last as long as the enterprise?.

[Captain Robert April]

EVERY Enterprise is considered a special ship. That includes the aircraft carriers.

 

[Vance]

Still, there's no denying that the E was considered a special ship.

"As fast as any" still means that she was considered one of the fastest. This is driven home by TSFS, of course. But how can anyone realistically say that Kirk didn't hold her in high esteem?

"Never lose you," isn't something you say about things you don't give a shit about, and there's more than one episode that Kirk's love for his ship is how the main plot is resolved!

 

[Forbin]

(e.g., "No, there are 12 others like her which would eventually catch you and drag you to the nearest Starbase!").

Not twelve others like it, "only twelve like it."
Meaning twelve total, including the Enterprise.

 

[YARN]

(e.g., "No, there are 12 others like her which would eventually catch you and drag you to the nearest Starbase!").

Not twelve others like it, "only twelve like it."
Meaning twelve total, including the Enterprise.

KIRK: There are only twelve like it in the fleet. (Tomorrow is Yesterday)

We are not told whether or not the Enterprise should be counted in or out of this sum. The line is ambiguous.

http://www.ditl.org/index.php?daymain=/pagarticle.php?15

 

[Forbin]

Yup, the line has been argued over ad infinitum. My personal reading is that "twelve like it" means 12 total, including the E. If he'd meant 12 more, he'd have said "12 more like it," or "12 others like it." To me, to the way I speak, to the way I understand the English language, 12 total is the only thing it could mean. I understand others feel differently.

 

[Mark 2000]

I don't see how only having 12 of these - at the time - enormous, powerful ships in your fleet means they were a failure as a line. They were probably all they could afford to build. Right now the US only has 10 aircraft carriers in active duty. I think Kirk's line that there's only 12 like them was meant to make us realize how powerful and special these ships are. Kirk seemed to be boasting when he said it. "There's only 12 and I've got one!"

And we see this again in TNG where it's proudly stated that there are only so many Galaxy Class ships.

 

[Forbin]

^Yes, exactly.

 

[YARN]

I don't see how only having 12 of these - at the time - enormous, powerful ships in your fleet means they were a failure as a line. They were probably all they could afford to build. Right now the US only has 10 aircraft carriers in active duty. I think Kirk's line that there's only 12 like them was meant to make us realize how powerful and special these ships are. Kirk seemed to be boasting when he said it. "There's only 12 and I've got one!"

And we see this again in TNG where it's proudly stated that there are only so many Galaxy Class ships.

It's funny that Timo doesn't think that there is anything belittling about saying

Shouldn't the ship only gain in prestige if she represents a successful class of 57, rather than an irrelevant and abortive batch of thirteen?

 

[Captain Robert April]

I stopped trying to figure out Timo's thought processes a while ago...

 

[Forbin]

They are extensive, arcane and elusive, like the gossamer plasma wings of an Arcturan mega-moth...

 

[antiquityscion]

I think I recall reading somewhere (eons ago, btw) that there were supposed to have been 12 starships of the Constitution Class. Perhaps Roddenberry mentioned this in Stephen E. Whitfield’s excellent book “The Making of Star Trek”. I also have something tugging at my consciousness – a dim memory of a passing line of dialog in a TOS episode that refers to the “12 Starship Class vessels” in the fleet. Am I imagining this? Any light that anybody can shed would be great.

FWIW, I can remember the following being mentioned or depicted in TOS: Republic, Potemkin, Farragut, Intrepid, Lexington, Hood, Excalibur, Yorktown, Exeter, Constellation, and Defiant. That makes 11 and, of course, Enterprise is the 12th. If this information can be considered canonical, then I suppose the viewers are to assume that Constitution was a 23rd Century equivalent to our space shuttle Enterprise (i.e. a prototype but not spaceworthy).

In any case, we hear many of these ship names referred to in subsequent ST series. Does anyone think it was the producers’ intention to imply that original Constitution Class ships had undergone refits like Enterprise and perhaps stayed in service for an extremely long time?

I think I recall reading somewhere (eons ago, btw) that there were supposed to have been 12 starships of the Constitution Class. Perhaps Roddenberry mentioned this in Stephen E. Whitfield’s excellent book “The Making of Star Trek”. I also have something tugging at my consciousness – a dim memory of a passing line of dialog in a TOS episode that refers to the “12 Starship Class vessels” in the fleet. Am I imagining this? Any light that anybody can shed would be great.

In Tomorrow is Yesterday, when Capt Christopher comments on the Enterprise, Kirk says, "There are only twelve like her in the fleet."

