A question about the Botany Bay.

[Tenacity]

I wonder why most fans and sources make the assumption that the mid 1990's era Botany Bay is Spock's identification of a DY-100, and it isn't Kirk's identification of a DY-500? Just because Kirk doesn't correct Spock, doesn't mean Kirk agrees with Spock, or that Spock is correct.

Spock isn't perfect, and his knowledge of Earth's history is flawed (efficent Nazi's), why shouldn't the Botany Bay be a DY-500 from the mid 1990's?

Star Trek's universe does have Humans space progress being being more advanced than it actually turned out to be. By the mid 1990's the fictional DY series could have been up to a 500 series number, with older DY-100 having been from the previous decade.

Spock states that the last of the DY-100's were built in the 1990's, but then later refers to spacecraft of the Botany Bay type as the most advance spacecraft of it's time

Why would the most advanced spacecraft of the time be discontinued?

Spock: " I fail to understand why it always gives you pleasure to see me proven wrong. "

 

[M'Sharak]

I wonder why most fans and sources make the assumption that the mid 1990's era Botany Bay is Spock's identification of a DY-100, and it isn't Kirk's identification of a DY-500? Just because Kirk doesn't correct Spock, doesn't mean Kirk agrees with Spock, or that Spock is correct.

From episode dialogue:

KIRK: An old Earth vessel, similar to the DY-500 class.
SPOCK: Much older. DY-100 class, to be exact.

Kirk's ID of the vessel is approximate -- "similar to"; Spock's is definitive -- "to be exact".

As for the DY-100 being the most advanced of its time, that kind of status is often fleeting. The DY-500, while similar in appearance, most likely represented an improvement of the design in several aspects, and (whether quickly or eventually) superseded the older model in production and use.

 

[Tenacity]

Kirk's ID of the vessel is approximate -- "similar to"; Spock's is definitive -- "to be exact".

But that depends on Spock being knowledgeable about Earth history, a very specific aspect of it.

Again, Spock has authoritatively and confidently spoken on details of Earth's history where he was completely wrong.

 

[uniderth]

Again, Spock has authoritatively and confidently spoken on details of Earth's history where he was completely wrong.

I remember discussion of this occurring but I don't specifically recall these instances. Any help would be appreciated.

 

[JonnyQuest037]

I wonder why most fans and sources make the assumption that the mid 1990's era Botany Bay is Spock's identification of a DY-100, and it isn't Kirk's identification of a DY-500? Just because Kirk doesn't correct Spock, doesn't mean Kirk agrees with Spock, or that Spock is correct.

1) Precisely because Kirk doesn't correct Spock. Earlier in that exact same scene, Spock says to Kirk, "I fail to understand why it always gives you pleasure to see me proven wrong." Considering that, do you really think that Kirk wouldn't correct Spock if he proved to be incorrect about something mere moments later?
2) Because Spock is correct about things about 97.2% of the time.
3) Because it was clearly the authorial intent that Spock was correct, and Shatner and Nimoy's performances bear that out.
4) Because it's the simplest possible explanation and it gets way too convoluted if Spock is incorrect about the ship class.

Honestly, if a scene says that something is X, and the scene is played as if something is X, it's really okay to interpret the scene as if the thing is X. Not everything has to be interpreted as the exact opposite of what we're shown on screen.

But that depends on Spock being knowledgeable about Earth history, a very specific aspect of it.

Yeah, so? Spock being knowledgeable about extremely specific stuff is one of his basic character traits. Spock is the guy that knows stuff. That's what he does.

 

[Tenacity]

Any help would be appreciated.

The death counts Spock gave for the first two world wars were wildly off ( 6 million and 11 million). Spock and Riker gave different death figures for the 3rd world War (37 million and 600 million) trust who you will there.

Spock agreed with the statement from John Gill that Nazi Germany was "the most efficiant state Earth ever knew," Nazi Germany thankfully was extremely inefficant and badly run.

Spock mis-identified the Eugenics War as Earth's last world war.

Spock being knowledgeable about extremely specific stuff is one of his basic character traits.

Being wrong about Earth history certainly is.

Because it's the simplest possible explanation and it gets way too convoluted if Spock is incorrect about the ship class.

Why "way to convoluted?" I started this thread to discuss a detail, not a major story element.

do you really think that Kirk wouldn't correct Spock if he proved to be incorrect about something mere moments later

Spock had moments before been proven wrong on his prior anouncement that the ship they were approaching couldn't possibily be a Earth ship. Why rub it in two mistakes in less than a minute.

Because Spock is correct about things about 97.2% of the time

Apparently not.

