Which 12 Constitution class starships in "Tomorrow is Yesterday"?

[Dukhat]

^ And also because NCC-1710 would have looked too much like 1701. At least on the TV sets of the day.

I suppose, but I'd like to think that the producers of Star Trek didn't consider their audience so stupid that they would have confused a destroyed ship for an intact one, no matter what was printed on them.

"In-universe" I think it holds a lot of water.

No, not really, because by that logic the Excelsior and the Enterprise-B were two different classes, the Enterprise-D and the Venture were two different classes, the Phoenix, the Sutherland, and the Melbourne from "BoBW" were three different classes, and the Reliant, the Lantree and Sisko's Saratoga were also three different classes.

That's nonsense, too. It was meant to be a starship, is all. It would have cost money to attempt to build a starship that looked different; at the very least, there would have been the risk of having to buy two ATM kits for experimentation.

The model kit was of the Enterprise. Someone put a different name on it, but the intent was that it was supposed to be the same type of ship as the studio model. If they wanted to make a different class of ship, they could have damn well bought two model kits and kitbashed them, just as you say (or just made a Saladin-like ship, or just glued the parts in different locations, etc.) But they didn't. Not because they didn't have the money, not because they didn't have the time. Because it simply wasn't necessary; because every other Starfleet vessel shown on screen in TOS was a Connie. Why should this be any different?

If logic must apply, you must be correct: How can the Constellation have been a Constitution class ship when it has a lower registry number?

Since there has never been a canonical reference to the U.S.S. Constitution's registry number, there isn't any problem here.

Maybe part of Decker's calculus of attacking the planet killer a second time is that the Enterprise was a newer and more capable ship than his own, thereby giving a better chance of success....

All that means is that it could be a newer ship of the same class.

Starship registries should be in order because it's logical and convenient.

I agree. Unfortunately Starfleet thinks otherwise.

 

[Wingsley]

Let's revisit the turbolift scene from "Tomorrow Is Yesterday" to review some details:

KIRK: (to turbolift computer) Bridge.

CHRISTOPHER: Must have taken quite a lot to build a ship like this.

KIRK: There are only twelve like it in the fleet.

CHRISTOPHER: I see. Did the Navy

KIRK: We're a combined service, Captain. Our authority is the United Earth Space Probe Agency.

CHRISTOPHER: United Earth?

KIRK: This is very difficult to explain. We're from your future. A time warp placed us here. It was an accident.

CHRISTOPHER: You seem to have a lot of them. However, I can't deny the fact that you're here. With this ship.

Based strictly on canon, one could conclude from this little bit of dialogue that Kirk has indicated there are twelve Federation starships-of-the-line sponsored by the United Earth Space Agency, without ever mentioning the Constitution class, or "Star Ship" class. The conversation really isn't about the space vessel's technical nomenclature, but about the fact she is from the Earth of the future. (Captain Christopher's distant descendants.)

This would seem logical, since we later learn that "Intrepid is manned by Vulcans" ("The Immunity Syndrome"), suggesting that there are "Earth" ships in Starfleet, as well as "Vulcan" ships, and possibly other ships crewed either mostly or entirely by a single species or the inhabitants from a given star system.

So, for all we know, Kirk's "twelve like it in the fleet" could be about 12 (or 13-total, including Enterprise) Federation starships-of-the-line from Earth. In which case, it's still an open question what the names of those vessels, other than the ones mentioned in various TOS episodes, would be. One could infer that Constellation, Lexington, Exeter, Defiant and maybe Hood, Potemkin and Excalibur were also Earth-based Federation starships as well. We can't be sure about the maybes, though; we never saw their crews so we don't know if they were Terran or not.

Kirk's remarks could be even murkier than that. What if Kirk was talking about Earth-sponsored Federation starships, but he only meant armed cruisers? This would eliminate all Federation scouts, warptugs/freighters, and other non-cruiser-type starships. We really have no idea what specifically Kirk's remarks could've meant, as he never elaborated. For instance, we know from the movie-era that there are Federation starships of a different type, such as Reliant and Saratoga. If these ships were considered cruisers and if they dated back to the TOS era, they may be included in Kirk's 12-like-it. If, however, Reliant and Saratoga were not classified as cruisers (frigates? destroyers?) then maybe they would not be part of Kirk's 12-like-it.

