Dos not work! Sorry.I have a list. It is from the FASA Star Trek roleplaying game scenario manual. Has 13 starships.
Link:
https://mail-attachment.googleuserc...DBzke-HkftWKnEkkz3l-fTZ24xiASMuRKRuM2QPGrrxX8
Image:
Original 12 Constitution class ships
- Thread starter garak1
- Start date
- Status
And a look at Google Earth over the past few years showed four to five of those limited number of Nimitz class carriers docked at Norfolk at one time. Thanks to the current political climate.
I've read through the whole thread and noted some early references to the Making of Star Trek, but no direct quotes. Here are a couple:
Firstly there were meant to be 12 ships like the Enterprise at the time of "Tomorrow is Yesterday" through to the end of the first season and at least partway into production of the second (based on the dates of the memos above). That includes the Enterprise (which also makes sense from uttered dialog, since if he meant 12 OTHERS like it, Kirk would have said so to Christopher).
Secondly, I think it is a sensible conclusion from DCF's and RHJ's memos that the intention was for Star Fleet to include (but not necessarily be limited to) 12 ships of the same class (whether we call it "Starship" or "Constitution" or even "Enterprise Starship" class). .
Thirdly, despite the frankly absurd suggestion that the AMT model of the Enterprise used to depict the Constellation in TDM is "proportionally different in exactly every aspect" from the 11 foot miniature must mean the Constellation was a different class of ship, even if that were not a gross exaggeration of the differences, it is clearly not what the creators intended.
The established facts versus debatable matters were fairly well laid out by Warped9 way back on the very first page of this thread, even though I disagree with him about it being "left up to the individual" as to the Constellation being the same class as Enterprise or not. As long as everyone wants to debate the debatable (you know, for fun
), then have at it. This is, after all, the Internets. But calling others obtuse for example (as one user here did) because they disagree with your position is asinine. Even if your position isn't completely untenable.
- "We have, in the course of a season and a half, established that Star Fleet includes 12 ships of the starship class" (from a memo by D.C. Fontana to Roddenberry et. al. on August 8, 1967 reprinted on pages 163-164. In the same memo, she offers a list of names / possible names for said ships and specifically calls out the destruction of the Constellation in TDM.
- "I am in receipt of a memo from someone using the pseudonym of D.C. Fontana. This character suggests that we establish the names of the 12 ships of the Enterprise Starship Class." from a response from Robert H Justman written on the following day and reprinted on the following page of TMOST (bold emphasis mine). In his memo, Justman also included the Constellation among the list of ships in the same class.
Firstly there were meant to be 12 ships like the Enterprise at the time of "Tomorrow is Yesterday" through to the end of the first season and at least partway into production of the second (based on the dates of the memos above). That includes the Enterprise (which also makes sense from uttered dialog, since if he meant 12 OTHERS like it, Kirk would have said so to Christopher).
Secondly, I think it is a sensible conclusion from DCF's and RHJ's memos that the intention was for Star Fleet to include (but not necessarily be limited to) 12 ships of the same class (whether we call it "Starship" or "Constitution" or even "Enterprise Starship" class). .
Thirdly, despite the frankly absurd suggestion that the AMT model of the Enterprise used to depict the Constellation in TDM is "proportionally different in exactly every aspect" from the 11 foot miniature must mean the Constellation was a different class of ship, even if that were not a gross exaggeration of the differences, it is clearly not what the creators intended.
The established facts versus debatable matters were fairly well laid out by Warped9 way back on the very first page of this thread, even though I disagree with him about it being "left up to the individual" as to the Constellation being the same class as Enterprise or not. As long as everyone wants to debate the debatable (you know, for fun
), then have at it. This is, after all, the Internets. But calling others obtuse for example (as one user here did) because they disagree with your position is asinine. Even if your position isn't completely untenable.
Last edited:
Bingo. They were modelling after the US Navy. The Federation losing a Connie was like the US losing an aircraft carrier. It was a big freakin deal because there weren't that many.
I'm seeing people using logic: Space is big! There had to be a lot of ships in Starfleet! Or people bringing in information from secondary sources. I'm trying to stick to what actually made it onscreen in TOS, and I'm not seeing a whole lot of reason to think there was much else in Starfleet after the 12 or so Connies.
I do see quite a bit of variation between the three. So I could see where someone may see the Constellation as another class or subclass.
The United States, in 1966 had seven Super Carriers, one under construction (John F. Kennedy), one nuclear powered carrier (Enterprise), three larger war built carriers (Midway class) and up to eighteen World Wars II era carriers still in service in some capacity. And five new helicopter carriers (Iwo Jima-class) with two more planned or under construction.