 

[ZapBrannigan]

The Botany Bay was the only miniature built to match the scale of the 11-footer, and the only one photographed with it as a single in-camera shot.

The cover photo of that, on the May 1975 printing of The World of Star Trek (David Gerrold), was the first behind the scenes glimpse of the 11-footer most fans probably ever had.

 

[Tribble Threat]

I'm confused. Would it improve the story in any way if the ship had a different digit in its number?

 

[Timo]

...Also, the heroes supposedly delve into historical records early on to uncover the ship's (and then Khan's) identity. If Spock hadn't preempted that with his correct statement, the guy or gal doing the searching should pipe up. Since he or she does not, Spock got it right.

He probably got Earth history right, too - it's just different history. John Gill educated Kirk, and perhaps Spock, too: both might believe the Nazis were efficient, if that's what Gill teaches, and Gill might teach it because that's what history in the 22rd century thinks of the Nazis. It's a POV issue: the US had a much, much more efficient industrial-logistical machine in WWII, but the Nazi way of governing may have been deemed superior in efficiency at some point.

The WW casualties may be a POV issue (Spock defines those as the result of despotism and slavery, perhaps excluding a lot with that), or then the wars were different in Trek. We know a lot of history was, after all, including the very 1990s being discussed here.

Not saying Spock couldn't be bullshitting himself through Earth History or Doomsday Machine Origins or Miri Civilization Age or a dozen other things where he speaks with authority on something he couldn't possibly know anything about. And certainly the opening of "Space Seed" is on the theme of everybody being wrong. But every error in that teaser gets corrected, either by comments from peers, or then by the events overtaking the presumptions. DY-500->DY-100 would seem to be one of those.

As for the DY-100 being the most advanced of its time, that kind of status is often fleeting. The DY-500, while similar in appearance, most likely represented an improvement of the design in several aspects, and (whether quickly or eventually) superseded the older model in production and use.

Yup - but, as per the dialogue, only "much later".

Then again, we have DY-200, DY-300 and DY-400 to do the replacing in the meantime...

Timo Saloniemi

 

[Tenacity]

I'm confused. Would it improve the story in any way if the ship had a different digit in its number?

As I mentioned, it a just a detail, but one I've wondered about. Ultimately it's impact on the story is non-existent.

...Also, the heroes supposedly delve into historical records early on to uncover the ship's (and then Khan's) identity.

While Spock did run the ship's name prior to the boarding, there was nothing.

The subsequent research into the historical records was into Khan himself and the supermen's history. Not the ship.

 

[Forbin]

Yes, I don't understand why this is an issue.

 

[Timo]

While Spock did run the ship's name prior to the boarding, there was nothing.

Do you think this was because he searched for DY-100 ships of that name when he should have searched for DY-500?

Obviously the search process would have involved establishing the type of the ship one way or another; the type would be the one bit of data the heroes actually had available, the name potentially (indeed, apparently!) being false and all the rest of the data missing. If what they had available were somehow faulty, they would correct the fault in the process of the search, there being no obstacles to doing so.

What we can deduce from this discussion is one (and only one) of the following:

1) The assorted DY series vessels resemble each other visually and OTOH are distinct from non-DY ships, allowing for this combination of identification and confusion; Spock knows more about them than Kirk.
2) The two DY types involved are utterly dissimilar, and Kirk doesn't know his shit (unlikely, because he's the one to initiate the discussion).
2) The two DY types involved are utterly dissimilar, and Spock doesn't know his shit (unlikely, because ultimately his insistence on this being a DY-100 helps establish the correct timeframe, while DY-500 by his own words would be outside that timeframe).

Timo Saloniemi

 

[Imaus]

I took Kirk's line is to say that he's familiar with the vessel type/shape/form, that something like it is still in service - the DY 500. It would make sense for a contemporary vessel, even if old, to be out in that far space. Lost ships on the Federation frontier aren't amiss. From what I gathered from TNG screencaps, the DY-500 was a hundred years before Kirk's time; and a few might still had been around in civilian service, and Kirk is a frontier lad.

This is taking a lower case 'old Earth' than a uppercase 'Old Earth' vessel line; the former implies that it's just an old bucket from Earth, while the latter might mean a vessel from a whole other era of Earth's history. I dunno maybe I'm making it too complicated. 'Capital O' Old appeared in, say, Dune; but I digress.

But then Spocks' line that it is a DY-100; 400 digits before, means that something is amiss.