Kirk's language was meant to be vague. After all, Kirk was telling a vague accounting of the future to a man who Kirk regarded as a relic from Earth's past.

 

[Dukhat]

^Ok. But I'm just taking Kirk's statement at face value: That there are twelve ships just like the Enterprise NCC-1701 in whatever future operating authority they belong to. (At least, twelve at the time of the episode.) The statement doesn't seem all that vague to me.

 

[Avro Arrow]

2. U.S.S. Constellation (NCC-1017) ("The Doomsday Machine")

It's been pointed out on this board before that there are physical differences between the the shooting model used on the show (the one in the Smithsonian) and the AMT model kit used for the Constellation. Differences in dimensions.

Coupled with a radically different NCC number the argument could be made that the Constellation is not the same class ship as the Enterprise.

Kirk almost walked past the auxiliary control room that he was looking for, suggesting that it wasn't in the same place as the ACR on the Enterprise.

Unlike some of the other responses on this thread, I actually like this theory, and like to think of the Constellation as older and smaller than the Constitution, but with similar lines. But the OP specifically mentioned TOS-R, and in TOS-R Constellation was shown to be pretty much identical to Enterprise. I personally wish TOS-R had played up the differences (and maybe even added more differences) rather than just having her as a run-of-the-mill Connie, but obviously CBS Digital felt otherwise.

(I will concede, of course, that Dukhat is probably right that the original model makers intended Constellation to be the same class as Enterprise, and it's just my personal preference that likes it otherwise, because of the low registry, and because I like to think that Starfleet had more than one ship type out there during TOS.)

Let's revisit the turbolift scene from "Tomorrow Is Yesterday" to review some details:

KIRK: (to turbolift computer) Bridge.

CHRISTOPHER: Must have taken quite a lot to build a ship like this.

KIRK: There are only twelve like it in the fleet.

CHRISTOPHER: I see. Did the Navy

KIRK: We're a combined service, Captain. Our authority is the United Earth Space Probe Agency.

CHRISTOPHER: United Earth?

KIRK: This is very difficult to explain. We're from your future. A time warp placed us here. It was an accident.

CHRISTOPHER: You seem to have a lot of them. However, I can't deny the fact that you're here. With this ship.

Based strictly on canon, one could conclude from this little bit of dialogue that Kirk has indicated there are twelve Federation starships-of-the-line sponsored by the United Earth Space Agency, without ever mentioning the Constitution class, or "Star Ship" class. The conversation really isn't about the space vessel's technical nomenclature, but about the fact she is from the Earth of the future. (Captain Christopher's distant descendants.)

This would seem logical, since we later learn that "Intrepid is manned by Vulcans" ("The Immunity Syndrome"), suggesting that there are "Earth" ships in Starfleet, as well as "Vulcan" ships, and possibly other ships crewed either mostly or entirely by a single species or the inhabitants from a given star system.

So, for all we know, Kirk's "twelve like it in the fleet" could be about 12 (or 13-total, including Enterprise) Federation starships-of-the-line from Earth. In which case, it's still an open question what the names of those vessels, other than the ones mentioned in various TOS episodes, would be. One could infer that Constellation, Lexington, Exeter, Defiant and maybe Hood, Potemkin and Excalibur were also Earth-based Federation starships as well. We can't be sure about the maybes, though; we never saw their crews so we don't know if they were Terran or not.

Kirk's remarks could be even murkier than that. What if Kirk was talking about Earth-sponsored Federation starships, but he only meant armed cruisers? This would eliminate all Federation scouts, warptugs/freighters, and other non-cruiser-type starships. We really have no idea what specifically Kirk's remarks could've meant, as he never elaborated. For instance, we know from the movie-era that there are Federation starships of a different type, such as Reliant and Saratoga. If these ships were considered cruisers and if they dated back to the TOS era, they may be included in Kirk's 12-like-it. If, however, Reliant and Saratoga were not classified as cruisers (frigates? destroyers?) then maybe they would not be part of Kirk's 12-like-it.

Kirk's language was meant to be vague. After all, Kirk was telling a vague accounting of the future to a man who Kirk regarded as a relic from Earth's past.

But they didn't get into talk about Enterprise's operating authority until after Kirk had made his "twelve" comment. The dialogue seems fairly straight-forward: Christopher comments that the ship seems like it'd have taken "a lot" to build (whether money or resources or whatever), and Kirk comments that there are only 12 like her in the fleet. If someone today was standing on the USS Harry S. Truman and said "It must have cost a lot to build this ship", and someone else replied "There are only ten like it in the fleet", you wouldn't think they were referring to all armed ships in the US navy, or all ships homeported in Virginia, or anything like that.

