Registries and Conjectural classes

[Dukhat]

So I've been working for several years on some essays about the conjectural classes from the Encyclopedia, and I've finally finished. The whole thing actually consists of four parts:

The Conjectural classes essay.

A chronological timeline of starship registries.

A batch number timeline of starship registries.

And a ship construction estimate spreadsheet. (Batch numbers on p.1, chronological numbers on p. 2)

All of this is of course, my own opinion, and any errors are my own. I hope you enjoy it.

 

[throwback]

I am of the opinion that the Antares-class starship is no longer a conjectural class. I believe that there is now a design for this ship. For DS9, an Antares was built as a background ship. This ship had the registry NCC-9844, which places it below the NCC-10376 of the Hermes. In appearance, this is a variant of the Miranda-class with a Nebula-class sensor pod.

 

[Dukhat]

^I understand that, but as I wrote in my essay, I am ignoring the DS9 kitbashes on the grounds that they were far background ships not meant to be taken seriously (except perhaps for the Centaur and the Curry, which were seen relatively clearly and close to the camera). YMMV.

 

[Timo]

Minor comments, mainly relating to the freighters:

1) That the Arcos was (invisibly) portrayed by the Husnock ship is not something we'd have to ignore. After all, the Husnock model subsequently became a prominent transport ship design, and although never actually seen in Starfleet or Federation hands, might have been part of the Starfleet arsenal nevertheless. Just like the SS Xhosa design was also used by the Federation as evidenced by SS Norkova, many other "international" designs for support ship may have eventually obtained a Starfleet identity... I'd have no problem believing that the Deneva class in fact looks like Kivas Fajo's ship, say.

2) The Arcos did not necessarily have a crew of two. The dialogue could easily be interpreted as the ship having a surviving crew of two instead. There are enough cuts in the action to allow Picard to establish the number of survivors either before the bit of auditory contact we actually get to hear, or immediately after it. The shared basic design of lifepod between the Arcos and Fajo's ship is something I'd like to embrace here as well.

3) Whether the closely related Bajoran Antares design from "Ensign Ro" (an even later incarnation of the Husnock vessel) would in turn be what Starfleet considers the Antares class, I'm undecided on. If I started believing that, and decided that the "Charlie X" Antares was not a class ship and belonged to, say, the Sherman class and that the kitbash Antares likewise was a run-of-the-mill ship of some other early class, long gone before the Hermes got her Starfleet registry, I'd only have to deal with one bit of conflicting info: that of the "Face of the Enemy" ship not looking like Orta's vessel at all. But I can chalk that off to Deanna Troi flunking Starship Recognition 101.

4) As for the "Antares Class Cruiser" text on the Xhosa, this actually sort of equates "Antares Class" with "Starship Class". And since the latter has to be accepted as a somewhat generalizing umbrella term encompassing the Constitution class, the former could also be an umbrella term rather than a class name. That is, the Xhosa belongs to a ship class that fits within the Antares Class parameters, much like the Nimitz class carriers today are Panamax Class vessels.

Or then Yates stole that dedication plaque from an Antares class vessel of that name as a prank. Perhaps Xhosa is a native Petarian name, while Yates rather preferred to interpret it as the name of the people she descended from (even thought the pronunciation is different), and stealing the plaque created the desired connection...

5) For the Istanbul to have a passenger capacity in the thousands, I'd suggest a design quite different from the known combat starship ones. But a tug with a pod would also do - and the two DS9 kitbashes with a Ptolemy-like configuration, the Curry and the Raging Queen, are thus good candidates. Not that I'd personally want the Istanbul to be one of those (what I actually think is that the Curry is of the Mediterranean class, as per the registry range!).

6) For the absence of screen evidence on all but the most common starship types, I'd primarily refer to the number of "transport" or "supply" assignments for the conjectural classes. Being of a design dedicated to these tasks would no doubt keep the conjectural types off the big first-wave battlefleets. Conversely, one wouldn't see conjectural combat types in TNG which takes place in peacetime; only hybrid exploration-capable vessels would be met by the E-D in deep space.

Timo Saloniemi

 

[throwback]

The Zodiac-class Yorktown would have to be a ship commissioned after SD 42527. Around that stardate, there was a Yorktown with the registry of NCC-20045.