The Nimitz-class was authorized in 1967 and the first one wasn't finished until 1975. The soon to be commissioned USS Gerald R. Ford will be the United States' 12th Nuclear powered carrier, with the future Enterprise being the 14th.
The Nimitz-class was authorized in 1967 and the first one wasn't finished until 1975. The soon to be commissioned USS Gerald R. Ford will be the United States' 12th Nuclear powered carrier, with the future Enterprise being the 14th.
Last edited:
First of all, thanks to @Shaw for the model drafts he has posted here documenting the models. Based on his drawing posted above, here is a comparison of the side elevation of the big shooting model and the AMT kit:
Here is a chronological summary of the US fleet carriers (no escort or amphibious carriers):
Here is a chronological summary of the US fleet carriers (no escort or amphibious carriers):
That is one fantastic graphic.
I was just looking at the Norfolk Naval Base area on Google Earth. And it shows the Nimitz-class Truman and Roosevelt at the naval base docks. With the decommissioned Enterprise across over at Newport News with areas marked out on it's flight deck for removing it's eight reactors. With the new under construction Ford next to it.
I was just looking at the Norfolk Naval Base area on Google Earth. And it shows the Nimitz-class Truman and Roosevelt at the naval base docks. With the decommissioned Enterprise across over at Newport News with areas marked out on it's flight deck for removing it's eight reactors. With the new under construction Ford next to it.
Some were in decommissioned reserve, which is not reflected in the timeline. USN History and Heritage Command has a good page with historical levels of ships. The number of US carriers in service stabilizes at twelve between 1994 and 2007.
Also, just to remember the times, sixteen CVA carriers and one CVS made Vietnam combat deployments between 1964 and 1973, including six for Enterprise, the most of any Atlantic Fleet carrier. The anti-submarine carrier pressed into Vietnam service was another Trek name, Intrepid (three cruises), and Constellation also made six Vietnam cruises.
Agreed about the Starship/Carrier analogy. And, like the US Navy, the capital ships are not the only ships in the fleet. We can assume (and I'm sure we were meant to), that they were not the only ships in starfleet, and there were a goodly amount of smaller vessels scattered about the Federation on their own missions.
I know this is an unpopular view, but I think it is important to recognize that the Enterprise and Starfleet weren't intended to be the military of the Federation at the beginning of TOS (which should be read as not the only military).
One can look at Starfleet as playing the same role that the United States Coast Guard does today. In Kirk's original log entry for WNMHGB...
Compare that to the mission statement of the United States Coast Guard...
And their own self description...
Starships are far more like Coast Guard Cutters in their design and operation than like military vessels of the US Navy. In fact, I'd say that the original Enterprise (in design and intent) is more like today's USCGC Healy (WAGB-20) than any aircraft carrier. And by the same comparison, the United Earth Space Probe Agency is a lot like our National Science Foundation or National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. I would suggest watching these two videos on the Healy (here and here) to get a feel for her type of missions.
Why the change from intent to execution?
Well, to start, it was because compelling war stories are easier to turn out than science/research stories. And you can see this in the first season with the use of the recycled war story of Balance of Terror (from The Enemy Below). And the viewers (later fans) loved those stories.
This is where fans started injecting the tropes like the Enterprise was the flagship of the Federation or the most famous starship (in universe), or the Mary Sue turn that the characters (and the Enterprise herself) would take as time went on.
A great example of this change in the look and feel of the Enterprise as she appeared in Star Trek: The Motion Picture. What we saw was the equivalent of this...
The Enterprise started out with no weapons (or minimal weapons) to becoming this weapons platform where that was her most distinctive feature.
While fans some times say that Star Trek became like Star Wars after Star Wars... personally, fans were pushing to make Star Trek into a star wars while it was still on the air.
Honestly, the writers should have made a separate Federation Naval Force early on to help distinguish the Starfleet and it's part in the military hierarchy.
But (unfortunately) that starship sailed early on in Trek history.
One can look at Starfleet as playing the same role that the United States Coast Guard does today. In Kirk's original log entry for WNMHGB...
Enterprise Log, Captain James Kirk commanding.
We are leaving that vast cloud of stars and planets which we call our galaxy. Behind us, Earth, Mars, Venus... even our Sun, are specks of dust. A question... what is out there in the black void beyond?
Until now our mission has been that of space law regulation, contact with Earth colonies and investigation of alien life. But now, a new task... a probe out into where no man has gone before.
We are leaving that vast cloud of stars and planets which we call our galaxy. Behind us, Earth, Mars, Venus... even our Sun, are specks of dust. A question... what is out there in the black void beyond?
