Franz Joseph Blueprints Revisited

[GSchnitzer]

But 83% operational makes sense, doesn't it? That's what the label "Status" suggests, anyway.

I assume if it would read "% operational" we wouldn't be having the discussion.

However, it does read "% complete" and this apparently refers to something else.

"Status" would be applicable in both cases, either as operational status or upgrade vs. repair status.

Bob

Naw, the chart just means "operational." ("% Operational" would indeed have been the more accurate description for it.) If a different intent got injected by the art director other than was intended by the script, it was just an inadvertant production mistake. (I don't think the art director was empowered to unilaterally inject some alternate interpretation into the writers' script--nor would he likely want to.)

"INT. STONE'S OFFICE

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

Also, Kirk's line about "repairs almost complete" was always scripted to be a Voice Over captain's log entry--even in earlier drafts of the script. With no such later scene ever planned or even contemplated, probability that the chart was made for some later scene approaches zero.

In fact, it was very studiously not shown in later scenes.

So showing necessary maintenance rescheduling in the opening scene was the sole intent (and sole appearance) of the chart.

 

[blssdwlf]

because the repair job of a ship that just arrived could hardly be already 83% complete.

Actually it can. The Enterprise was damaged in the ion storm and made her way to the Starbase to complete her repairs. She could've started her repairs out in space and by the time she arrived at the Starbase, she was 83% complete in her task list of repairs to be made.

The possibility of the "% Complete" on that chart to mean "under construction" is probably very low because the Enterprise is on that same chart. She would have to be already completely constructed in order to undertake her various missions prior to this episode.

 

[Timo]

Of course, with "status" being so ambiguous, and "star ship" misspelled in relation to later usage, we could just as well argue that this is a list of starships that compete for Star Ship status, and the second ship from top has already won that status complete with the coveted Green Ribbon. Kirk's personal fumbling may now put his own ship's hopes of gaining the Green Ribbon in serious jeopardy... A sword of Damocles hanging over Kirk's, well, shoulder, as Stone psychologically turns up the heat before launching into full accusations.

Timo Saloniemi

 

[Robert Comsol]

@ EliyahuQeoni

The way I see it, ignorance can either be that you see / learn something but decide to ignore it or that you "ignored" it because you didn't have access to the materials. In the interviews Franz Joseph (not me) claimed that he had access to several thousands film stills, but frankly I consider this to be a myth, especially when looking at his phaser type II reproduction in the Technical Manual.

Since Greg Jein was able to extrapolate from stills that there are numbers beginning with "16" but no such number ever appeared in Franz Joseph's works, it's a higher probability he never saw that scene or still and merely relied on the episode's script to learn that NCC-1371 was USS Republic (he didn't get the Commodore rank sleeves right in the Technical Manual although you can clearly see these in this episode).

@ GSchnitzer

If that's the interpretation that you prefer, it's fine but please don't make this (and other items) sound as if these were established facts that no longer require evaluation and examination. "Experts" like Mike Okuda obviously do have a different interpretation, because the Starship USS Intrepid (NCC-1631) is not on this chart but is being repaired in orbit of Starbase 11 when the Enterprise arrives.

@ blssdwlf

From the context of the episode and the naval analogy presented in this episode (e.g. "ashore" for "down on the planet") I understood that the ion storm mostly caused external "considerable damage" that requires "full repairs" and "a couple of days". I would also wonder why Kirk files a log entry at the beginning of the episode and fails to mention any repair effort by the crew. It's not his style to ignore accomplishments by his crew (compare log entries in "Where No Man Has Gone Before").

@ Timo

Wonderful unorthodox thinking. Maybe that's something we should investigate (after the 5-year-mission theory has been kicked out the door)...

Bob

 

[Sean_McCormick]

AFAIK Intrepids NCC number comes from this chart nontheless. Okuda did not have access to images that high in resolution as we have today and misread the eight in NCC-1831 on the chart as a six.