EDIT: Oops, Dukhat already responded to the second part. I agree with his response.

 

[Robert Comsol]

But I'm just taking Kirk's statement at face value: That there are twelve ships just like the Enterprise NCC-1701 in whatever future operating authority they belong to. (At least, twelve at the time of the episode.) The statement doesn't seem all that vague to me.

I concur.

Assuming Kirk did not want to get too specific, it's possible he merely mentioned the "twelve like it" (i.e. Enterprise Starship Class) which then would still leave an unspecified amount of Constitution Class starships to be accounted.

OTOH, The Making of Star Trek seems to suggest that the original producers didn't envision more than 12 starships to co-exist simultaneously (there must have been at least 12 starships still in active service when Kirk made that statement)

Bob

 

[Lance]

Does anybody know where the term "Constitution Class" first appeared?

In theory, the term is part of the graphics seen in ST:TMP monitors (as we know those graphics in detail, thanks to them coming from the Star Fleet Technical Manual), but in practice it cannot be spotted there; it's not visible in the up-close view of such a graphic in ST3:TSfS, either. Early TNG has no references to the class name, so it falls upon ST6:TUC to show a graphic with that name (although it refers to the refitted design). That and "Relics" really are the first canon usages AFAIK.

The designation was apparently invented early on, as it was used in a TOS graphic (that never was visible enough to the audience), but it was not mentioned in any dialogue and wasn't even particularly tightly associated with Kirk's ship.

There'd be a 1/10 chance, surely! Not exactly bad odds.

Thank you !!

That's a 1/100 chance, actually, since what we're talking about here are the odds of 400 (two zeroes) triumphing over 430 (one zero).

Timo Saloniemi

Edit: Actually, TNG "The Naked Now" has Picard say out loud "The Constitution class Enterprise, Captain James T. Kirk commanding" when reading the computer entry pertaining to the "The Naked Time" adventure. Yet the episode features a graphic of the refitted ship there, allowing us to interpret the Constitution class as referring solely to the refit (as it does refer to the refit in ST6) - it's only in TNG-R that a different graphic, closer to the TOS appearance of the ship, is shown there. So nitpickers might say that TNG-R "The Naked Now" came after "Relics" and ST6.

In any case, my mistake.

It's worth noting that for at least a while in the 1980s, the refit ship was often refered to in some licenced works as being 'Enterprise Class' (eg, from Mister Scott's Guide To The Enterprise), flagged up as a distinct and separate ship designation to the original Constitution. The implication seems to be that the extensive refit in TMP was *so* extensive that Starfleet effectively redesignated it a new class of ship, even though structurally it began life as a former-Constitution.

Do any of us know for certain when 'Constitution Class' really began to float around as the preferred phraseology behind-the-scenes?

 

[Dukhat]

Do any of us know for certain when 'Constitution Class' really began to float around as the preferred phraseology behind-the-scenes?

I'm sure that the FJ Tech Manual, the FASA role-playing games, Pocket Books Star Trek novels, and a myriad other works that came out between the TOS movies and the debut of TNG were heavily influential to committing the name to the canon.

 

[Mr. Laser Beam]

^ And also because NCC-1710 would have looked too much like 1701. At least on the TV sets of the day.

I suppose, but I'd like to think that the producers of Star Trek didn't consider their audience so stupid that they would have confused a destroyed ship for an intact one, no matter what was printed on them.

Well, it's not that, it's just that 1960's televisions were not exactly of the highest picture quality, and thus it was just easier to make a new number that could not possibly be confused with the old. Besides, nobody really cared about which numbers were in order anyway.

 

[GSchnitzer]

Do any of us know for certain when 'Constitution Class' really began to float around as the preferred phraseology behind-the-scenes?

As has been discussed on this board (search on “Constitution”), the earliest reference to the “Constitution Class” seems to be in the shooting script for “Space Seed.”

Scene 44 of the Second Revised Final Draft for "Space Seed," dated December 13, 1966 has the following content:

44 ANGLE ON SICK BAY VIEWER

It is covered with mathematical symbols and diagrams. CAMERA PULLS BACK to show Khan studying with great concentration. He pushes a button. Another transparency appears: a chapter heading, reading: BASIC SPECIFICATIONS, CONSTITUTION CLASS STAR SHIP.

