Yes.
You're talking about open architecture. You can outfit different ships for different missions, but if you're putting those different mission packages in the same hull design, they don't qualify as different ship classes.
Constitution Class Ships Seem To Be Everywhere
- Thread starter There Be Whales Here
- Start date
Yes.
You're talking about open architecture. You can outfit different ships for different missions, but if you're putting those different mission packages in the same hull design, they don't qualify as different ship classes.
You're the one that keeps bleating about in real life. IN REAL LIFE, you can't get rid of seven billion people mostly clustered in coastal cities just to set up what you think is an impossible scenario.
Counter a) They are all faster-than-light spacecraft.
Counter b) Counter a is all you need to make those interstellar distances more reachable.
We are not talking about real life and starships are not space shuttles. You cannot judge the probabilty of two Connies meeting by the standards of current day technology, and you have no idea how distant they would really be without marking positions on star charts. You're assuming that all the ships will always be too far away to rendezvous with each other. That's what's improbable.
And yet, this is the topic being discussed, whether you like it or not.
No, I'm stating that it's improbable that two or more of the same class of ship would be in the same area of space when there's only twelve of those ships in existence, since Starfleet operates other ship classes besides just that one. The distance involved is a secondary matter (but not something to be ignored.)
But they might qualify as different Mks, which was the point of the post. Or, alternatively, they could be Constitution class and not Starship class, or vice versa.
I would have to revisit but there never appeared to be a difference in the Constitution classes as presented on screen. So, while it is possible there are variations, it seems unlikely to me based upon presented material.
I would be more curious to revisit the episodes with explicit Constitution class ships and see if the Enterprise happened to be in the area, or if they were redirected by Starfleet Command to investigate. If the later than distance is irrelevant.
I would be more curious to revisit the episodes with explicit Constitution class ships and see if the Enterprise happened to be in the area, or if they were redirected by Starfleet Command to investigate. If the later than distance is irrelevant.
Fair enough. Constitution class is the most specific label.
No, the topic being discussed, according the OP, is why so many Constitutions appear on screen, not why they shouldn't, which makes your argument doubly irrelevant.
And I'll say it again: It's only improbable if all twelve ships are deployed at the same at extreme distance from each other. There's no evidence on screen to suggest that's the case. However, there's plenty of evidence of Constitutions meeting in space, which is the main thing that makes the "improbable " argument bullshit. It happened. We saw it. Period.
It might be. Or it might be the most general label. We don't have enough data to make that call. All we can do is theorize.
So the ships the Enterprise encountered were supposed to appear different. I always thought the trend was a nod to US Navel vessels where there are similar classes.
No, sometimes two syllables are too much which is why I'm sometimes called "Rob".
Robert
No. You completely misinterpreted. They were written as starships because they had starship models and stock footage.
Writer intention is secondary in discussions such as these. This is looking for a technical explanation that may or may not exist, and a lot of speculation. A thought exercise, if you will.
To you. Outta here.
There is an explanation that exists?
Ahem. Allow me to repost your previous response (bold emphasis mine):
So it was you who decided to take the thread in a different direction, and I was responding to that. So instead of being snarky, perhaps you should own up to your own actions and not cop an attitude when you invited people in this thread to respond to your segue.
To be fair, the word "constitution" routinely trips me up when I try to type it.
We could one-syllable it to just CON...works in RPGs.
Last edited:
One of the problems with this thread is the theorizing. I don't have to "theorize." I have all the data I need. I know what I saw on screen and I'm not distracted by terms used by more confused people.
F'rinstance, "Starship" is not a class. It's a category or type. "Swan shaped" is not a class. It's a design feature.
"Constitution" is a class, because it's the name of the first ship of a production run of vessels that are all built to the same basic design. Minor changes within or on the design doesn't mean you've created a brand new class. On screen, in the scenes we're talking about, these are Constitution-class, swan-shaped starships.
Now, you can continue to parse the terminology all you like, asking questions like "But what does Starfleet mean by "class?" or "What do the Vulcans mean by "class?" Hell, you can even follow the previous suggestion of waiting for the mental patients writing CBSTrek to come up with an explanation. Good luck with that. In current-day shipbuilding terms, "class" has a definite meaning, and it's that meaning that most fits the collection of vessels we're discussing. TPTB know this, or else we wouldn't have terms like Galaxy-class, Intrepid-class, D'deridex-class, etc., sprinkled into the stories and scripts.
All the data you need is readily available. "Starship class" is too general and "Swan shaped class" is too vague. "Constitution class" is a specific term that identifies a specific collection of ships.
Indeed, I asked the question about everybody's problems with Constitution rendezvous. I never said I wouldn't debate the answers I got, especially if those answers are cop outs instead of valid reasons