 

[blssdwlf]

From the episode, Kirk doesn't go into detail as to what exactly was damaged and what efforts were made to repair them. The damage could have been external AND internal. We are only given information after the fact, that the result was "considerable" damage and Kirk orders a non-scheduled layover at a Starbase. It would be unusual for the crew not to attempt some repairs while en-route to the Starbase, IMO.

From the context of the episode and the naval analogy presented in this episode (e.g. "ashore" for "down on the planet") I understood that the ion storm mostly caused external "considerable damage" that requires "full repairs" and "a couple of days". I would also wonder why Kirk files a log entry at the beginning of the episode and fails to mention any repair effort by the crew. It's not his style to ignore accomplishments by his crew (compare log entries in "Where No Man Has Gone Before").

 

[Shawnster]

Let me add another possibility as to the % COMPLETE idea. Perhaps this isn't % of overall ship efficiency or % of total damage to the ship (0% meaning near destruction and 100% meaning "shipshape and Bristol fashion"). Perhaps the % is the percentage of completion from a list of total repairs needing to be made.

For example, NCC 1709 is listed at 70% complete. Let's say that NCC 1709 came into port with a repair list of 10 items. As of the time of the above screen cap, 7 of the 10 items on that list have been completed. So, the list is % COMPLETE of the requested repairs.

Regardless, one thing is for sure. The graphic represents the same thing for each ship. With as minimal information on the graphic, there isn't enough data to mean different things for different ships. A graphic will compare apples to apples, not apples to Milk Duds. Whatever the % COMPLETE means, it will mean the same thing for every ship on that list. Otherwise, the graphic is pointless and would actually cause confusion to the reader.

 

[Robert Comsol]

AFAIK Intrepids NCC number comes from this chart nontheless. Okuda did not have access to images that high in resolution as we have today and misread the eight in NCC-1831 on the chart as a six.

Greg Jein is the one who misread the "1831" as "1631" as the resolution of his film still didn't yield more information back in the 1970's when he wrote his treatise "The Case of Jonathan Doe Starship" (heck, even in HD today I can't determine whether it is "1664" or "1864". Trying to examine the scene still by still in Full HD resolution it changes back and forth between "16" and "18"...).

Bjo Trimble's Star Trek Concordance adopted Jein's numbering proposal, same as the Okudas for their Star Trek Encyclopedia (and during the days of SD resolution, I should add).

However, the Okudas were involved in the TOS-R project and thus had access to the starship status chart in HD before most of us. If there's one thing that has become crystal clear, it's that the number is "1831" and not "1631".

Of course, the Okudas could have decided, not to reveal a new CGI shot of the starship Intrepid with the registry number. The moment they did ("1631"), they practically "pulled" the Intrepid from the starship status chart and changed its possible meaning.

Personally, I don't consider this to be a final word (because I've mentioned other reasons why I doubt the chart reflects repair work), but felt it to be worth mentioning.

Bob

 

[Robert Comsol]

For example, NCC 1709 is listed at 70% complete. Let's say that NCC 1709 came into port with a repair list of 10 items. As of the time of the above screen cap, 7 of the 10 items on that list have been completed. So, the list is % COMPLETE of the requested repairs.

But that still doesn't answer the question why Commodore Stone is pulling section 18 from the (unfinished) repair work on the Intrepid and diverts it to work on the Enterprise.

Section 18 may be a specialized repair unit to finish the remaining 13% repairs on the Enterprise but wouldn't they have work sheets and plans for that in the 23rd Century?

Stone is a former Starship commander and now he has to move the repair crews to their next assignment because without his order, they'd just be sitting around?

Whatever the % COMPLETE means, it will mean the same thing for every ship on that list. Otherwise, the graphic is pointless and would actually cause confusion to the reader.

Finally something we can all agree on, right?

Bob

 

[blssdwlf]

Stone answers that in his dialogue. Enterprise is on priority one.

