Franz Joseph Blueprints Revisited

[ZapBrannigan]

Pike suffered injuries on a cadet vessel that was an "old Class J Starship" in "The Menagerie". That would indicate there must be at least one other class of starship other than the one the Enterprise belongs to. Well unless the Enterprise was also an "old class J" which I doubt.

I think Class J is just Starfleet slang for "junk." So it could be a starship much like the Enterprise, but older and going out of commission.

My theory is supported by Harry Mudd flying "a small Class J cargo ship." Spock had to specify small and cargo, because "Class J" only told you it was a piece of junk in Spock's estimation.

 

[blssdwlf]

Pike suffered injuries on a cadet vessel that was an "old Class J Starship" in "The Menagerie". That would indicate there must be at least one other class of starship other than the one the Enterprise belongs to. Well unless the Enterprise was also an "old class J" which I doubt.

I think Class J is just Starfleet slang for "junk." So it could be a ship much like the Enterprise, but older and going out of commission.

Like Mudd's Class J as well Anyway it still means that even back then they were thinking of more than one class or flavor of starship. The Enterprise and her specific "Starship Class" starships had 12 active but there was room for other starships to exist as well.

 

[CorporalCaptain]

Perhaps there were starships, and then there were Starships. Maybe a Starship was a starship's starship.

 

[Robert Comsol]

All your points are worth considering. Ultimately, I don't think the evidence that the Enterprise is some class of vessel other than a Constitution class is actually very compelling. The evidence of that seems to be somewhat circumstantial and inconclusive.

But considering Matt Jefferies' preproduction sketch (if you seriously want to chalk it up and declare it as "fraud", you'd better come up with some solid evidence, please) and the "Enterprise Class" statements in The Making of Star Trek it's less circumstantial or inconclusive than "Constitution Class", especially considering how this one made it into the world and is now defended at all cost and the expense of the original series' creators and producers:

• The creator of the Enterprise didn't know what he was doing (sketch indicating Enterprise to be the 17th design and the first in the series or "the first bird")
• Producer Bob Justman didn't know what he was doing ("Enterprise Class")
• Stephen E. Whitfield didn't know what he was doing ("Enterprise Class Starship")

While you and others create a lot of imaginative interpretations why the Enterprise should be a starship of the Constitution Class ("NCC-1700") you fail to comment how these starship registries on the starship status display in "Court-Martial" beginning with a prefix of "16" could seriously belong to a class that supposedly began with "17".

Greg Jein didn't reflect on this issue when he first wrote his treatise, but later - when approached with the issue of the "complete" bars on the starship status display - he conceded that a low "complete" bar could indicate a starship just being built and the lowest bar on this display was that of "1700"! (being the farthest from "complete").
According to Jefferies' nomenclature that would have been a new starship whose last two digits hadn't been determined, yet.

A logical conclusion, especially considering TOS-R, would have been that the Constitution's prefix began with a "16", too.

The "Space Seed" script mentioned "Constitution Class Starship" and everybody involved with the production would have wondered "What the heck is a Constitution Class Starship" especially since the bridge dedication plaque said "Starship Class".

The simple answer comes from the script itself and Khan stating that he has read several manuals of several starships, of which one obviously belonged to a Constitution Class. Thus, the Constitution Class was merely adding some "flavor" to the fictional universe of Star Trek. If you invoke Occam's Razor, please apply it accordingly.

Bob

 

[GSchnitzer]

Greg Jein didn't reflect on this issue when he first wrote his treatise, but later - when approached with the issue of the "complete" bars on the starship status display - he conceded that a low "complete" bar could indicate a starship just being built and the lowest bar on this display was that of "1700"! (being the farthest from "complete").

Why do you think the "Court Martial" chart shows ships being built? (Or, I guess, more accurately, why do you think that Greg Jein speculated that the bars on the "Star Ship Status" chart shows ships being built?) "The Case of Jonathan Doe Starship" makes reference to "ships in port and undergoing repair," but it doesn't seem to make reference to the idea that the ships, such as NCC-1700, were actually being constructed. Where does that idea come from?


