How extensive was the refit from D7 to K'tinga we can see structural differences from the outside but what else would have changed or is it a refit at all is it just a new ship design all together but uses the tried and tested D7 shell as a means of faster construction thoughts
D7 K'tinga refit
- Thread starter heavyneos
- Start date
At first, I too thought it was a refit, but several people had pointed out that it was, indeed, a new design....yes, one that resembles the old D-7 class, but with a lot more armor and hull detail.
I think it also led to the confusion of some folks who worked at FASA that the refit Enterprise suddenly became a brand new Enterprise class, instead of retaining its status as a Constitution class. This oversight found its way into "Mr. Scott's Guide to the Enterprise" which was heavily influenced by FASA.
I remember reading in the novelization of Star Trek The Motion Picture that the Klingon ships were described as "the new K't'inga class battle cruiser", built to be a combat equivalent to the Constitution class cruisers of the era. However, I think that when that was mentioned, the Klingons had little idea that a certain Connie was being refit.
The K't'inga remains my favorite Klingon design starship (and my favorite starship in all of Trek), followed quickly by the Vor'Cha class, and then the refit Enterprise.
I think it also led to the confusion of some folks who worked at FASA that the refit Enterprise suddenly became a brand new Enterprise class, instead of retaining its status as a Constitution class. This oversight found its way into "Mr. Scott's Guide to the Enterprise" which was heavily influenced by FASA.
I remember reading in the novelization of Star Trek The Motion Picture that the Klingon ships were described as "the new K't'inga class battle cruiser", built to be a combat equivalent to the Constitution class cruisers of the era. However, I think that when that was mentioned, the Klingons had little idea that a certain Connie was being refit.
The K't'inga remains my favorite Klingon design starship (and my favorite starship in all of Trek), followed quickly by the Vor'Cha class, and then the refit Enterprise.
Well, it depends on who you ask. The book Starfleet Dynamics posits that the Klingon philosophy is to just continually upgrade their ships ad infinitum until they are destroyed, also claiming that some Klingon space-frames have been in service since Earth's late 19th Century.
Personally, I love this idea, and it's backed up on screen, at least circumstantially, as we have seen D-7/K'Tinga type ships in Enterprise and Voyager, and all stops between.
Actually, I assume that Klingon ships are built and maintained by individual Houses rather than a central Federal/Imperial authority. This would allow many variations on the basic D-7 cruiser configuration, including the smoothies from TOS, the beefier metallic looking ones from TMP (and reused in TWOK and TNG), the luxury presidential one (TUC), the more brown and gray ones (DS9) and the CGI one (VGR, and ENT). (I'm sure someone will correct me if I got my DS9, ENT, and VGR ones confused, I'm not rightly sure off the top of my head whether the DS9 ones were CG or models, and if CG if they are the same mesh as used later or not.)
The point is, there are a bunch of "same but different" varieties of the D-7 type which could suggest refits or new hulls. Or variations on the same theme (my personal favorite notion).
But keep in mind: comparing the proportions of the miniature Richard Datin built for TOS compared to the model of the Enterprise refit that Magicam built shows pretty different proportions, enough so that to believe it's the same ship, just remodeled is quite a stretch. So the simple fact that the filming model of the TOS D-7 that AMT built in the 60's is differently proportioned from Magicam's K'Tinga shouldn't by itself tell us that they too are not just upgraded ships.
--Alex
Personally, I love this idea, and it's backed up on screen, at least circumstantially, as we have seen D-7/K'Tinga type ships in Enterprise and Voyager, and all stops between.
Actually, I assume that Klingon ships are built and maintained by individual Houses rather than a central Federal/Imperial authority. This would allow many variations on the basic D-7 cruiser configuration, including the smoothies from TOS, the beefier metallic looking ones from TMP (and reused in TWOK and TNG), the luxury presidential one (TUC), the more brown and gray ones (DS9) and the CGI one (VGR, and ENT). (I'm sure someone will correct me if I got my DS9, ENT, and VGR ones confused, I'm not rightly sure off the top of my head whether the DS9 ones were CG or models, and if CG if they are the same mesh as used later or not.)
The point is, there are a bunch of "same but different" varieties of the D-7 type which could suggest refits or new hulls. Or variations on the same theme (my personal favorite notion).
But keep in mind: comparing the proportions of the miniature Richard Datin built for TOS compared to the model of the Enterprise refit that Magicam built shows pretty different proportions, enough so that to believe it's the same ship, just remodeled is quite a stretch. So the simple fact that the filming model of the TOS D-7 that AMT built in the 60's is differently proportioned from Magicam's K'Tinga shouldn't by itself tell us that they too are not just upgraded ships.
--Alex
Interesting to note, I do believe that in DS9's "Way of the Warrior" all the K't'ingas seen in that ep were AMT models.
