Aventine

[Christopher]

Well, don't tell me. It's Doug Drexler's explanation, and he knows far more than I ever will about the FX process on both ENT and BSG. So if there's something about his explanation that doesn't make sense to you, I suggest you visit The Drex Files and post a question in the thread comments. Although he's not posting as regularly as he used to, because Caprica is keeping him very busy.

 

[David cgc]

Well, Dayton asked. I added in the comments to you because you posted while I was writing mine up, and I wanted to clarify some things in light of what you said.

Honestly, I can think of a dozen reasons not to make such a large change to the hero ship, but stock footage isn't really the most compelling one. I originally just pointed out that it can be practical to replace all the old establishing shots on a starship-based series. Come to think of it, Babylon 5 cycled through their stock shots a lot, too. They pretty much used an entirely fresh batch every season. But every show and every producer is different. Hell, it might've been psychological, that the Enterprise production team were still in the frame of the model-era, where each shot was quite a bit more precious.

 

[Rush Limborg]

Oh, for the love of the Bird--

Just add a secondary hull, and give it a new class name.

 

[Dayton Ward]

If I had to guess, I'd say any such decision would likely come down to simple economics, rather than abilities on the part of the FX staff.

Enterprise was on the bubble for cancellation during its third season. The fourth season was greenlit mostly as a means of making the series a more attractive prospect as a syndication package (the "magic number" of 100 or so episodes, and all that). If it had somehow survived to a fifth season, I imagine the decision from the bean counters would be not to spend any more than was absolutely necessary to get the individual episodes in the can. Whereas inflicting "damage" on the Galactica model was necessary from a storytelling standpoint, given the series' internal continuity, allowing for the redesign/refit of the NX-01 might possibly have been seen as extraneous so far as production costs for Enterprise were concerned. Why spend the money, when there was really nothing to be gained that wouldn't be there with what they already had? Isn't that pretty much how TV production works?

(Of course, given that some of the coolest - and most expensive looking - episodes of the series came during that fourth season, this theory is likely suspect. Or, it could just mean that the production crew was simply that creative with respect to squeezing everything they could out of the budget.)

Since I have no insider knowledge of the show's production, this is obviously pure speculation on my part.

 

[F. King Daniel]

I think the “Ring ship” could fit into Star Trek pre-ENT somewhere. I’ve always found it an interesting design and was disappointed to learn that Christopher chalked its appearance up to a “mistake” in Ex Machina. It seemed a little closed-minded to me.

Who knows if it was a Starfleet ship, ISA or even Virgin (with an insane Richard Branson in command, Adrik Thorsen style)? It’s nice to have bits of Trek that haven’t been quantified into oblivion.

For that matter, I’d love to see the Bonaventure from the Delta Triangle, keeping the same lumpy design (and crazy hull number) as the TAS episode but with NX01-style hull details. I remember reading a reconciliation online somewhere (no idea where) that put it’s launch in 2119, just before Zefram Cochrane was lost, and a top speed of warp 1.9 (clearly it reached the triangle the same way the Ent-A did the centre of the galaxy)

Thus early Earth starship launches may go like this:

2119: Launch of Bonaventure. Lost on third voyage. Found in 2269.

2123: Launch of Enterprise XCV-330 (date from Spaceflight Chronology, most other details incompatible)

2139: Launch of Daedalus. Destroyed at launch.

2151: Launch of Enterprise NX-01. Killed the franchise.

 

[Christopher]

I think the “Ring ship” could fit into Star Trek pre-ENT somewhere. I’ve always found it an interesting design and was disappointed to learn that Christopher chalked its appearance up to a “mistake” in Ex Machina. It seemed a little closed-minded to me.

Don't misunderstand -- I'm quite fond of the ringship. But it's problematical to work it into canon as a ship named Enterprise, or to explain retroactively why it would be included in the refit E's rec deck over NX-01. After all, it wasn't seen on Archer's wall display of past Enterprises or on the TNG wall display of past Enterprises (though of course NX-01 wasn't on the latter either). It is canonical that the design did exist pre-ENT, because a painting of it was seen on a tavern wall in "First Flight" and in Starfleet HQ in "Home." But we never saw any such ships in use onscreen, so it seemed reasonable to conclude that it was an unused prototype -- at least, unused by Starfleet as a ship named Enterprise. Closed-minded? No, because I would've loved to include the ringship more fully. I didn't make the choice because of personal preference, but because it seemed the most logical interpretation of the evidence of canon.