"* R[uth ]B[erman]'s note. Readers may recall from T-N 23 that I speculated that the chart measured where the ships were in their five-year missions, as it was numbered in percentages--and the ship which Greg has here identified as the Intrepid had not only reached the 100% line but had a line beyond it starting over. Greg's theory, that the chart showed ships in port and undergoing repair, fits in better with the plot of the episode, and I asked him if he could find a way to reconcile a repair job which was more than 100% complete. He suggested that perhaps the extra percentage 'refers to some form of "finishing touch" labor, i.e., painting, checking computer, etc' and the first part of the graph 'to heavy mechanical labor/construction.'"


What you probably need to do is look at the "Court Martial" script and actually find out exactly what information that "Star Ship Status" chart was scripted and intended to be communicated to the viewing audience.

 

[Warped9]

I always believed that chart referred to ships being repaired.

 

[GSchnitzer]

I always believed that chart referred to ships being repaired.

Yes, I think that's the logical assumption. I think that would be most people's assumption. But somehow Robert Comsol thinks that the "% Complete" bar graph on the "Star Ship Status" chart indicates that NCC-1700 is only about 11% of the way towards being built. I'm just not sure why he thinks that. (And, of course, that also means that NCC-1701 is only about 83% of the way towards being built.)

 

[Myko]

And none of those lines pass 100%, as indicated in the post above. They are repairs.

 

[Maurice]

Am I missing something here regarding "over 100%"? There are 11 lines there, which look to be 0 to 100 in increments of 10, which means the longest % complete line would be about 100%.

 

[GSchnitzer]

Am I missing something here regarding "over 100%"? There are 11 lines there, which look to be 0 to 100 in increments of 10, which means the longest % complete line would be about 100%.

Yes, that shot is too tight to show the entire "Star Ship Status" chart. Here's what you're after:

The wider shot shows something beyond the 100%. Some people think this means "more than 100%," or that the line is "starting over." I think that all this indicator means is that "now that the repairs are 100% complete, the ship now has a green light to get back underway again." I think the little green dot/bar is just a "checkmark"--a "good to go" marker--which is why it's green instead of red like the bar graph lines, and why it doesn't have any percentage figures up at the top of the column. It also explains why it appears only on the vessel that has completed 100% of its repairs. (You people do watch the episodes, and not just the screen grabs posted here, right? )

 

[CorporalCaptain]

(And, of course, that also means that NCC-1701 is only about 83% of the way towards being built.)

Decisive.

Naturally, not everything there has to be in the same class. Many different kinds of ships can have NCC numbers.

 

[GSchnitzer]

(And, of course, that also means that NCC-1701 is only about 83% of the way towards being built.)

Decisive.

Naturally, not everything there has to be in the same class. Many different kinds of ships can have NCC numbers.

Well, I think that when the chart was made, it was probably just a bunch of numbers intended to represent all kinds of Starfleet vessels. I'm not really sure why Greg Jein, in coming up with numbers for all of the twelve Star Ships felt compelled to use all the numbers seen on that chart. I mean, it's not like ten of the twelve happened to be parked at Starbase 11. Other than the numbers that we did actually see or hear being used, I think the numbers should be taken with a grain of salt.

 

[Robert Comsol]

Why do you think that Greg Jein speculated that the bars on the "Star Ship Status" chart shows ships being built? "The Case of Jonathan Doe Starship" makes reference to "ships in port and undergoing repair," but it doesn't seem to make reference to the idea that the ships, such as NCC-1700, were actually being constructed. Where does that idea come from?

"* R[uth ]B[erman]'s note. ... He [Greg Jein] suggested that perhaps the extra percentage 'refers to some form of "finishing touch" labor, i.e., painting, checking computer, etc' and the first part of the graph 'to heavy mechanical labor/construction.'"