The earliest that TMP could take place was 2272. Memory Alpha has settled, largely, on 2273. We learn in a Voyager episode that the five-year mission under Kirk ended in 2270, and in TMP that Kirk hadn't logged time in space for 2-and-1/2 years.

And, there was a Miranda-class starship with the registry of NCC-4186.

Finally, I don't know how you approach the Okudagram displays from "Conspiracy", but there are examples of ships with registries in the 8xxxx range, including the Ticonderoga which has a registry of NCC-87270. (I notice that you are not including ships that were seen in the Okudagrams for this episode and "The Measure of a Man".)

 

[Dukhat]

Thanks Timo and Throwback for your replies.

1) That the Arcos was (invisibly) portrayed by the Husnock ship is not something we'd have to ignore. After all, the Husnock model subsequently became a prominent transport ship design, and although never actually seen in Starfleet or Federation hands, might have been part of the Starfleet arsenal nevertheless... I'd have no problem believing that the Deneva class in fact looks like Kivas Fajo's ship, say.

But here's the thing: The stock footage of the Arcos didn't show the ship in the Fajo configuration. It showed it as the Husnock ship. So we either have to be a literalist and state that the Deneva class looks exactly like the Husnock ship (which is patently absurd), or we just have to say that we're going to ignore what we (barely) saw on screen and consider the Deneva class to be more what we typically think of with Starfleet vessels: A saucer and nacelles. Just the Arcos by itself wouldn't be a problem, but we also have the LaSalle specifically referred to as a starship. If we believe that both ships are of the Starfleet Deneva class, then I have a hard time thinking that it looks like a wedge-shaped alien ship with no saucer and nacelles. Again, YMMV.

2) The Arcos did not necessarily have a crew of two. The dialogue could easily be interpreted as the ship having a surviving crew of two instead. There are enough cuts in the action to allow Picard to establish the number of survivors either before the bit of auditory contact we actually get to hear, or immediately after it. The shared basic design of lifepod between the Arcos and Fajo's ship is something I'd like to embrace here as well.

I'll have to review the episode again to determine what exactly was said about the number of crew, but if the Arcos was that old (NCC-6XXX), and we already had old ships like the Oberth class operating with as little crew as five people, then it's within the realm of possibility that the Arcos could be the same.

4) As for the "Antares Class Cruiser" text on the Xhosa, this actually sort of equates "Antares Class" with "Starship Class". And since the latter has to be accepted as a somewhat generalizing umbrella term encompassing the Constitution class, the former could also be an umbrella term rather than a class name. That is, the Xhosa belongs to a ship class that fits within the Antares Class parameters, much like the Nimitz class carriers today are Panamax Class vessels.

This was the one thing I was really stuck on, because of that plaque. However, because the plaque wasn't actually ever seen on screen to my knowledge, I decided to ignore it.

Or then Yates stole that dedication plaque from an Antares class vessel of that name as a prank. Perhaps Xhosa is a native Petarian name, while Yates rather preferred to interpret it as the name of the people she descended from (even thought the pronunciation is different), and stealing the plaque created the desired connection...

Why would she steal something that she could easily replicate on her own?

5) For the Istanbul to have a passenger capacity in the thousands, I'd suggest a design quite different from the known combat starship ones. But a tug with a pod would also do...

I suggested that in my essay, since I didn't like the idea of another class of ship being as large or larger than the Ent-D. Plus, if it's a colony ship, then it would make more sense to have a detachable pod with supplies to leave behind.

...and the two DS9 kitbashes with a Ptolemy-like configuration, the Curry and the Raging Queen, are thus good candidates. Not that I'd personally want the Istanbul to be one of those (what I actually think is that the Curry is of the Mediterranean class, as per the registry range!).

Yes, the Curry could be a potential Mediterranean class ship, but I'd prefer a distinct design and not an out-of-scale kitbash.

6) For the absence of screen evidence on all but the most common starship types, I'd primarily refer to the number of "transport" or "supply" assignments for the conjectural classes. Being of a design dedicated to these tasks would no doubt keep the conjectural types off the big first-wave battlefleets. Conversely, one wouldn't see conjectural combat types in TNG which takes place in peacetime; only hybrid exploration-capable vessels would be met by the E-D in deep space.

Yes, that does make sense, and would explain the frequency of conjectural classes with numbers so close to one another.