Scenes 47 and 48 have similar content:

From 47:

...At the door, she [McGivers] turns and looks back at him. He gives her a strong, masculine, confident smile. She is about to say something, but turns and exits. Khan turns back to his studying. He pushes a button, stares back up at his screen.

48 INSERT SCREEN

A chapter heading: Basic Propulsion Systems, Constitution Class Star Ship.



From this single script direction, a number of things seem to have happened:

1. Matt Jefferies created a "Constitution Class" graphic that was filmed for the episode (but ultimately not used in “Space Seed).”

2. The aforementioned graphic did finally show up (barely) in “The Trouble with Tribbles.”

3. D.C. Fontana began cobbling together a list of 12 starship names; these "official" names--including the Constitution--were published in Stephen Whitfield's The Making of Star Trek.

4. Cut up film clips of close-up of this graphic were sold by Lincoln Enterprises and ended up in the hands of various collectors.

5. Bjo Trimble made reference to the Enterprise being a “Constitution Class” starship in her Star Trek Concordance.

6. Greg Jein made reference to the Enterprise being a “Constitution Class” starship in his article “The Case of Jonathan Doe Starship”—also adopting (somewhat capriciously but logically) the “1700” as the registry number for this vessel.

7. Franz Jospeh Schnaubelt, also in possession of this film clip, also pressed the Constitution into service as the class ship, in both his Booklet of General Plans and his Star Fleet Technical Manual and also gave it the registry number of “1700.”

8. Gene Roddenberry made reference to the ships-of-the-line “Constitution Class” starships in his novelization of Star Trek The Motion Picture.”

From there it seems to have spread to the “The Naked Now” and a shot for Star Trek VI—and lots of other references. As they say, the rest is history.

There might be some question whether Khan was studying ships of the class to which the Enterprise belonged, of if he was instead studying some other kinds of starships to help him in his piracy efforts. Rightly or wrongly, it seems to have taken hold in the public’s consciousness.

If there are any references to the "Constitution Class" earlier than this December 13, 1966, script, I haven't heard about it.

 

[Robert Comsol]

Thanks, Greg, great summary / chronology, I hope you don't mind I reflect on a few points

3. D.C. Fontana began cobbling together a list of 12 starship names; these "official" names--including the Constitution--were published in Stephen Whitfield's The Making of Star Trek.

It's worthwhile to note that D.C. Fontana suggested 21 names, Bob Justman in return suggested 12 names plus names of English, French, Russian and Japanese carriers and a Vulcan name (I presume we own the Japanese Kongo to him). "Constitution" is not on any of these lists, but ended up in "the following names have been established".
I really wish Harvey could tell us, should he find memos past August 9, 1967, how "Constitution" made it into the finals.

6. Greg Jein made reference to the Enterprise being a “Constitution Class” starship in his article “The Case of Jonathan Doe Starship”—also adopting (somewhat capriciously but logically) the “1700” as the registry number for this vessel.

I think it's important to understand, how he arrived at his conclusion.

First of all, higher up in his treatise he quotes from the sentence (!) of The Making of Star Trek which contains the "Enterprise-class starships" remark, but never felt it necessary to address why he ignored it, although he must have read it!

For his read-NCC-registries-in-"Court-Martial"-from-bottom-to-top he needed a ship name starting with an A, B or C. Since he felt "NCC-1700" couldn't be the Constellation (NCC-1017) he picked the Constitution to somehow fit his theory.

Interestingly, at the end (apparently after feedback) he conceded that "NCC-1700" could have been a ship just being built which I think was the case or intention (of the starship status chart). I had speculated that the last two digits were just a placeholder for the yet to come contact code, and in this case it probably was the Defiant (NCC-1764) who "inherited" the code from the Excalibur (NCC-1664), destroyed by the M-5 in "The Ultimate Computer".

8. Gene Roddenberry made reference to the ships-of-the-line “Constitution Class” starships in his novelization of Star Trek The Motion Picture.”

Which could just indicate that "Constitution Class" starships were better opponents than "Enterprise Class" starships.

It's interesting to notice that the Official TMP Blueprints, "approved" by Gene Roddenberry, state on sheet 6 (Drell-4 Klingon Battlecruiser): "The new Enterprise Class, however, promises to even those odds."