^^ In the end, Greg Jein himself suggested a different interpretation for "NCC-1700", but apparently most people (then and now) didn't read that far.

What you probably need to do is look at the "Court Martial" script and actually find out exactly what information that "Star Ship Status" chart was scripted and intended to be communicated to the viewing audience.

Although I seriously doubt that the script will have such information, why exactly, do I need to examine the script?

According to Jefferies' Nomenclature the "Star Ship Status" chart shows starships of the 16th, 17th and 18th Federation cruiser design (reminder: before the producers settled for "Starship Class" the Enterprise was a member of the "Cruiser Class").
Apparently, we do see the NCC registries of starships of the Constitution, the Enterprise and the Miranda Class.

Bob

 

[Robert Comsol]

I'm not really sure why Greg Jein, in coming up with numbers for all of the twelve Star Ships felt compelled to use all the numbers seen on that chart. I mean, it's not like ten of the twelve happened to be parked at Starbase 11. Other than the numbers that we did actually see or hear being used, I think the numbers should be taken with a grain of salt.

Jein interpreted the information from The Making of Star Trek not as "there are only 12 starships like the Enterprise" but as "there are only 12 starships" (in Starfleet).

The chart is specific as it only indicates starships, hence Jein's conclusion. I doubt these are all starships parked at Starbase 11 (then why bring starship captains in from the outside for Kirk's Court-Martial?), probably just starships that are being constructed and/or still require essential upgrades.

But what about the actual numbers? Jein's assumed NCC-1631 for the Intrepid turns out to be "1831" in HD.

And I'm not sure whether it's really "1664" and "1697" or rather "1864" (USS Reliant!) and "1897".

Bob

 

[GSchnitzer]

I think the "heavy mechanical and/or construction" comment probably means initial construction or reconstruction or refurbishment or refitting. I don't think the comment is meant to imply only initial constructions. Greg Jein seems to have meant the "heavy lifting" portion of major repair work, as opposed to the "finishing touches" and "punch list" items. You don't think NCC-1701 was only about 83 percent constructed, do you? You don't think that Greg Jein thought NCC-1701 was only 83 percent built, do you? And you don't think that Matt Jefferies thought that NCC-1701 was only 83 percent built, do you?

Scene 3 of the Final Draft script for "Court Martial" has the following conent:

"INT. STONE'S OFFICE

"FEATURING chart with legend: STAR SHIP STATUS. Columns lettered: Major Maintenance...Minor Maintenance...Ships Incoming...Ships Cleared."

In the end, Matt Jefferies seems to have exercised some artistic discretion. We have a "Star Ship Status" chart, but one that says "% complete"--and which shows those ships that have been "cleared" (by use of the little green bar on the 100% completed vessel). But it's clear that the intent of the chart was to show ships coming and going for maintenance, not ships being constructed. Why would NCC-1701 be undergoing construction?

(Also, I think none of the other ship captains who were already present on Stabase 11 were willing to serve on the court martial board of the Great Captain Kirk. In the end, they could only rustle up two; they had to settle for a "Space Command Representative" for the reamining trail board member.)

Why do you think that Greg Jein speculated that the bars on the "Star Ship Status" chart shows ships being built? "The Case of Jonathan Doe Starship" makes reference to "ships in port and undergoing repair," but it doesn't seem to make reference to the idea that the ships, such as NCC-1700, were actually being constructed. Where does that idea come from?

"* R[uth ]B[erman]'s note. ... He [Greg Jein] suggested that perhaps the extra percentage 'refers to some form of "finishing touch" labor, i.e., painting, checking computer, etc' and the first part of the graph 'to heavy mechanical labor/construction.'"

^^ In the end, Greg Jein himself suggested a different interpretation for "NCC-1700", but apparently most people (then and now) didn't read that far.

What you probably need to do is look at the "Court Martial" script and actually find out exactly what information that "Star Ship Status" chart was scripted and intended to be communicated to the viewing audience.

