Depends on just how large a contract is expected to be within the expanding Federation and how many new worlds and colonies have shipyards for even things as small as runaboats that are given a contract code.
Starborn Dragon
Captain
Woooo. That's a good catch. Thanks for pointing that out.
But you notice, the Republic doesn't match the USS. It should be USR.
There is an interview with Matt Jeffries on a dvd/ blu ray special feature tribute to him where he took the view when choosing it that it was the 17th class of ship and the first of it's line. Unfortunately, canon rules that out as a continuing format.
This makes some kind of sense. In the UK, since late 2001, car registrations have been in the format LLNN LLL (L being letters, N being numbers) and the first two letters determine the region it was registered in.
They could also follow a stranger numbering pattern. On the same UK registration format, numbers determine the year of registration, but in a convoluted way. The first of these in 2001 had the numbers 51, early 2002 have 02, late 2002 have 52, early 2003: 03, late 2003: 53 etc. Currently we are on 15, but soon, new cars will have 65.
This makes some kind of sense. In the UK, since late 2001, car registrations have been in the format LLNN LLL (L being letters, N being numbers) and the first two letters determine the region it was registered in.
They could also follow a stranger numbering pattern. On the same UK registration format, numbers determine the year of registration, but in a convoluted way. The first of these in 2001 had the numbers 51, early 2002 have 02, late 2002 have 52, early 2003: 03, late 2003: 53 etc. Currently we are on 15, but soon, new cars will have 65.
I find that hard to believe because the dedication plaques of several newer ships in the 71xxx to 75xxx range have them originating from several different locations.
According to plaques on Memory Alpha, the Defiant and Valiant were from the Antares Ship Yards; the Odyssey, the Equinox, the Sao Paolo/new Defiant, probably Voyager, as per "Relativity" (and definitely the Enterprise-D and E) were from Utopia Planitia; the Nebula class Prometheus was from the 40 Eridani A Yards (probably in the Vulcan system); the plaque of the prototype Prometheus (with a far more sensible registry from 74913) was from the Beta Antares Ship Yards; and the Sutherland was from the San Francisco Fleet Yards.
Edited to note: It took me four flippin' times to post this!
Last edited:
Just realised that there's quite an obvious solution to some of the inconsistencies in ship numbering. Each shipyard could be allocated a range of numbers to use, and construction can go at different rates. One shipyard could run out of allocated numbers. When they are allocated new registrations, they would get higher numbers than those already allocated to other shipyards, others could be running behind due to all sorts of things from supply problems to technical glitches, and be using lower numbered registrations (already allocated to them) than ships already in service.
I think I'm rambling a bit, I'll check again if this makes sense to me later.
I would think ship registrations would be handled by a single office. There has to central authority that handles all aspects of shipbuilding logistics.
^ I think that's what Socks is suggesting. Starfleet is the central authority that hands out registries; it would allocate a block of numbers to a specific shipyard (for whatever reason), and when that runs out, the yard is given a new block, which may be completely different.