In ST II-TWOK, the bridge simulator in the beginning was designated "Enterprise Class", too.

There might be some question whether Khan was studying ships of the class to which the Enterprise belonged, of if he was instead studying some other kinds of starships to help him in his piracy efforts.

KHAN: I've been reading up on starships, but they have one luxury not mentioned in the manuals.
MARLA: I don't understand.
KHAN: A beautiful woman. My name is Khan. Please sit and entertain me.

The way I understood his line he either read about an older starship design (to understand the technological improvements from one design to the next) or about a different starship design he might encounter in combat.

I think Gene Roddenberry fixed the latter with his TMP novelization. And if you believe the TOS-R CGI lettering, I would have installed the M-5 on a weaker starship to show what it is capable of. For all we know the Constitution Class starships could have had extra phasers on the inside of the warp nacelles (maybe even that particular long-range phaser Mark IX/01 Khan and Scotty had both been studying...)

Rightly or wrongly, it seems to have taken hold in the public’s consciousness.

That much is obvious, I agree.

Bob

 

[GSchnitzer]

It's important to know that the very point of generating such a list of starship names, as Dorothy Fontana indicated in her memo, was that they had been tossing out ship names in episodes, and then forgetting entirely that those names were being established. The ships Constitution, Intrepid, Republic, and Valiant were the four ships established in first season episodes but which were inadvertently left off of Dorothy's list. (She was right: staffers were establishing names and then forgetting about them.) Fortunately, by the time the "official list" was generated in The Making of Star Trek book, they remembered to go back and add in those four ships they had already established but very nearly missed. Also added onto the list was another name appearing in no other memos, but which had been established in the recent episode "The Ultimate Computer: the Potemkin. Lastly, of course, having cobbled together the "official" list of starship names, they seem to have forgotten about it again, and established the Defiant (almost named the Scimitar) in "The Tholian Web."

So it's not like the Constitution and the other ships were simply mysterious and capricious afterthoughts, being added to the official list on someone's whim; they had already been established and so became part of the final list. No one says "Hey, wait! How did the Intrepid get added to the final list when it doesn't appear in Fontana's or Justman's memos? Where's the memo that explains that decision?"

TO: Gene Roddenberry
FROM: D. C. Fontana
DATE: August 8, 1967
SUBJECT: Star Fleet - 12 Starships

Dear Gene,

We have in the course of a season and a half, established that Star Fleet includes 12 ships of the starship class. We are frequently called upon to name one or the other of them, and no one has kept track of who's where. The following is a list of suggested names and some international alternates we may wish to establish as starships of the Fleet. Would like you and Bob J. to indicate preference for the names, put it in the STAR TREK Guide and use it... if this seems feasible.

Enterprise
Exeter
Essex
Excalibur
Lexington
Yorktown
Endeavor
El Dorado
Excelsior
Saratoga
Constellation (destroyed in "Doomsday Machine." Presume she would be replaced by Star Fleet.)

Alternates include the names of some famous fighting ships of the past, plus a couple of international variations we might consider, Star Fleet being composed of a united service.

Hornet
Wasp
Farragut (mentioned as destroyed in "Obsession")
Hood
Bonhomme Richard
Monitor or Merrimac, depending upon your loyalties
Tori (bird)
Lafayette
Ari (lion)
Krieger (warrior)

Please consider.

D. C. Fontana

 

[Unicron]

It's worth noting that for at least a while in the 1980s, the refit ship was often refered to in some licenced works as being 'Enterprise Class' (eg, from Mister Scott's Guide To The Enterprise), flagged up as a distinct and separate ship designation to the original Constitution. The implication seems to be that the extensive refit in TMP was *so* extensive that Starfleet effectively redesignated it a new class of ship, even though structurally it began life as a former-Constitution

Yep. FASA mentioned that the Enterprise was the only heavy cruiser of the original batch to survive its missions intact, and so it became the template for the next series of refits (which turned out to be more extensive than Scotty had originally planned). IIRC, this detail originated in Gene Roddenberry's TMP novelization, and from that source it was used in contemporary tie-ins like Mr. Scott's Guide and FASA. I could be wrong on that though.