I suppose it is possible that during TOS, there were only 12 Constitution class vessels, but after Kirks first 5 year mission, it is conceivable that star fleet put an order in for more to be built. Then variants were also introduced, particularly refit-style Constitution class (built from ground up in refit style) and Reliant class.

 

[YARN]

I'd think that ship types would become outmoded pretty fast.

With each new contact with an advanced society there is a chance for a technological exchange which changes the game.

It's bad enough living in just one world where today's technology is laughed at as antiquated within a few years. In Star Trek you'd think it would be even worse. "Hey, the Intrepid just came back with new technology from Quibble-Twas 3! They figured out that whole warp engines the size of walnuts after all! But, we just finished building our latest batch of ships. Damn!!!!"

 

[cblmc1296]

I'd think that ship types would become outmoded pretty fast.

With each new contact with an advanced society there is a chance for a technological exchange which changes the game.

It's bad enough living in just one world where today's technology is laughed at as antiquated within a few years. In Star Trek you'd think it would be even worse. "Hey, the Intrepid just came back with new technology from Quibble-Twas 3! They figured out that whole warp engines the size of walnuts after all! But, we just finished building our latest batch of ships. Damn!!!!"

I think since Starfleet is depicted as a military organization, it does make sense (especially in light of what today's military does) that ships of the line might be in service for a good many years. Even though it's pointed out many times in ST that the economics of the future are different, construction contracts for new ships would probably be a lot less common than refits of existing ships. IMHO.

 

[antiquityscion]

I'd think that ship types would become outmoded pretty fast.

With each new contact with an advanced society there is a chance for a technological exchange which changes the game.

It's bad enough living in just one world where today's technology is laughed at as antiquated within a few years. In Star Trek you'd think it would be even worse. "Hey, the Intrepid just came back with new technology from Quibble-Twas 3! They figured out that whole warp engines the size of walnuts after all! But, we just finished building our latest batch of ships. Damn!!!!"

I think since Starfleet is depicted as a military organization, it does make sense (especially in light of what today's military does) that ships of the line might be in service for a good many years. Even though it's pointed out many times in ST that the economics of the future are different, construction contracts for new ships would probably be a lot less common than refits of existing ships. IMHO.

agreed. I am sure ships will have new tech constantly added at each major port stop for service and repair (much as seen in Enterprise, when weapons were upgraded), but I think it makes more sense if a ship class stays in service for a number of years, easily 3-4 decades, with constant variants being introduced. You can cite naval ships as real world examples, but also look at the jets in military and civilian service. B52s have been and are expected to be in service for many years to come, and are approaching 60 years (invented in 1952, in service since 55). F4 Phantoms, f14 Tomcats, f15s,f16s and A10 warthogs are other examples of war jets receiving up upgrades to extend past their expected service life. Heck, the space shuttle was on the drawing boards in the mid 1960s, and are just now being retired (had budget concerns not prevailed, possibly have served longer). finally, dc10sw, 737s, and 747s are still running strong, as well as many Russian Aeroflot jets, and European Airbuses.

So, it would stand to reason that ship classes would fare just as long, if not longer. In fact, the constitution class should have lasted as long as the Reliant class, although I chalk their retirement as a class due to Kitomer peace accords demanding certain star ship classes being retired, than obsolescence. But that is another topic altogether.

 

[cblmc1296]

^^^Love it when things come full circle. I've kinda forgotten the exact nature of the OP's first post but it was definitely about that very concept - Enterprise being in service for some 4 decades.

 

[antiquityscion]

^^^Love it when things come full circle. I've kinda forgotten the exact nature of the OP's first post but it was definitely about that very concept - Enterprise being in service for some 4 decades.

Well, IMHO, if we are to expect technology to only improve by the 23-24 century, that means things last longer, and ships should be more modular, where upgrades can be made easily to keep them in service as long as possible.

For example, in Relics (TNG) LaForge points out that Scotty's ship would probably still be in service (talking 70+ years, there) had it not crashed into the Dyson Sphere, and that all the technology from Scotty's time was essentially the same, on an operating level. I mean, there are only so many ways to build a star ship, and as long as the structural integrity holds up, and the design itself can keep up with the technological upgrades, I really think the idea of the Enterprise retiring after 40 years due to obsolescence (barring pesky things like running afoul of Klingons or self destructs :P ) is really kind of a plot hole, if it is a well maintained ship. Hence, why I am a fan of the fan theory that there were other reasons to retire the Enterprise and constitution class, like a treaty with Klingons, Romulans, or what have you (sort of like Salt 1 or 2, treaties between the USA and USSR).

 

[cblmc1296]

^^^Seems reasonable. :-)

 

[YARN]

.