Although I seriously doubt that the script will have such information, why exactly, do I need to examine the script?

According to Jefferies' Nomenclature the "Star Ship Status" chart shows starships of the 16th, 17th and 18th Federation cruiser design (reminder: before the producers settled for "Starship Class" the Enterprise was a member of the "Cruiser Class").
Apparently, we do see the NCC registries of starships of the Constitution, the Enterprise and the Miranda Class.

Bob

 

[Melakon]

I never understood the fuss regarding class, how many ships like Enterprise existed, etc. But maybe that's because I considered all those articles in "Trek" and "Enterprise Incidents" as speculation, and Franz Joseph's work to be speculation as well, not some sort of pseudo-canon. Kirk tells Capt. Christopher "There are only 12 like it in the fleet." I always interpreted that as 12 ships of Enterprise's design, not that the entire fleet was just 12 ships.

 

[Robert Comsol]

You don't think that Greg Jein thought NCC-1701 was only 83 percent built, do you? And you don't think that Matt Jefferies thought that NCC-1701 was only 83 percent built, do you?

I don't think that NCC-1701 was only 83% built, but there's no need to assume that the bars exclusively show stages of external ship construction. The 11% of NCC-1700 could simply state that the ship's hull has been assembled and other work steps are to follow next.

In the particular case of NCC-1701 we've all seen how the ship looked in "Where No Man Has Gone Before", then there had been some external reconstruction (lowering of Bridge dome, exchange of main sensor-deflector dish, new warp nacelles etc.) and some internal one, also.

Since we haven't seen all internal areas of the Enterprise by the time of "Court-Martial" the remaining 13% could have suggested yet-to-do internal reconstruction and upgrades (e.g. engineering section?)

"FEATURING chart with legend: STAR SHIP STATUS. Columns lettered: Major Maintenance...Minor Maintenance...Ships Incoming...Ships Cleared."

In the end, Matt Jefferies seems to have exercised some artistic discretion. We have a "Star Ship Status" chart, but one that says "% complete"--and which shows those ships that have been "cleared" (by use of the little green bar on the 100% completed vessel). But it's clear that the intent of the chart was to show ships coming and going for maintenance, not ships being constructed?

Wow, that's a cool find. Apparently the separate bar you mentioned would state "ship cleared" (so it couldn't be the Intrepid but then again the registry is 1831 and not 1631). But other than that I'm uncertain whether you can actually match the script with the final and actual display: Ships Incoming - XX% complete (?).
To match script and display I'd believe this chart would rather look like a typical Bridge monitor, where some starships would just have a bar in one column (minor maintenance) or the one next to it (major maintenance).
While it's definitely interesting, I find the script to be somewhat inconclusive next to the actual display.

As for NCC-1700 being a ship under construction it is compatible with the Jeffries' nomenclature. While the yard definitely knows whether they are assembling a starship of the 16th, 17th or 18th design, the last two digits (or contact code in "my world") haven't been asigned, yet, thus in their place it reads "00" as a placeholder.

Bob

 

[GSchnitzer]

So if two ships are being constructed simultaneously (like the Olympic and the Titanic), they are both assigned "00" as a placeholder until NCC numbers are established for them? That is, there can be multiple 00s being built?

You mentioned that the construction work on 1701 might actually be "internal reconstruction and upgrades." If so, then 1700 might be undergoing similar "internal reconstruction and upgrade." If it's just having some reconstruction done, then it's not actually being built. So, it actually could have been built before 1701.

You're not really suggesting that "% Complete" actually means "% of vessel's shipbuilding complete" rather than "% of vessel's repairs complete," are you? You're just yanking our chain, right?

 

[Robert Comsol]

I never understood the fuss regarding class.

I'd dare to say it didn't exist in the beginning. The Making of Star Trek states on the first pages that the original draft had the Enterprise to be a member of the "Cruiser Class" (another hint that the debated Matt Jefferies' preproduction sketch is a genuine work from the 1960's) before they changed it to "Starship Class".