 

[Robert Comsol]

@ GSchnitzer

Yes and No. I for one couldn't blame D.C. Fontana for not having mentioned these four ships, because

• Constitution was just a small print on a phaser schematic not used in the final episode "Space Seed" and not mentioned in dialogue.
• Intrepid was not identified as a "starship" in "Court Martial", this is merely an assumption (starship status chart interpretation debate)
• Republic was an older "United Star Ship" Kirk had served on. Maybe she thought it was no longer in active service
• Valiant was not identified as a "starship" and she probably was even older than the Republic (I think she might have been an Oberth Class ship).

However, I think there is a high probability that the small "Constitution Class" print on the phaser schematic / in the screenplay found its way into the name finding discussion, eventually.

Where you have to give D.C. Fontana credit, IMHO, is that she did consider Theodore Sturgeon's starship names from his first "Amok Time" draft, May 15, 1967, i.e. Excalibur and Endeavor (in case anyone had been wondering what the names of these starships mentioned in "Amok Time" had been, there you go).

Interesting to note that Bob Justman cited Eagle as a Fontana proposal...

Apparently she didn't mind and added the Eagle to "her" Essex in her first draft of "Journey to Babel", September 30, 1967.

That either tells me that the name finding process hadn't ended yet by that date (those two names are not on the final list) or D.C. Fontana was just stubborn.

Bob

 

[GSchnitzer]

"Dorothy, in addition to the ship names you provided in your list--and the few other ones I suggested--we also need to double back and find all the ones we're already established so far. Do you remember 'em all?"

"Crap, Bob, I don't remember what we've established a year and a half later. That's why I wanted to make a list--because we keep establishing stuff but then we forget to keep track of what we've established. I can go back and check, but it's going to be a real headache. I'll get a hold of the screening room, and have the projectionist rack up the episodes and watch 'em all. I can probably get through one--maybe two--episodes a day. With over 40 episodes to look at, I'll have an answer for you by the end of the month."

"Dorothy, don't be a schmuck. Walk over to the file cabinet over there, pull out the scripts, and look for the names of ships we've already established. There's no need to go and pull the actual footage. That's just crazy! You can start the project after lunch, and then have an answer for me by the end of the day."

"Bob, should I concern myself as I go about this little project, with the particular timeframe these ships appear in--or what kind of star ships they are?"

"Are you joking? Just get me their names, Dorothy!"

 

[Wingsley]

It's important to know that the very point of generating such a list of starship names, as Dorothy Fontana indicated in her memo, was that they had been tossing out ship names in episodes, and then forgetting entirely that those names were being established. The ships Constitution, Intrepid, Republic, and Valiant were the four ships established in first season episodes but which were inadvertently left off of Dorothy's list. (She was right: staffers were establishing names and then forgetting about them.) Fortunately, by the time the "official list" was generated in The Making of Star Trek book, they remembered to go back and add in those four ships they had already established but very nearly missed. Also added onto the list was another name appearing in no other memos, but which had been established in the recent episode "The Ultimate Computer: the Potemkin. Lastly, of course, having cobbled together the "official" list of starship names, they seem to have forgotten about it again, and established the Defiant (almost named the Scimitar) in "The Tholian Web."

So it's not like the Constitution and the other ships were simply mysterious and capricious afterthoughts, being added to the official list on someone's whim; they had already been established and so became part of the final list. No one says "Hey, wait! How did the Intrepid get added to the final list when it doesn't appear in Fontana's or Justman's memos? Where's the memo that explains that decision?"

TO: Gene Roddenberry
FROM: D. C. Fontana
DATE: August 8, 1967
SUBJECT: Star Fleet - 12 Starships

Dear Gene,

We have in the course of a season and a half, established that Star Fleet includes 12 ships of the starship class. We are frequently called upon to name one or the other of them, and no one has kept track of who's where. The following is a list of suggested names and some international alternates we may wish to establish as starships of the Fleet. Would like you and Bob J. to indicate preference for the names, put it in the STAR TREK Guide and use it... if this seems feasible.

Enterprise
Exeter
Essex
Excalibur
Lexington
Yorktown
Endeavor
El Dorado
Excelsior
Saratoga
Constellation (destroyed in "Doomsday Machine." Presume she would be replaced by Star Fleet.)

Alternates include the names of some famous fighting ships of the past, plus a couple of international variations we might consider, Star Fleet being composed of a united service.