STONE: Maintenance Section Eighteen. The section is working on the Intrepid. Reschedule. The Enterprise is on priority one.
​

The reason for priority one is unknown, but that apparently means either Section 18 is additional manpower to existing section(s) working on the Enterprise or the Enterprise just settled into orbit and was waiting for a starbase section to be assigned to her. Intrepid just got short-changed.

But that still doesn't answer the question why Commodore Stone is pulling section 18 from the (unfinished) repair work on the Intrepid and diverts it to work on the Enterprise.

Section 18 may be a specialized repair unit to finish the remaining 13% repairs on the Enterprise but wouldn't they have work sheets and plans for that in the 23rd Century?

Stone is a former Starship commander and now he has to move the repair crews to their next assignment because without his order, they'd just be sitting around?

 

[Warped9]

Who decided Intrepid was supposed to be 1631 or 1831 anyway? It certainly wasn't onscreen. Was it written down anywhere like on a script draft? It's been a very long time since I read Jein's article.

The only registries TOS ever established were the Enterprise (1701), Republic (1371), Constellation (1017) and Galileo (1701/7). Anything else is pure conjecture or arbitrary unless someone knows of any notes somewhere.

Otherwise based on what we know I give the nod to FJ's reasoning.

 

[Timo]

Jein's reasoning was fairly straightforward:

1) This chart shows the Enterprise (the registry is there)
2) This chart probably shows the Intrepid (Stone makes decisions concerning her)
3) Both of these are starships ("Immunity Syndrome" supports this)
4) Thus, all of these are starships (a leap of faith, but then again, it sez so on top)
5) There is a list of starship names for TOS (several in fact, but whatever, he picked one)
6) The only thing remaining, then, is to put them in order of some sort...

...And he picked alphabetical order! This caused the Intrepid to fall in the 1831 or 1631 slot, and that was that.

The numbers aren't in ascending or descending order, nor are the percentages, so clearly something else is ruling the ordering. One could still pick from two other fairly rational governing parameters: order of arrival at the starbase (1701 is near the top, and perhaps this is a busy place) or order of repair docks (Dock 1 atop, Dock 2 below etc.).

Timo Saloniemi

 

[Robert Comsol]

@ blssdwlf

Exactly my point. If the Enterprise's repair jobs are already 83% "complete", why the sudden rush to a) put her on "Priority One" and b) withdraw the repair crew from the Intrepid?

There is no indication in the episode that the Enterprise is in a hurry to go somewhere and - sorry - I don't believe that Kirk's demand to have an immediate "Court-Martial" is because he wants to keep an appointment we or Commodore Stone are unaware of.

@ Timo

But because the Intrepid had fallen into the 1X31 slot and was "complete" Jein concluded this couldn't be Starbase 11's repair progress chart - the fact that Stone pulled the repair crew from the Intrepid was clear evidence that work on her hadn't been finished, yet.

The ramifications are interesting. If you seriously believe this is the repair progress chart of Starbase 11, then you should also disregard the NCC registries from the Concordance, Encyclopedia and TOS-R.

@ Warped9

Greg Jein proposed and Bjo Trimble and the Okudas decided.

Yes, it's pure conjecture (as an adolescent, however, I believed it to be official. The stuff I still have to "unlearn" is amazing) but if you give a nod to FJ - is his registry number for the Intrepid on the starship status chart?

Bob

 

[Warped9]

And he's also assuming they're all heavy cruisers like the Enterprise rather than a mix of classes. I reject that simply because it takes a small and simplistic view of Starfleet's makeup.

 

[Warped9]

Both Jein and FJ are flawed in their reasoning I think, but I find less flaw in FJ. And, no, I don't care what supposedly "official" since it isn't onscreen.

 

[Robert Comsol]

@ Warped9

I concur, though I hate to say it (considering Greg Jein did benchmark research and concluding in the first part of his treatise) it's Franz Joseph's numbering that is more compatible with what Matt Jefferies had intended in the first place.