The Zodiac-class Yorktown would have to be a ship commissioned after SD 42527. Around that stardate, there was a Yorktown with the registry of NCC-20045.

Both "Frame of Mind" and "All Good Things" take place after that date, so there's no problem other than a brand-new ship after that date having a 6XXXX registry instead of a 7XXXX registry. But if registries are batch numerical as in my spreadsheet, there's no problem whatsoever.

The earliest that TMP could take place was 2272. Memory Alpha has settled, largely, on 2273. We learn in a Voyager episode that the five-year mission under Kirk ended in 2270, and in TMP that Kirk hadn't logged time in space for 2-and-1/2 years.

I just used the Encyclopedia's date for TMP, but I can easily change it.

And, there was a Miranda-class starship with the registry of NCC-4186.

Thanks, I'll add that to the list.

Finally, I don't know how you approach the Okudagram displays from "Conspiracy", but there are examples of ships with registries in the 8xxxx range, including the Ticonderoga which has a registry of NCC-87270. (I notice that you are not including ships that were seen in the Okudagrams for this episode and "The Measure of a Man".)

Basically, because even in HD the displays from "Conspiracy" and "MoaM" are still not clear enough to determine those ships' exact numbers. If I had a clearer readout of those charts I would definitely have added their info, even though they were from early TNG and some info was contradicted later.

 

[throwback]

For myself, some of the bigger issues with the ships from "Conspiracy" is that (a.) there is a ship with the registry NCC-42 and (b.) there are ships which seem to share the same registry. In the latter case, if a few ships did go through two or three name changes in a year, I have to ask myself, why would Starfleet do this? The issues with the chart in "The Measure of a Man" for me is that it needlessly complicates the registry conundrum with the Yamato, and introduces new registries for a couple of ships that were first mentioned in "Conspiracy". The Yamato has four registries: NCC-1305-E, NCC-24383, NCC-71806, and NCC-71807.

There does seem to be a running issue with registries in the franchise, wherein a graphic will disagree with a model. We have the Intrepid (1631 vs. 1831), Yamato (71806 vs. 71807), Zhukov (26136 vs. 26136), and Ahwahnee (71620 vs. 73620). These are the examples I can name off the top of my head.

For me, the issues with the registries, as of the end of the third season, is proof of evidence that Michael Okuda hadn't yet developed a master copy of Federation starships in which each ship had an assigned number and class. He started to do this with the list of ships first seen in "Brothers", and expanded upon it for the Encyclopedia.

I have been studying the chart from "Court Martial". I have noticed that there is a slight difference between the 6 and 8. It can be seen here - there is a separation between the end of the curve and the enclosed circle. This can be seen in the blu-ray. (I have a 42" flatscreen TV.) I am now reading the chart as:
* NCC 1709
* NCC 1831
* NCC 1703
* NCC 1672
* NCC 1864
* NCC 1697
* NCC 1701
* NCC 1718
* NCC 1685
* NCC 1700

So, for the year 2267, the highest registry known would be NCC 1864. At the time of this episode, these registries were for ships of the Constitution-class starship. It's interesting to me that NCC 1864 was later used for the Miranda-class starship Reliant. Considering this retcon, I am thinking that one or two other ships on that list might be Mirandas, which might put the introduction of this ship to the mid-23rd century. So, by the mid-2370s, this class of ship would be over a century old.

 

[Timo]

The stock footage of the Arcos didn't show the ship in the Fajo configuration. It showed it as the Husnock ship.

But at that distance, and that stage of the footage, what we would really see if we squinted infinitely hard is the general triangular shape plus the engine glow, and both correspond nicely to the Fajo configuration. Plus perhaps the lower "cannon" prong, but in such a position as to match Fajo's "canards" in silhouette. So our make-believe would be based on "almost visual canon" rather than complete dismissing of visuals, which I find rather enjoyable.

I have a hard time thinking that it looks like a wedge-shaped alien ship with no saucer and nacelles.

But it's a transport ship, and we have seen some UFP wedge-shaped, nacelle-free ones (such as the Pakled ship, which apparently is e.g. a common Rigelian = UFP model, or the Trill ship from "The Host") plus other shapes lacking prominent nacelles (the Norkova or the ST:INS holoship) but only one obviously nacelled design (the Sydney).

Just add whitish paint and red cheat lines and basically any Trek design looks "Starfleety" enough...