Hornet
Wasp
Farragut (mentioned as destroyed in "Obsession")
Hood
Bonhomme Richard
Monitor or Merrimac, depending upon your loyalties
Tori (bird)
Lafayette
Ari (lion)
Krieger (warrior)

Please consider.

D. C. Fontana

Confused... why did anyone assume that the Farragut that young Lt. James T. Kirk served on was destroyed? The ship was attacked, yes, and half of Farragut's crew was killed, but there was never an indication that the ship itself was destroyed. If that had happened, the discussion of the Tycho IV incident would've surely included mention of that occurance.

 

[GSchnitzer]

I think she just remembered wrong. She seems to have conflated the Intrepid with the Farragut.

 

[Dukhat]

It's important to know that the very point of generating such a list of starship names, as Dorothy Fontana indicated in her memo, was that they had been tossing out ship names in episodes, and then forgetting entirely that those names were being established. The ships Constitution, Intrepid, Republic, and Valiant were the four ships established in first season episodes but which were inadvertently left off of Dorothy's list.

The Valiant was never considered to be a Constitution class ship, was it? That would mean that they were being built at least as far back as 2217.

 

[Avro Arrow]

It's worth noting that for at least a while in the 1980s, the refit ship was often refered to in some licenced works as being 'Enterprise Class' (eg, from Mister Scott's Guide To The Enterprise), flagged up as a distinct and separate ship designation to the original Constitution. The implication seems to be that the extensive refit in TMP was *so* extensive that Starfleet effectively redesignated it a new class of ship, even though structurally it began life as a former-Constitution.

This is an idea I've always liked. The point was made repeatedly in TMP that the refit ship was completely different than the original, both in capabilities and internal layout. What's the point of having a classification system if two completely dissimilar ships are considered the same class? This isn't some minor dockyard variance or a minor upgrade... the ship is so different it doesn't even look the same on a recognition silhouette. Even if you want to keep "Constitution" in the name, you at least have to differentiate it somehow from the original (eg - Canada's Improved Restigouche class). But naming the class after the first ship to undergo the refit is IMHO an elegant solution.

And it had some evidence in the canon too... Robert Comsol already mentioned the signage on the simulator in TWOK.

My understanding is that "Enterprise Class" was so prevalent in licensed works of the time that fandom pretty much accepted it, until the TNG Technical Manual came out 1991 and indicated that the refit Enterprise was still Constitution class. Does anyone know if this understanding is correct?

Of course, there are those of us that still stick with Enterprise Class, despite all the modern evidence to the contrary!

 

[Lance]

It's worth noting that for at least a while in the 1980s, the refit ship was often refered to in some licenced works as being 'Enterprise Class' (eg, from Mister Scott's Guide To The Enterprise), flagged up as a distinct and separate ship designation to the original Constitution. The implication seems to be that the extensive refit in TMP was *so* extensive that Starfleet effectively redesignated it a new class of ship, even though structurally it began life as a former-Constitution.

This is an idea I've always liked. The point was made repeatedly in TMP that the refit ship was completely different than the original, both in capabilities and internal layout. What's the point of having a classification system if two completely dissimilar ships are considered the same class? This isn't some minor dockyard variance or a minor upgrade... the ship is so different it doesn't even look the same on a recognition silhouette. Even if you want to keep "Constitution" in the name, you at least have to differentiate it somehow from the original (eg - Canada's Improved Restigouche class). But naming the class after the first ship to undergo the refit is IMHO an elegant solution.

And it had some evidence in the canon too... Robert Comsol already mentioned the signage on the simulator in TWOK.

My understanding is that "Enterprise Class" was so prevalent in licensed works of the time that fandom pretty much accepted it, until the TNG Technical Manual came out 1991 and indicated that the refit Enterprise was still Constitution class. Does anyone know if this understanding is correct?

Of course, there are those of us that still stick with Enterprise Class, despite all the modern evidence to the contrary!

Yeah, I've always liked the 'Enterprise Class' thing as a solution as well. It also accounts for things like the Miranda/Soyuz Class being such similar designs: if the practice at Starfleet is that if a ship is sufficiently refitted in a way as to make it functionally a different vessel, even though it started with another class of ship as it's "base" structure, then it gets a whole new classification to reflect that.

 

[CrazyMatt]

The Valiant was never considered to be a Constitution class ship, was it? That would mean that they were being built at least as far back as 2217.

I'm not even sure they had starships 200 years before the events of WNMHGB. Enterprise fans, help me out here.