 

[Henoch]

What we can deduce from this discussion is one (and only one) of the following:

1) The assorted DY series vessels resemble each other visually and OTOH are distinct from non-DY ships, allowing for this combination of identification and confusion; Spock knows more about them than Kirk.
2) The two DY types involved are utterly dissimilar, and Kirk doesn't know his shit (unlikely, because he's the one to initiate the discussion).
2) The two DY types involved are utterly dissimilar, and Spock doesn't know his shit (unlikely, because ultimately his insistence on this being a DY-100 helps establish the correct timeframe, while DY-500 by his own words would be outside that timeframe).

It's probably subtle differences like with identifying the differences between 1968-1974 Corvettes by their side vents and bumpers.

I took Kirk's line is to say that he's familiar with the vessel type/shape/form, that something like it is still in service - the DY 500. It would make sense for a contemporary vessel, even if old, to be out in that far space. Lost ships on the Federation frontier aren't amiss. From what I gathered from TNG screencaps, the DY-500 was a hundred years before Kirk's time; and a few might still had been around in civilian service, and Kirk is a frontier lad.

We actually have one in-universe example: The freighter Woden from The Ultimate Computer was obviously a DY-series spacecraft.

 

[Tenacity]

Yes, I don't understand why this is an issue.

no issue involved. it like discussing why scotty had the wrong insignia on his shirt once,

you think this was because he searched for DY-100 ships of that name when he should have searched for DY-500?

no.

 

[BK613]

Don't understand the confusion. The BB is identified as a DY-100 class twice in this episode. I don't understand how anyone think it were any other class.
First, at the initial encounter:

KIRK: An old Earth vessel, similar to the DY=500 class.
SPOCK: Much older. DY-100 class, to be exact. Captain, the last such vessel was built centuries ago, back in the 1990s.​

And second, after being along side for ten hours (during which she was examined by "engineering and medical specialists"):

SPOCK: A strange, violent period in your history. I find no record what so ever of an SS Botany Bay. Captain, the DY-100 class vessel was designed for interplanetary travel only. With simple nuclear-powered engines, star travel was considered impractical at that time. It was ten thousand to one against their making it to another star system. And why no record of the trip?​

 

[Dukhat]

Honestly, if a scene says that something is X, and the scene is played as if something is X, it's really okay to interpret the scene as if the thing is X. Not everything has to be interpreted as the exact opposite of what we're shown on screen.

This quote should be pinned to the top of the TrekBBS, especially for serial contrarians to read.

The death counts Spock gave for the first two world wars were wildly off ( 6 million and 11 million). Spock and Riker gave different death figures for the 3rd world War (37 million and 600 million) trust who you will there.

That's not an example of Spock being wrong. That's a changed premise. Did anyone point out that Spock was wrong when he made that statement?

Spock agreed with the statement from John Gill that Nazi Germany was "the most efficiant state Earth ever knew," Nazi Germany thankfully was extremely inefficant and badly run.

Except he agreed with something that Kirk said. So either both Kirk and Spock are not knowledgeable about Earth history, or in the Star Trek universe the Nazis were efficient. Never mind that in real life it would be nonsensical for Kirk & Spock to think that.

Spock misidentified the Eugenics War as Earth's last world war.

Again, a changed premise, not a mistake. I'm thinking you're confusing the two concepts.

 

[Timo]

I don't see your definition working here much. If it's a changed premise in the sense that WWIII is one thing now, another thing later, then it cannot be used to describe the fictional universe. It can only describe the faulty process of writing the fiction, for those interested in that sort of stuff.

So e.g. WWI and WWII going differently in that other universe is not a changed premise at all. Either it's a premise, period, or then it's an error, period. The former applies in-universe; the other doesn't.

The bottom line regarding the original speculation is that the heroes get the timeframe spot on, solely by studying the vessel. Spock says DY-100 and the 1990s go hand in hand. If Spock is to be in error, then DY-500 and the 1990s go hand in hand instead, and DY-100 apparently is from the 1960s or whatever. Which is, like, two needless complications: Spock being wrong despite double-checking himself, and space tech being extremely advanced before the 1990s when we already saw the late 1960s and saw Saturn V marking the state of the art.

Now, Spock can be wrong, and apparently is on the issue of how Earthlings call their wars. Not on how they call their old ships, though.

Timo Saloniemi

 

[Dukhat]

I don't see your definition working here much.

Sorry you feel that way. But a changed premise is not the same thing as a mistake.

 

[Angry Fanboy]

I'm confused. Would it improve the story in any way if the ship had a different digit in its number?

Lots of things discussed here would fall into a similar category.

Often people just like to discuss small details, they enjoy it, and if others don't there's no requirement to participate in that particular discussion.

Hope that clears up your confusion!