Why would she steal something that she could easily replicate on her own?

Call it intellectual property theft, then. What I like to believe in is that this object is not part of the starship, but rather a memento, and while those are seldom genuine, they often are of dubious origin in other respects as well.

I mean, "cruiser"? Sheesh. She looks neither like a pleasure cruiser nor a police cruiser, and a type of classic scouting-fighting vessel is right out.

I didn't like the idea of another class of ship being as large or larger than the Ent-D

But the E-D only has a thousand crew. In "Ensigns of Command", she's about to embark fifteen thousand passengers; a ship capable of moving a couple of thousand in slightly greater comfort across somewhat greater distances could still be very compact, perhaps something like a "double Sydney".

On the topic of early registries:

At the time of this episode, these registries were for ships of the Constitution-class starship.

The evidence isn't all that strongly in support of that. The writer of the episode did not express any sentiment that this class would be the only one warranting the designation "star ship", and we have no clear reason to think that the maker of the artwork would have been thinking in terms of a list featuring just a single class of ships. Quite to the contrary, the diversity in numbers would appear to be another attempt at creating diversity on the cheap.

Timo Saloniemi

 

[137th Gebirg]

I am of the opinion that the Antares-class starship is no longer a conjectural class.

Indeed. I think that, in this case, opinion can be elevated to fact. There are at least 5 canonical variants I'm aware of:

• Variant 1
• Variant 2
• Variant 3
• Variant 4
• Variant 5

There may be others - these are just the ones I've been able to collect so far.

 

[Timo]

There's nothing on screen to connect the first type with the name Antares in any way, though. Or the second. Or the third. And the fourth doesn't exist - it is a misinterpretation of the fifth.

Timo Saloniemi

 

[Dukhat]

For myself, some of the bigger issues with the ships from "Conspiracy" is that (a.) there is a ship with the registry NCC-42 and (b.) there are ships which seem to share the same registry...For me, the issues with the registries, as of the end of the third season, is proof of evidence that Michael Okuda hadn't yet developed a master copy of Federation starships in which each ship had an assigned number and class.

That's another reason why I didn't add them: A lot of those ships are nothing more than in-jokes that were never meant to be scrutinized up close or to be taken seriously, at least for what I was writing.

I have been studying the chart from "Court Martial". I have noticed that there is a slight difference between the 6 and 8. It can be seen here - there is a separation between the end of the curve and the enclosed circle. This can be seen in the blu-ray. (I have a 42" flatscreen TV.) I am now reading the chart as:
* NCC 1709
* NCC 1831
* NCC 1703
* NCC 1672
* NCC 1864
* NCC 1697
* NCC 1701
* NCC 1718
* NCC 1685
* NCC 1700

Actually, I have what was advertised as a copy of this master list that Greg Jein used in T-Negative. Here's what it reads:

1709
1631
1703
1672
1664
1697
1701
1718
1685
1700

Unfortunately I don't remember the source, but I can post the pic if you want to see it.

But at that distance, and that stage of the footage, what we would really see if we squinted infinitely hard is the general triangular shape plus the engine glow, and both correspond nicely to the Fajo configuration. Plus perhaps the lower "cannon" prong, but in such a position as to match Fajo's "canards" in silhouette. So our make-believe would be based on "almost visual canon" rather than complete dismissing of visuals, which I find rather enjoyable.

Be that as it may, the fact remains that it still wasn't Fajo's ship, it was the Husnock ship, no matter what angle it was (barely) seen from. If one is just going to fudge stuff like that, then one can also feel free to claim that they saw a ship with saucer and nacelles, and it would have just as much validity. That is, none whatsoever. If they had used, say, stock footage of a Cardassian Galor exploding in the far-off distance, we wouldn't even be debating this.

But it's a transport ship, and we have seen some UFP wedge-shaped, nacelle-free ones (such as the Pakled ship, which apparently is e.g. a common Rigelian = UFP model, or the Trill ship from "The Host") plus other shapes lacking prominent nacelles (the Norkova or the ST:INS holoship) but only one obviously nacelled design (the Sydney).

But to my knowledge, none of the above examples was ever classified as a "starship," which has uually been the purview of the saucer/nacelle Starfleet, whatever its function. The LaSalle was classified as such in dialogue, so that's what I'm going with.