The only difficulty in canon I see with this idea is that there are references such as "Imperial Klingon Cruiser Amar" and "Imperial Klingon Ship Korinar." I assume the idea is that the translation IKS stands for Imperial Klingon Ship. That seems to imply ships at least legally owned by the Empire.
Perhaps individual Houses contribute/pay for labor to build ships as a levy, then they run the ships on commissions, but the ships are technically owned by the Empire.
In the time period of the writers knowing a little bit about naval history, ships that were heavily modified had a tendincy to be renamed after the ship that had the heavy modifications in order to keep it seperate from others that did not have the modifications. This is why in 1950 there were 24 Essex-class Carriers, but by 1980 there were listed as: 1 Lexington-class training carrier (still in active service), 8 Yorktown-class anti-submarine carriers (inactive), 1 Intrepid-class anti-submarine carrier (inactive), 5 Hancock-class attack carriers (inactive), 6 Franklin-class aircraft transports (inactive), and 3 Boxer-class helicopter assault ships (inactive). Several had been scrapped by then.
Several cruiser and destroyers also had multiple designations for what had been single large classes of ships built during World War II. So by the logic, USS Enterprise, in the 2260s was a Constitution-class starship, but followign her massive refit/reconstruction, became an Enterprise-class starship to designate her from the other Constitution-class ships. However, if at a later date all the Constitutions are refit to this pattern, the name would probably switch back to being Constitution-class. All the ships are still Constitution-class, but for bookkeeping purposes and ease of idetifying specific subtypes by modification, she'd be an Enterprise-class.
Several cruiser and destroyers also had multiple designations for what had been single large classes of ships built during World War II. So by the logic, USS Enterprise, in the 2260s was a Constitution-class starship, but followign her massive refit/reconstruction, became an Enterprise-class starship to designate her from the other Constitution-class ships. However, if at a later date all the Constitutions are refit to this pattern, the name would probably switch back to being Constitution-class. All the ships are still Constitution-class, but for bookkeeping purposes and ease of idetifying specific subtypes by modification, she'd be an Enterprise-class.
You might find the Haynes Owner's Manual: Klingon Bird of Prey an interesting read, because it corroborates some elements of your finding. And, it's official.
Ignoring noncanon manuals, I don't think there was any refit. In VOY: "Prophecy" a K'tinga model is referred to as a "D7" (the only canon mention of the name) and in ENT: "Unexpected" we see one of these D7/K'tinga ships challenge the NX-01 in 2151. Therefore, they're essentially the same ship, a type which by DS9's time has been in service for at least 2 centuries.
There might well be dedicated Imperial ships in addition to House ships that merely swear allegiance to the Emperor - say, Martok would have his House BoP, but be in command of more impressive assets such as Vor'Chas when serving the Emperor.
Difficult to tell whether the ST:TMP battle cruiser is "really" a new design or a massive refit. After all, Starfleet engaged in a rather extreme refit, too, changing every single bit of the Enterprise so that there was nothing left of the original shape or dimensions!
I like to think that the Organian Peace Treaty was formulated by both sides so that it would limit the number of new ships either side could build - both would think this would give them the strategic advantage (Klingons think they have more warships to start with, Feds think their ships are newer and better), and soon both find they need to refit their old vessels in order to keep up with the Joneses. And some of those "refits" essentially amount to cheating and newbuilding: the old ship is torn to pieces and a new ship is built, after which the old dedication plaque is screwed onto the new ship...
Timo Saloniemi
Difficult to tell whether the ST:TMP battle cruiser is "really" a new design or a massive refit. After all, Starfleet engaged in a rather extreme refit, too, changing every single bit of the Enterprise so that there was nothing left of the original shape or dimensions!
I like to think that the Organian Peace Treaty was formulated by both sides so that it would limit the number of new ships either side could build - both would think this would give them the strategic advantage (Klingons think they have more warships to start with, Feds think their ships are newer and better), and soon both find they need to refit their old vessels in order to keep up with the Joneses. And some of those "refits" essentially amount to cheating and newbuilding: the old ship is torn to pieces and a new ship is built, after which the old dedication plaque is screwed onto the new ship...
Timo Saloniemi
You might find the Haynes Owner's Manual: Klingon Bird of Prey an interesting read, because it corroborates some elements of your finding. And, it's official.
Neat. I was simply trying to interpret canon in what I thought was a reasonable way, and determining that, were Albertese's idea tenable with respect to Houses running individual ships, it would imply something like a feudal system.
But, yes, Timo is correct that their could perhaps be both Imperial-owned ships and House-owned ships. That idea occurred to me too, but I'm unaware of there being any example in canon that isn't referred to as an Imperial Klingon Ship (Cruiser)/IKS, so I didn't consider the idea of House-owned ships further.