Would I make the same choice today? Maybe not. Maybe I could work out a more creative hypothesis that incorporated the ringship more fully into Trek history. But what I offered in ExM was the best reconciliation I could devise at the time. After all, I wasn't telling the story of the ringship. I was telling the story of the TMP Enterprise, and reconciling the continuity glitch raised by the ringship was a minor issue calling for a brief explanation, not a dissertation on the history of human starflight.

 

[F. King Daniel]

I see what you mean, but were you told to "fix" the ringship "glitch" by an editor or was it something you came up with?

I'm looking forward to reading Ex Machina, btw. I'll get to it soon...

 

[Christopher]

^It's not important enough for an editor to direct a writer to do something about it. It was purely my own fanatical attention to detail.

 

[Rush Limborg]

And Chris does have a point. The "ringship" idea was used by the ENT Vulcans, so it makes sense that the design would be "Earth tech applied to Vulcan designes, as a prototype".

I will say, I loved his explanation. It had always bugged me that the NX-01 was not on the wall in TMP. (Of course, my beef was kinda with Rick and Co., who seemingly ignored the reference in favor of a new design. But still, you see my point. )

 

[Clawhammer]

Sorry to bring this on topic again

I just got green light to show Work In Progress images of the Aventine MKII. So the next couple of months, starting from next week I will do my best to post some of them on my blog. (or here)

For now I need to go back to my precious!!! (Ringship) Quite a challenge to give this 60's design a certain "modern" look without doing modifications to the basic blueprint shapes.

 

[ST20133]

I can't wait to see the re-fit since I loved the original. It may be hard to top the beauty of the first one. I suppose a more battle ready/battle scarred look might suit after the events of the Destiny series.

 

[Clawhammer]

I can't wait to see the re-fit since I loved the original. It may be hard to top the beauty of the first one. I suppose a more battle ready/battle scarred look might suit after the events of the Destiny series.

I was thinking that after the Destiny events it would be a good idea to directly upgrade the layout of the Aventine to "latest Vesta class standards".

(Ofcourse that is my own attempt to an in universe justification to make these corrections.)

 

[Christopher]

Upgrading makes sense. "Battle-scarred" doesn't. It stands to reason that the ship would get complete repairs and upgrades, with no physical "scars" remaining.

And the last thing I want to see is a "more battle-ready" Starfleet. Enough is enough with the wars and combat. Leave that stuff to the computer game. The books should return to exploration and diplomacy. The Aventine has slipstream drive, making it a powerful tool for exploration. That should be the focus.

 

[Rush Limborg]

^Peace Through Strength, mate. Speak Softly, And Carry A Big Stick, and all that good stuff....

But I see your point on, "This shouldn't be a warship, per se." We'll leave that to the Defiants and Sabres.

 

[DEWLine]

But also have a Damn Big Carrot ready as well. You never know if your next first contact's gonna be with a Bugs Bunny-style civilization, right?

 

[Rush Limborg]

^Pretty much. That's where the "Speaking Softly" comes in.

Trust, but verify.

 

[Sci]

"Speak softy but carry a big stick" is all well and good, but the books have done enough stories about big sticks. It's time to tell some stories about speaking softly.

 

[rahullak]

I'd like to read a "speak softly" Trek book that reads like an Arthur C. Clarke or an Isaac Asimov. Now that would be something.

 

[Rush Limborg]

"Speak softy but carry a big stick" is all well and good, but the books have done enough stories about big sticks. It's time to tell some stories about speaking softly.

Yes, indeed. But, there must, as always, be the "suspense" element. Thus, diplomatic tension is the way to go. "Cold War" anyone?

 

[David cgc]

Speaking of, how long has it been since Mac Calhoun yelled at, physically assaulted, or otherwise coerced the leaders of warring interplanetary powers so they'd talk like adults? I remember back when it happened, like, every third book. Things were so much more fun back then!