The evidence isn't all that strongly in support of that. The writer of the episode did not express any sentiment that this class would be the only one warranting the designation "star ship", and we have no clear reason to think that the maker of the artwork would have been thinking in terms of a list featuring just a single class of ships. Quite to the contrary, the diversity in numbers would appear to be another attempt at creating diversity on the cheap.

True; it was Greg Jein who assumed they were all Connies way after the fact. Which when you think about it, makes no sense whatsoever. Almost all the Connies built just happen to be under repairs at that one Starbase at the exact same time?

 

[Timo]

If they had used, say, stock footage of a Cardassian Galor exploding in the far-off distance, we wouldn't even be debating this.

Which is my point, sort of: we now have more than nothing (even if just a smidgen more), so it's fun to make use of it.

a "starship," which has usually been the purview of the saucer/nacelle Starfleet

The term "starship" is liberally thrown left and right in the TNG era, not being specific to saucer-nacelle ships in any way. That Starfleet's own starships tend to be saucer-nacelle vessels is a separate issue, yielding no particular support to the terminological debate.

Almost all the Connies built just happen to be under repairs at that one Starbase at the exact same time?

The fun thing is that we have zero idea what that chart actually describes. Not only is the identity of the ships unknown, but the very meaning of "% complete" or "star ship status" is left unexplained. Possibly these ships aren't even anywhere near Starbase 11 - this might be a chart listing the status of star ships everywhere in the universe, in alphabetical order or whatnot, and Stone has just decided to zoom in to the section mentioning the current status of the Enterprise so that he can evaluate his decisions (on repairs, and/or on court-martialing the skipper) based on that. Perhaps he'd not dare challenge Kirk if his ship were currently scoring 80% or more in the star ship status contest?

Timo Saloniemi

 

[Dukhat]

The term "starship" is liberally thrown left and right in the TNG era, not being specific to saucer-nacelle ships in any way. That Starfleet's own starships tend to be saucer-nacelle vessels is a separate issue, yielding no particular support to the terminological debate.

While that might be so, in the instance of the LaSalle, by calling it a starship, the implication is that it belongs to Starfleet. The next implication is that it shares the design characteristics of almost all Starfleet vessels, i.e. a saucer and nacelles. IMHO.

The fun thing is that we have zero idea what that chart actually describes. Not only is the identity of the ships unknown, but the very meaning of "% complete" or "star ship status" is left unexplained. Possibly these ships aren't even anywhere near Starbase 11 - this might be a chart listing the status of star ships everywhere in the universe, in alphabetical order or whatnot, and Stone has just decided to zoom in to the section mentioning the current status of the Enterprise so that he can evaluate his decisions (on repairs, and/or on court-martialing the skipper) based on that. Perhaps he'd not dare challenge Kirk if his ship were currently scoring 80% or more in the star ship status contest?

The episode heavily implies if not outright states that these ships are all present at the starbase and in whatever state of "completion" they're in. The Enterprise and the Intrepid are definitely there, so why not the others? Why do we need to be spoon-fed this information instead of just taking it at face value?

 

[Timo]

The Enterprise and the Intrepid are definitely there

Well, not really. Arguing that the Intrepid would be there is circular, as all we see are registries, and the only registry we can recognize is that of the Enterprise.

Assuming things about that list is what got us to the ridiculous extremes of the Greg Jein list. Assuming nothing initially leaves us free to try out more workable alternatives and seeing if they work better.

Timo Saloniemi

 

[Dukhat]

Well, not really. Arguing that the Intrepid would be there is circular, as all we see are registries, and the only registry we can recognize is that of the Enterprise.

Yes, really. Check out TOS-R. The Enterprise and the Intrepid are hovering right next to each other.

Assuming things about that list is what got us to the ridiculous extremes of the Greg Jein list. Assuming nothing initially leaves us free to try out more workable alternatives and seeing if they work better.

I based my assumptions on the strong physical and verbal evidence from the episode itself. Jein based his assumptions on no logical rationale whatsoever. They're hardly similar.

 

[Mark_Nguyen]

Nice essay. I don't agree with some points, but it shows you did some exhaustive research. Well done!

One note on your observation of the 2344 Enterprise-C crew using phasers from the 2270s - well, it's not like the US Army didn't do the same. The M1911 Browning automatic pistol was introduced in 1911, and despite being officially replaced by the M9 Beretta in the 90s, it's still being used by Navy and Marine units, with essentially the same design as a hundred years ago.

