Right, but that line will never be the same.
I'm practically a canon extremist, but there is absolutely nothing about this name that bothers me.
Star Trek Picard Season 3 End Credits - Legacy Ships at Earth Spacedock?
- Thread starter Admiral Archer
- Start date
Right, but that line will never be the same.
I'm practically a canon extremist, but there is absolutely nothing about this name that bothers me.
Again, proving my point. And it's a fascinating line to discover for individual people, yet hilariously, fans insist upon using "we" as if we have consensus on what actually counts towards continuity.
It's not. Lord Terry just doesn't know what the word refit means. Case in point, in season 2 the new Stargazer is referred to as a refit, yet in season 3 the original Stargazer can be seen in at the Museum.
Yeah, it seems obvious since he made the same mistake twice that Matlas believes “refit” means “new ship that’s based on an old ship”.
Constitution-III is what's written on the dedication plaque, but I'm guessing Terry or someone didn't like that name and changed it to Neo Constitution during Post-Production.
The line of dialogue where Riker says 'Neo Constitution' sounds like it was recorded on a different day from the rest of the lines in that sequence.
Mind you when he says that line the camera is not looking at him, it's an exterior VFX shot looking at the ship, so that could also be why it sounds like it was recorded later.
The line of dialogue where Riker says 'Neo Constitution' sounds like it was recorded on a different day from the rest of the lines in that sequence.
Mind you when he says that line the camera is not looking at him, it's an exterior VFX shot looking at the ship, so that could also be why it sounds like it was recorded later.
Last edited:
So how do we actually define refit? Does 90% of the ship's structure have to remain intact? Or 80%? 70%?
Whenever I've looked at the TMP Enterprise I cannot see how the real-world definition of "refit" could ever work on it. I just can't see it as anything but a new ship, possibly with parts from the old one. The superstructure couldn't remain intact to get the shapes we're seeing.
So using that logic, and knowing Picard’s old Stargazer is inoperable, why couldn't they have gutted it for parts to make a new Stargazer? A bit like an old car with the engine removed, but on a larger scale.
It's a genuine enigma that I've always wanted to understand.
That'd be like building a modern Mustang GT out of parts from a 32 Ford. They both have 4 wheels and a V-8, but that's pretty much where the similarities end.
Last edited:
Ok, the engine alone was a bad example.
Along with the V-8 and the wheels, take out all the wiring, reupholster the seats, take the fuel tank, repurpose the exhaust, dash, steering wheel etc. Basically, just leave the body intact and take anything that isn't part of the chassis.
Not literally going to make a modern GT from those parts ofc, but put it into Star Trek and consider what the minimum threshold for refit classification would be. I mean, you're using any part that won't accidentally make the nacelles detach, sort of thing. Or does it always have to be the exterior that gets used too?
Refit is when you take an existing ship and make changes to it. Both the new Stargazer and the Titan A are brand new ships, newly constructed. Therefore not refits, regardless what sloppily written dialogue might indicate.
Even if the new Stargazer were built from parts gutted from the original, that still wouldn't make it a refit.
There shouldn't really be a debate on what counts towards continuity... that's up to Paramount/creators.
Rather it's more "we" don't have a consensus about how much we care about canon.
Yes... it is certainly an oddity and perhaps oversight on Matalas' part.
Although Titan is different from Stargazer.
Sounds like a "refit" to me? It's an extreme refit, but a refit nonetheless.
The Titan-A is a "newly constructed ship"... built from the core of the Luna-Class Titan.
It's all really just a semantics game and in the grand scheme is largely irrelevant.
I can somewhat excuse the Stargazer... only Picard called it a "refit", and there is a on odd long-standing thing in Trek (and every fandom, but I know Trek the best) where anything a character ever says sis 100% gospel truth and nobody ever makes a mistake or misspeaks ever.
90-some odd year old Picard called the new Stargazer a refit when it... probably was not actually a refit. My 39-some odd year ass has misspoken worse this morning than that.
And yet...
Indeed. This isn't even a ship of Theseus discussion.
I would tend to disagree, but only on the basis that we still haven't seen a refit happen. The engineering behind it isn't defined on screen.
It's like the Gorn, we never saw how they were born, so the depiction shown in SNW is still hard to grasp for some.
Some..we just assume words have a new meaning?
Because a refit has a specific meaning in regards to ships in the real world.
Maybe? Like I said, I don't know how a refit is defined in a fictional 23rd or 25th century.
There was nothing of any substance left of the TOS Enterprise when the refit happened. I can't recognise a single piece of the hull from before.
Not really. CBS/Paramount plays fast and loose with continuity, and cares far less about it than the fans do. Therefore, it can absolutely be up to any individual's interpretation of what they're seeing on screen as the 'reality' of this fictional universe.
Neither can I, but since we don't see the process we have to take an Occam's Razor approach and look at it from a real world influence.Maybe? Like I said, I don't know how a refit is defined in a fictional 23rd or 25th century.
There was nothing of any substance left of the TOS Enterprise when the refit happened. I can't recognise a single piece of the hull from before.
The USS MIDWAY had a new top deck put on and other hull modifications. That's a refit.
In the case of the refit Enterprise, Occam's Razor for me would be Decker's line about it being an almost totally new ship.Neither can I, but since we don't see the process we have to take an Occam's Razor approach and look at it from a real world influence.
The USS MIDWAY had a new top deck put on and other hull modifications. That's a refit.
USS Midway is a good example of real world refits, sure.
I would agree to a point, but my point is that from a real world perspective there are still bones of the old ship in there.In the case of the refit Enterprise, Occam's Razor for me would be Decker's line about it being an almost totally new ship.
USS Midway is a good example of real world refits, sure.
With the Stargazer or Titan its' like "Oh, we took these parts and made a new ship. Total refit." It sounds oddball.
Granted, from a totally purist perspective it wasn't accurate.
Similar threads