Until now our mission has been that of space law regulation, contact with Earth colonies and investigation of alien life. But now, a new task... a probe out into where no man has gone before.
Compare that to the mission statement of the United States Coast Guard...
For over two centuries the U.S. Coast Guard has safeguarded our Nation’s maritime interests in the heartland, in the ports, at sea, and around the globe. We protect the maritime economy and the environment, we defend our maritime borders, and we save those in peril. This history has forged our character and purpose as America’s Maritime Guardian — Always Ready for all hazards and all threats.
And their own self description...
The U.S. Coast Guard is one of the five armed forces of the United States and the only military organization within the Department of Homeland Security. Since 1790 the Coast Guard has safeguarded our Nation's maritime interests and environment around the world. The Coast Guard is an adaptable, responsive military force of maritime professionals whose broad legal authorities, capable assets, geographic diversity and expansive partnerships provide a persistent presence along our rivers, in the ports, littoral regions and on the high seas. Coast Guard presence and impact is local, regional, national and international. These attributes make the Coast Guard a unique instrument of maritime safety, security and environmental stewardship.
Starships are far more like Coast Guard Cutters in their design and operation than like military vessels of the US Navy. In fact, I'd say that the original Enterprise (in design and intent) is more like today's USCGC Healy (WAGB-20) than any aircraft carrier. And by the same comparison, the United Earth Space Probe Agency is a lot like our National Science Foundation or National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. I would suggest watching these two videos on the Healy (here and here) to get a feel for her type of missions.
Why the change from intent to execution?
Well, to start, it was because compelling war stories are easier to turn out than science/research stories. And you can see this in the first season with the use of the recycled war story of Balance of Terror (from The Enemy Below). And the viewers (later fans) loved those stories.
This is where fans started injecting the tropes like the Enterprise was the flagship of the Federation or the most famous starship (in universe), or the Mary Sue turn that the characters (and the Enterprise herself) would take as time went on.
A great example of this change in the look and feel of the Enterprise as she appeared in Star Trek: The Motion Picture. What we saw was the equivalent of this...
The Enterprise started out with no weapons (or minimal weapons) to becoming this weapons platform where that was her most distinctive feature.
While fans some times say that Star Trek became like Star Wars after Star Wars... personally, fans were pushing to make Star Trek into a star wars while it was still on the air.
Honestly, the writers should have made a separate Federation Naval Force early on to help distinguish the Starfleet and it's part in the military hierarchy.
But (unfortunately) that starship sailed early on in Trek history.
Shaw makes some good points and I agree. But at the same time, I think Starfleet was the Federation's only military for the same reason that Vulcans lived on the planet Vulcan and all spoke a language called Vulcan. And Scotty was Scottish, his surname was Scot, and his drink was Scotch. It was a simplified, shorthand version of things that was easier to write, and casual viewers could get it very quickly.
To be clear, I never made any statement regarding the creator's intent. I have no doubt that the intent was indeed that the Constellation was the exact same class as Enterprise. I was simply arguing that I choose to interpret differently.
And if you are a rivet-counting detail-obsessed model builder like me and you've ever tried to correct the AMT kit to make it a exact match to the 11-footer, you will learn that you can't do it out of the box. Literally every part needs some sort of modification. It factually is incorrectly proportioned in every way. I don't have time to list all the areas that are different. The overlaid silhouette J.T.B. posted shows some of the proportional differences, but that's only part of the story. Dig into it and there is a lot to change.
--Alex
^ I know someone who once claimed that they couldn't tell the difference between the 1701-Refit and the 1701-D. Even when I showed them pictures of each side by side.
I think (hope?) they were just messing with me, but they played it *really* seriously...
I think (hope?) they were just messing with me, but they played it *really* seriously...
Well then I swear Mr. Spock was a different character sometimes because of the different way his eyebrows and ear appliances were sometimes applied. I think it was sometimes actually his cousin Spork we were seeing.
All kidding aside, why would one expect all ships of the same class to be identical in every way? Ever compare the Titanic to the Olympic? Does anyone really believe there aren't design differences between ships of the same class in the U.S. Navy (or Coast Guard)?
All kidding aside, why would one expect all ships of the same class to be identical in every way? Ever compare the Titanic to the Olympic? Does anyone really believe there aren't design differences between ships of the same class in the U.S. Navy (or Coast Guard
)?
Last edited:
On a similar note, when I originally went to see Generations in the theaters, my gf at the time (who was not a Trek fan), couldn't tell the difference between the Enterprise-B and the Enterprise-D. She thought Picard was just an older version of Harriman, and asked me after the movie was over why all of a sudden he changed from an American to an Englishman
- Status
Similar threads