If it ain't broke... Just like the Miranda and Excelsior classes.

Mark

 

[Timo]

Check out TOS-R. The Enterprise and the Intrepid are hovering right next to each other.

In TOS, there's no such evidence. But even if we count TOS-R, we don't see the name of that other starship, and only barely see the first three digits of her registry. So that may or may not be the Intrepid, and that may or may not have a registry appearing on the list.

Sure, there's probably some sort of intent behind all those graphics and scenes. But it doesn't really carry across the screen. What we get is a vague and confusing piece of ambience, which we still are free to interpret as we please.

Timo Saloniemi

 

[Dukhat]

Nice essay. I don't agree with some points, but it shows you did some exhaustive research. Well done!

Thanks! I'd be interested to know what you don't agree with

One note on your observation of the 2344 Enterprise-C crew using phasers from the 2270s - well, it's not like the US Army didn't do the same. The M1911 Browning automatic pistol was introduced in 1911, and despite being officially replaced by the M9 Beretta in the 90s, it's still being used by Navy and Marine units, with essentially the same design as a hundred years ago.

While you are undoubtedly correct, I was looking at it more from an in-universe perspective, i.e. for 70+ years the uniforms and sidearms never changed, but then in just the span of a few decades Starfleet suddenly gets all manner of uniform and weapons changes.

The interesting thing about the TMP phaser reuse is that only a few episodes before "Yesterday's Enterprise," we see what looks like a pre-TNG phaser gun in "The Survivors" (the phaser Kevin Uxbridge holds). I have photos of a prop reproduction of the gun and it looks amazingly like a hand-weapon version of the TNG phaser rifle. I wonder why they didn't use that instead.

If it ain't broke... Just like the Miranda and Excelsior classes.

Very funny

But even if we count TOS-R, we don't see the name of that other starship, and only barely see the first three digits of her registry. So that may or may not be the Intrepid, and that may or may not have a registry appearing on the list.

I suppose that I don't need to clearly see the name and registry to know that it's the Intrepid, based on both the episode's dialogue and that fact that Okuda said so.

Sure, there's probably some sort of intent behind all those graphics and scenes. But it doesn't really carry across the screen. What we get is a vague and confusing piece of ambience, which we still are free to interpret as we please.

It's not vague and confusing to me at all. It shows what appears to be a list of ships at the starbase undergoing some type of work. My issue was not where the ships were or what was being done to them, my issue was that I don't think they should all have been Connies like Jein postulated.

 

[Timo]

I suppose that I don't need to clearly see the name and registry to know that it's the Intrepid, based on both the episode's dialogue and that fact that Okuda said so.

I don't think Okuda really knows what he is doing here, or is a credible source - from the in-universe point of view. We see no work being done on either of the ships, which is fine in the case of the Enterprise, but inconsistent with what we know of the Intrepid at the time.

It's not vague and confusing to me at all.

Not after one inserts one's own assumptions, no. But one should strip those away before starting to see what becomes possible.

Timo Saloniemi

 

[Praetor]

I enjoy the OP's assessment. It reinforces that there are more questions when it comes to conjectural classes than there are answers and it's quite open for interpretation. I personally believe there are at least that many classes of ship that we do not see onscreen. It does make for a more fun universe, even if the practicalities of budget prevent us from seeing them. I think balancing the two forces us to accept that when Starfleet finds a design it really likes, it sticks with it for a while.

The differences of intention when it comes to the term "Starship" are rather vast, as well. Privately, I have accepted the term to really mean "Star(fleet)ship." But I believe that in TOS, as evidenced by the dedication plaque, it really was intended to refer to ships of the same design as the Enterprise. From behind the scenes materials, we know a list of "ships of the Starship class" and that they were meant to be the biggest thing Star Fleet [sic] had out there. (Or UESPA, depending which week it was.) A universe including the movies and the 24th century, however, I don't think can include this definition of the term. We can either choose that its presence on the plaque meant something else, or ignore it entirely.

Regarding "Court Martial," I have to agree that Greg Jein's list, while admirable, isn't really feasible anymore. And anything based off of it I would take with a grain of salt, including the presence of the Intrepid in orbit in TOS-R. It's there in TOS-R because of Jein and Okuda.