That wasn't the intent, though. The intent was that the Constellation was the same class as the Enterprise. It was not the fault of the filmmakers that the model kit was not accurate.
That Starbase 11 wall chart - noe in slide form
- Thread starter ChallengerHK
- Start date
That wasn't the intent, though. The intent was that the Constellation was the same class as the Enterprise. It was not the fault of the filmmakers that the model kit was not accurate.
We know Starfleet does it thanks to Lower Decks and the California and Texas classes. The Luna class as well, but that's not made explicit on screen. Runabouts are also a themed name class, but aren't called "Rivers class".
I’m not sure what the intent was. Nobody is. If the number preceded the model, the intent might very well have been that the ship be entirely different. (I recall reading accounts of the production of that episode that say the original idea was a different ship, but I also recall those accounts weren’t substantiated by what I would consider reliable links back to their production sources. And unfortunately I can’t find them anymore.) There WERE shortcuts taken, as in Spinrad’s directions for how the planet killer was to look being ignored in favor of the expedient “windsock in concrete” approach. So the art was rushed.
The point is, if that AMT model was the intent all along, and time had been taken to make a decal or paint the ship with “U.S.S. Constellation”, why wouldn’t a little more time be taken to make a number for this model that reflects what had been on that first season status chart- 16xx and 17xx numbers? Why willfully go against what you had just established?
It doesn’t make sense. What does make sense is that there was a communication breakdown. It was supposed to have been 1710 or 1707 or 1700 or 1711 but not 1017.
That is, UNLESS the instructions were written for a different looking ship and this model got used as an expedient. In that case, decals for one thing got used for another.
There is an interesting sketch among Jefferies’ drawings that shows a fully developed Enterprise saucer with TMP-looking pylons coming out of its impulse area, and half-cylinder nacelles. It clearly got drawn after the Enterprise had been designed. It looks like it is either being pulled by a tug or has a nose module attached to the saucer. I have always wondered whether THAT was supposed to be Constellation.
It doesn't take a rocket scientist to establish their intent. If they wanted the Constellation to be a different type of ship, they would have made modifications to the model kit to clearly indicate that. The fact that they built the model to look 100% like how it should have looked, with the idea that the model represented the same type of ship as the Enterprise because, well, it was an Enterprise model kit, not to mention that there was no dialogue to indicate it was a different type of ship, and that they used the same interior sets for the ship, clearly indicates that they meant for it to be the same type of ship. The specific use of '1017' probably had little thought behind it other than to make it as different from the Enterprise's number as possible, or the person who applied the decals simply didn't know or give a crap about any established numbering system.
Making Constellation the same class as the Enterprise established that the planet killer was a danger to the Enterprise without devoting one second of dialog to establish that point. It was very efficient storytelling, and it raised the stakes in the debates about who was in charge of the Enterprise and what their course of action should be.
Yep. Same reason why they used the Galaxy class Enterprise-D model for the USS Odyssey in 'The Jem' Hadar.' If they could easily destroy a Galaxy class starship (the most powerful starship they had at the time) by ramming into it, what chance did the Federation have against the Dominion?
That and the fanatacism of sacrificing their Jem'Hadar at any cost to win.
Which doesn't really contradict anything in existing TOS lore. It was never said what class of ship the Farragut was in the actual show.
I do give them credit for using the registry from Greg Jein's article however. Though they probably just grabbed that from Memory-Beta or Memory-Alpha's background section on the ship.
Yeah, no. That's because they're making a TV show, that stuff should always come second to the story.
Leave the hard technical details to the tie-in media and/or the fans online.
Yeah, I always thought that both the Farragut and the Republic were two different classes of ship unrelated to the Constitution class.
That wasn't really his point. He was talking about extrapolating the wall chart based solely on information from TOS, not from some other show made 50 years later that has nothing whatsoever to do with it.
Was anybody here actually doing that? What I was participating in was a very narrow discussion, a sidebar if you will, regarding what ships have been canonically established as Constitution-class. That sidebar discussion was kicked off by someone who was out of the gate admitting TNG+, PIC, etc., not to mention TOS-R too, none of which existed when the chart was made.
For that matter, NCC-1017 wasn't even on the board when "Court Martial" was made.
Last edited:
Just my two cents, but the Constellation fits nicely enough if you go with the idea that the Enterprise was a ship with "some history", if I recall Roddenberry properly. The use of "The Cage" in a wrapper was both expedient and helped flesh out the universe in exactly that manner. But, if the Enterprise was already mature in the 2250s (to use the later-established dating scheme) and not an early example of her class, then 1017 could easily fit as a much earlier build ... AMT warts and all. _There could even be an even earlier rendition_.