We do know that had we examined the sister ships of the Enterprise in TOS close-up we'd noticed they are all identical externally and all carried a "17" prefix (since it was the same model ).

Bob

 

[Warped9]

If I recall correctly FJ listed the Intrepid as 1708 or 1709 and 1709 is on that chart in Stone's office.

 

[Timo]

And he's also assuming they're all heavy cruisers like the Enterprise rather than a mix of classes. I reject that simply because it takes a small and simplistic view of Starfleet's makeup.

Not really. It only indicates that this particular display covers the Star Ships currently under repair; another display titled "Star Destroyer Status" would then obviously cover the destroyer-class vessels, and so forth.

We have no real idea of the scope of this SB11 thing. The bar we visit is small, but the base currently hosts several of Kirk's old acquaintances - something we can interpret as defending the idea that Starfleet is a teeny weeny organization, or the completely opposite idea that SB11 is a vast facility processing hundreds of ships. If the latter, having a dozen Star Ships there wouldn't be all that unlikely, and the scattershot registries would support the idea that Kirk's ship and her 11-12 sisters (in the 17XX range) represent only a tiny fraction of the Star Ship force.

the fact that Stone pulled the repair crew from the Intrepid was clear evidence that work on her hadn't been finished, yet.

Far from clear IMHO. We've seen the dialogue quoted, on the previous page: Stone believes a team is currently working on the Intrepid. Yet a display listing work on the Intrepid already completed would not be in contradiction of this, because the display would then merely confirm what Stone has already decided and now orders his underlings to execute. That is, Stone first sets the degree of completion on the Intrepid at 100%, then informs his underlings of the matter...

The same argument would naturally enable us to believe the Intrepid is not on the chart: Stone would have removed her before calling the team. Thus both the 1831 and 1631 identities can be defended.

Timo Saloniemi

 

[EliyahuQeoni]

And he's also assuming they're all heavy cruisers like the Enterprise rather than a mix of classes. I reject that simply because it takes a small and simplistic view of Starfleet's makeup.

Exactly. I also think it can be possible for a ship to have multiple classifications. For instance:

• Starfleet Vessels
  • Star Ship Class
    • Cruiser Class
      • Heavy Cruiser Class
        • Constitution Class
        • Achernar Class
        • Bonhomme Richard Class
        • Tikopai Class
        • Enterprise Class
        • Excelsior Class
      • Light Cruiser Class
        • Miranda Class
    • Scout Class
      • Hermes Class
      • Oberth Class
    • Destroyer Class
      • Saladin Class
    • Dreadnaught Class
      • Federation Class
  • Space Ship Class
    • Servey Class
      • Antares Class
      • Beagle Class
    • Tug Class
      • Minnow Class

Those are just off the top of my head, but it show how

1. The Enterprise could be Star Ship Class, Heavy Cruiser Class and Constitution Class all at the same time.
2. All of the ships on the chart could be Star Ship and not all be Constitution Class Starships.

 

[ZapBrannigan]

Exactly. I also think it can be possible for a ship to have multiple classifications. For instance:

• Starfleet Vessels
  • Star Ship Class
    • Cruiser Class
      • Heavy Cruiser Class
        • Constitution Class
        • Achernar Class
        • Bonhomme Richard Class
        • Tikopai Class
        • Enterprise Class
        • Excelsior Class
      • Light Cruiser Class
        • Miranda Class
    • Scout Class
      • Hermes Class
      • Oberth Class
    • Destroyer Class
      • Saladin Class
    • Dreadnaught Class
      • Federation Class
  • Space Ship Class
    • Servey Class
      • Antares Class
      • Beagle Class
    • Tug Class
      • Minnow Class

Those are just off the top of my head, but it show how

1. The Enterprise could be Star Ship Class, Heavy Cruiser Class and Constitution Class all at the same time.
2. All of the ships on the chart could be Star Ship and not all be Constitution Class Starships.

That's some good stuff right there.