Roddenberry wanted to have a series palatable to international audiences and not just pigeonholed for US audiences (hence United Space Ship, hence "NCC" as a mixture of US and Soviet naval prefixes, hence alphabetic Starship sub-classifications reminiscient of the Soviet Navy and not the US Navy).

"Starship" can be translated into all languages (including the alien ones of the UFP) and therefore had no preference for a certain nation.

But apparently US script writers for Star Trek (like Gene Coon?) didn't subscribe to Gene's philosophy and suddenly we had the "Constitution Class" in the "Space Seed" script and the primary phaser schematic.
Especially considering the debate we are still having, it's not too farfetched to assume that people like Matt Jefferies and Bob Justman didn't like that idea. If there had to be, yet, another classification then it would be "Enterprise Class" for NCC-1701 and therefore "Enterprise Class" is twice mentioned in The Making of Star Trek to exactly avoid the kind of confusion that came from this "Constitution Class" reference.

In the interviews Matt Jefferies gave in the early 2000's there is no reference to either "Constitution Class" or "Enterprise Class".
That's not surprising, if he had been from the start an advocate of "Starship Class" and nothing else.

Apparently he revisited his original preproduction sketch of the TOS Enterprise and merely restated how it was supposed to be, i.e. that the Enterprise was the "first bird", the "first of the [17th design] series."
To avoid stepping on anybody's toes, courteous as he was, he left it to us to draw or ignore the conclusions from his statements, IMHO.

I'm sorry, but I find myself unable to interprete the "first bird" as anything else than the first ship of its kind.

Franz Joseph might have been an expert of the Jupiter II, Greg Jein is most definitely the expert of ADC 2238-5531, but when it comes to NCC-1701 I consider its creator the ultimate authority.

Bob

 

[Warped9]

Stone is studying the chart and then turns to his intercom wherein he directs repairs crews (or whatever) to switch from the Intrepid to the Enterprise. Put together it supports the idea the chart refers to ships being maintainanced and/or repaired and not ships being constructed.

At the time 17 series ships might well have been considered the same as the Enterprise (this is long before the Constellation being shown onscreen). It could also be that the Republic (1371) mentioned onscreen wasn't originally intended as an Enterprise sister ship. Certainly the Valiant mentioned later in "A Taste Of Armageddon" likely mightn't have been intended as a 17 series ship given it was fifty years older. But as that list of proposed names started circulating they all might not of remembered what numbers (if any) were intended for which ships other than the Enterprise, of course. The appearance of the Constellation's 1017 is the wrench in the works that causes all the confusion. We're it not for that it would have all remained pretty straightforward.

Making the Constellation an older ship upgraded to 17 series configuration is a fair enough rationalization, but there really is no reason why the Republic has to be an upgrade as well because we never got to see that ship and at the time it was referenced it might not have been intended as a 17 series vessel. And I think Stone's chart was a cheap and creative bit of world-building to establish that Starfleet had a variety of ship classes besides the Enterprise type. The show couldn't afford to physically show other ship classes, but that chart was a clever non-verbal way to establish that other classes did exist in the TOS universe.

In all of TOS only three ship's registry numbers are seen or heard: 1701, 1371 and 1017. Two of them are definitely sister ships and one might be. The question: is 1017 an aberration or a precedent? I think that comes down to interpretation. Even if you add into the mix the sister ships we've actually seen we don't see or hear their registry numbers except, again, for 1017. And so beyond the Constellation the only ship we know are definitely sister ships are those we've actually seen. Any other names on any list are mostly conjecture if they weren't mentioned onscreen.

Now there is the question of whether there were any proposed registry numbers in script drafts that didn't make it onscreen and to which ships those numbers were intended. Still, unless those numbers were meant for a ship actually seen onscreen then there is no reason to assume they're sister ships of the Enterprise.

In my opinion FJ was closer to getting it right then Jein even if he didn't put as much speculation into it.