Thus, I have long dated the Constitution Class as a long-serving type from much earlier than even 2245, the Enterprise a later build thereof . . . which fits nicely with the later (if lazy) continued batches of Excelsiors and Mirandas. The Miranda, to my mind twenty-ish years ago, largely replaced the Constitution owing to her equivalent volume and more efficient platform, without the literal bottleneck neck likely required for the ships that predated reliable warp core ejection technolgy.
To bring all this back around to the chart, then, I always went with the common presumption and never really cared for the idea of the Starbase 11 chart showing other information besides the obvious ... it's a repair base and ought to be showing repairs, right? However, I now think this has been the wrong idea the whole time. Just as later shows featured assorted "Starship Mission Status" or "Starship Mission Assignment" charts (even on starbases in random reallocated rooms per another courtroom drama episode), so does this one. After all, when we first see the chart, Kirk appears to just be reporting in to Commodore Stone. The Enterprise almost certainly hadn't begun repairs much less completed them to ~80% . . . or, alternately, certainly wasn't battered down to ~80% status of hull/systems if the repairs were only going to take a "couple of days".
As such, this is a mission status chart. Not the five year mission . . . "Court Martial" is first season and Stardate 29XX . . . but whatever she was up to, she was ~80% done when the ion storm incident happened. And for whatever reason, Stone had a list of several Constitutions on his chart. Indeed, perhaps they were, in fact, *all* Constitutions of the 2240-2245 vintage (_assuming a ~20ish NCC per year rate_), spread across various locations, or various starships of that vintage within Starbase 11's sphere of influence. (Only the Intrepid was apparently present in dialog and on the TOR version, and she apparently departed quickly enough to not be around to save the Enterprise from orbital decay later ... which also supports the absence of the other ships.) That would fit 1631 through 1718, though Potemkin 1657 is missing . . . perhaps not on a mission at the time due to refit or what-have-you.
In any case, after previously finding the whole use of the chart an embarrassment by Jein and Okuda, I've 180'ed my opinion. They just needed to drop the idea it was a repair status at the base and it totally worked. Thank goodness Okuda didn't show the other ships be thought were around for the remaster.
Thus, I have long dated the Constitution Class as a long-serving type from much earlier than even 2245, the Enterprise a later build thereof . . . which fits nicely with the later (if lazy) continued batches of Excelsiors and Mirandas. The Miranda, to my mind twenty-ish years ago, largely replaced the Constitution owing to her equivalent volume and more efficient platform, without the literal bottleneck neck likely required for the ships that predated reliable warp core ejection technolgy.
To bring all this back around to the chart, then, I always went with the common presumption and never really cared for the idea of the Starbase 11 chart showing other information besides the obvious ... it's a repair base and ought to be showing repairs, right? However, I now think this has been the wrong idea the whole time. Just as later shows featured assorted "Starship Mission Status" or "Starship Mission Assignment" charts (even on starbases in random reallocated rooms per another courtroom drama episode), so does this one. After all, when we first see the chart, Kirk appears to just be reporting in to Commodore Stone. The Enterprise almost certainly hadn't begun repairs much less completed them to ~80% . . . or, alternately, certainly wasn't battered down to ~80% status of hull/systems if the repairs were only going to take a "couple of days".
As such, this is a mission status chart. Not the five year mission . . . "Court Martial" is first season and Stardate 29XX . . . but whatever she was up to, she was ~80% done when the ion storm incident happened. And for whatever reason, Stone had a list of several Constitutions on his chart. Indeed, perhaps they were, in fact, *all* Constitutions of the 2240-2245 vintage (_assuming a ~20ish NCC per year rate_), spread across various locations, or various starships of that vintage within Starbase 11's sphere of influence. (Only the Intrepid was apparently present in dialog and on the TOR version, and she apparently departed quickly enough to not be around to save the Enterprise from orbital decay later ... which also supports the absence of the other ships.) That would fit 1631 through 1718, though Potemkin 1657 is missing . . . perhaps not on a mission at the time due to refit or what-have-you.
In any case, after previously finding the whole use of the chart an embarrassment by Jein and Okuda, I've 180'ed my opinion. They just needed to drop the idea it was a repair status at the base and it totally worked. Thank goodness Okuda didn't show the other ships be thought were around for the remaster.
Well I've always assumed—and I believe rightfully so—that the chart was supposed to be some window dressing to make Starbase 11 seem real. Dialog mentions repair work, and "NCC 1701" is on the chart. So, it's not an unwarranted leap to think that the chart exists primarily, exclusively really, to support what the story's about, which is that the Enterprise is under repair. It's basically a maxim that things don't exist in theater unless it relates to the story (for example, see Chekhov's Gun, the original meaning).
Now, it's decades later, the franchise is sprawling, and to make sense of everything we have to face square pegs and round holes. My take is that it's never going to fit together in a perfectly coherent way. That's asking too much. There have been too many people working on the shows with too many different ideas, not all singing from the same sheet music, and we are basically three generations removed now from the original.
Now, it's decades later, the franchise is sprawling, and to make sense of everything we have to face square pegs and round holes. My take is that it's never going to fit together in a perfectly coherent way. That's asking too much. There have been too many people working on the shows with too many different ideas, not all singing from the same sheet music, and we are basically three generations removed now from the original.
Last edited:
I'm not sure why anyone wouldn't assume that those ten ships were at that starbase because they were all undergoing repairs, because, as was mentioned above, that's what the story was about. I mean, what else would that chart be indicating?
The issue isn't really what they were there for. The issue is if they were all Constitutions. If Kirk mentioned that there were only twelve Constitution class starships in the fleet, then either:
1. That particular starbase was meant to repair only Constitution class ships, or
2. The ships on that list were not all Constitutions.
So let's say that option 1 is the correct one. Why have ten of your twelve Connies in one place at one time, and all essentially offline? Are they all getting repairs/upgrades/etc. at the same time? That would put them all at risk of being attacked by enemy forces in one place. Wouldn't it make more sense to stagger the repairs so that you don't have the bulk of your most advanced ships in one place and vulnerable to enemy attack?
Let's say option 2 is the correct one. If we assume that all Constitution class ships are NCC-17XX, then five of the twelve ships are there. Not as bad as above, but still uncomfortable having that many Connies offline at one time. But for all we know, Starfleet built 100 NCC-16XX starships, so having only five of those offline wasn't a problem, and Starfleet could still operate just fine with the other ninety-five 16XX ships at their disposal.
The issue isn't really what they were there for. The issue is if they were all Constitutions. If Kirk mentioned that there were only twelve Constitution class starships in the fleet, then either:
1. That particular starbase was meant to repair only Constitution class ships, or
2. The ships on that list were not all Constitutions.
So let's say that option 1 is the correct one. Why have ten of your twelve Connies in one place at one time, and all essentially offline? Are they all getting repairs/upgrades/etc. at the same time? That would put them all at risk of being attacked by enemy forces in one place. Wouldn't it make more sense to stagger the repairs so that you don't have the bulk of your most advanced ships in one place and vulnerable to enemy attack?
Let's say option 2 is the correct one. If we assume that all Constitution class ships are NCC-17XX, then five of the twelve ships are there. Not as bad as above, but still uncomfortable having that many Connies offline at one time. But for all we know, Starfleet built 100 NCC-16XX starships, so having only five of those offline wasn't a problem, and Starfleet could still operate just fine with the other ninety-five 16XX ships at their disposal.
Last edited:
So many replies. And no replies to this. On the one hand, it was important it look like Enterprise to establish the threat to Enterprise. On the other hand, getting the number to match all the other numbers they had painstakingly chartpacked onto this status board was a detail left to tie in media and fans online (when no tie in media or fans online yet existed).
The demonstrable fact is, TOS took the issue of verisimilitude seriously. They researched and ruminated for a year before they committed anything to film. Maybe the intent all along was to use the AMT kit because they believed it important to establish the threat. Maybe the intent in drawing this status chart was to show a base with a bunch of starships like Enterprise being serviced. But… if they went to the trouble to put only 16xx and 17xx ships on the chart, but didn’t give a damn when it came time to paint numbers on the hull, something doesn’t fit. You can say one thing was important and they didn’t give a damn about the other and that might be good enough for you. But it doesn’t make sense to me. I think either
1) it was a mistake and there just wasn’t time to correct it
2) it reflected an earlier intention for Constellation to look different from Enterprise to reduce confusion
3) a combination of the two- using the AMT model as is was more expedient than using just the saucer to build a different ship, but the problem of distinguishing Constellation from Enterprise remained and 1017 was more distinctive than... 1631? 1647? (Remember- they made a decal or painted “U.S.S. CONSTELLATION” so a NCC-1647 would have been a cinch and would have looked a hell of a lot more distinctive than 1017, which uses all the same numbers as 1701.)
The intent was either a different look than Enterprise or a number that fit this status chart. But the reality ended up being neither. That’s Hollywood. But it isn’t what a Trek Tech discussion is about. If it is important whether a ship is 1831 or 1631, then it is even more important whether 1017 or the AMT kit is what they really wanted. Because 1017 is what screws up this chart, in universe.
At least, to me.
I'm not sure if an early intention for the Constellation to be distinct from the Enterprise survived to the script.
Per dialogue, she's "By configuration, a starship", which as we've seen likely means a ship like the Enterprise. She's got ~400 crew, the same as the Enterprise accounting for usual variances or battle casualties.
And in the script, she's described as an "Enterprise-class starship". The number isn't given AFAIK.
I suspect the reality is that it was a tight production schedule and everyone did the best they could. The people who created the set dressing for Court Martial were likely not the people who built and labelled the Constellation model. Why would they know what the chart said? It was a year later and the set was struck. Were they even aware of Jefferies original thinking about the number?
They had to stencil the new name by hand, but could simply use the existing decals for the number, which they did in the easiest way possible - they didn't even make one additional cut and number the ship NCC-1710 which would have saved us all a lot of heartache! But it could have been worse - they could have picked 7011.
Would be interesting to know if there were any memos about this, but I suspect not. We've discussed that the costuming error with the starship emblems wasn't caught until well after the fact. It seems likely that the same was the case with the number. So we've now got two examples of design intent not making it through to the episode.
Per dialogue, she's "By configuration, a starship", which as we've seen likely means a ship like the Enterprise. She's got ~400 crew, the same as the Enterprise accounting for usual variances or battle casualties.
And in the script, she's described as an "Enterprise-class starship". The number isn't given AFAIK.
I suspect the reality is that it was a tight production schedule and everyone did the best they could. The people who created the set dressing for Court Martial were likely not the people who built and labelled the Constellation model. Why would they know what the chart said? It was a year later and the set was struck. Were they even aware of Jefferies original thinking about the number?
They had to stencil the new name by hand, but could simply use the existing decals for the number, which they did in the easiest way possible - they didn't even make one additional cut and number the ship NCC-1710 which would have saved us all a lot of heartache! But it could have been worse - they could have picked 7011.
Would be interesting to know if there were any memos about this, but I suspect not. We've discussed that the costuming error with the starship emblems wasn't caught until well after the fact. It seems likely that the same was the case with the number. So we've now got two examples of design intent not making it through to the episode.
Last edited:
Hmm, why would Stone use a chart showing starships spread throughout the galaxy to determine which maintenance section is to be assigned to the Enterprise? Because the scene shows that he is consulting a chart of assets under his care in order to make a choice.
---------
And, TBH, I think this chart has taken on an importance among fans that probably wasn't there during production. It was set dressing for one scene and likely forgotten. At least no production memos have ever surfaced AFAIK that reference it. Readability on TV sets and clarity—this is not the Enterprise—probably ruled the day in the case of the 1017, not some chart from an episode made in the middle of the previous season.
We do know what MJ had in mind, but IIRC, we know that from one drawing and some post-TOS interviews.
---------
And, TBH, I think this chart has taken on an importance among fans that probably wasn't there during production. It was set dressing for one scene and likely forgotten. At least no production memos have ever surfaced AFAIK that reference it. Readability on TV sets and clarity—this is not the Enterprise—probably ruled the day in the case of the 1017, not some chart from an episode made in the middle of the previous season.
We do know what MJ had in mind, but IIRC, we know that from one drawing and some post-TOS interviews.
Last edited:
I think it was the Heavy Cruiser Evolution blueprints, they had the Constellation as originally a Horizon/Archon-class ship (their version of what became the Daedalus) and over the course of huge refits over the years, eventually became a Constitution-class. All to explain a weird low number.
IIRC, STVI graphics or perhaps the "Operation Retrieve" plan had the Constitution-class Eagle with a number in the 900's.
IIRC, STVI graphics or perhaps the "Operation Retrieve" plan had the Constitution-class Eagle with a number in the 900's.
Eagle was only identified by a silhouette, which could therefore be a different ship with a similar footprint.
It's a funny one, because Okuda usually took numbers from Jein's list, or the SFTM. This one he freelanced for some reason, making it something of an oddity.
In his ubiquitous mission assignment chart, Eagle is listed as "colony resupply", perhaps suggesting a second-rate ship relegated to a support role. But then she probably wouldn't be first pick for a daring raid into the heart of the Klingon Empire!
It's a funny one, because Okuda usually took numbers from Jein's list, or the SFTM. This one he freelanced for some reason, making it something of an oddity.
In his ubiquitous mission assignment chart, Eagle is listed as "colony resupply", perhaps suggesting a second-rate ship relegated to a support role. But then she probably wouldn't be first pick for a daring raid into the heart of the Klingon Empire!
Last edited:
At the risk of provoking certain debates, it's possible that "colony resupply ship" might be used to drop personnel and/or equipment* during the operation rather than being one of the ships engaging Klingon warships in combat.
*Perhaps similar to the company from The Siege of AR-558, but optimised for polar operations rather than SIGINT/base defence.