Those designations are an interesting question in their own right. Are they "NATO names" for ships that have proper native designations? If so, "D7" might be a gross misnomer, covering several distinct types that are not particularly closely related.
Klingons themselves use the designation D5 between themselves in "Once More Unto the Breach". Then again, they also speak English between themselves there! Apart from that, the D designations are spoken in a Federation context, and may not be accurately reflecting Klingon intentions and tactical reality...
Timo Saloniemi
It's just like the forehead ridges. They didn't have the money in 1966 to make a D7 model that had the level of detail we saw in TMP.
But even if there was a "smooth" D7 and a "bumpy" D7, it could be the same class.
I agree with Timo, the "D7" designation is probably all Starfleet's idea.
NATO had their own names for modern Russian planes as well as WWII Japanese ones.
But even if there was a "smooth" D7 and a "bumpy" D7, it could be the same class.
I agree with Timo, the "D7" designation is probably all Starfleet's idea.
NATO had their own names for modern Russian planes as well as WWII Japanese ones.
That's not an absolute given. Aesthetics had changed in the decade since TOS. There were feature films during the '50s and '60s that obviously had the budget to make impressive models with any amount of detail they wanted. One might cite 2001, but it was also depicting near future tech (within forty years) rather than a far future one.
If the original Star Trek had been a feature film or the series had had a bigger budget we might have seem more detail, but I seriously doubt the designs would have been hugely different from what we got. The designs of TMP couldn't help but be influenced by the changes seen in SF film (notably Star Wars) and the subsequent expectations over the previous decade since Matt Jefferies created the original designs and overall look of Star Trek's hardware.
If they had had the money would the Klingons have had ridges in TOS? It's debatable because we have no idea what they might have tried to go for. It's easy to say, "Well that's what the Klingons really looked like all along." but what evidence do we have in the real world that the new look in the films was what was always intended?
Didn't Gene sate he wanted to do ridges in the beginning, if they had the money?
Without going back to check... I'm pretty sure that Kira IDed Koloth's ship as a D-7 in "Trials and Tribble-ations."
Also, I still hold to the idea of ships being House owned and operated. I see the Klingon Civil War in "Redemption" to support this as it starts out with a lot of back-room wheeling and dealing to see who's House's forces would support which side. I would say that the "I.K.C." prefix indicates that the House operates under the imperial blessing and that the House which owns it has sworn fealty to the High Council in, yes, a very feudal system.
Under this model, the Klingon Defense Force would really be more of a coordinating body than a Pentagon-equivalent.
Having said that, I'm also open to the idea that during the 2260's a force of state owned and operated vessels were in use (and would tend to assume that the cheaper looking TOS D-7 ships belonged to this) but that after Praxis it was impossible to maintain the state fleet and the Houses again became more heavily relied upon. It could well be that there was always at least a core of this state fleet in operation, but it's relative strength versus the House Fleets was generally lesser.
But the details of Klingon force organization have never really been gone into on-screen so your guess is as good as mine.
--Alex
Not meaning to start or prolong any kind of "canon" debate, but, the Haynes' Manual is sanctioned fully by CBS, and is co-written by Rick Sternbach with support from Mike Okuda. Methinks that it would be canon...even though it does a wee bit of retconning regarding ship sizes, mostly for the K't'inga and for the K'vort class battlecruiser. (The former of which I can accept, and the latter of which makes much more sense than the size given for it in the DS9 Technical Manual.)
That said: I didn't read anywhere where the manual stated that K't'inga was a refit. So that supports our thinking. I used to think the K't'inga was a refit, but various references (including the TMP novelization) suggest it is its own design, only based on the previous D-7 class.
Here's what the Haynes' Manual says on the K't'inga:
Haynes' Manual: Klingon Bird of Prey said:
'nuff said on that for my part.
Back to your point:
My initial thoughts before reading that manual's statement of the design placement were that perhaps at that time, until the production team actually came up with a design, that D-7/K't'inga was meant to represent the D-5 class. The manual would seem to contradict that thinking. The D-5 is also seen in Enterprise, and is only as remotely similar an appearance to the later D-7/K't'inga as the Vor'Cha is to those designs.
Kor mentions the D-5's in the episode of DS9 where he sacrifices himself to help Martok's forces escape.
Personal opinions only. Take with a grain of salt... or perhaps the whole durned shaker.
Last edited:
My understanding, and part of this I believe is from FASA but it does make sense, is that the D-7 designation is a ship configuration. The TOS era 'smooth' style would be a D-7 and the one we saw in TMP was a D-7m. Same basic hull config, just evolving production runs like the block series in out aircraft and rockets/missiles.
A successful ship design can go through a number of changes as new equipment and performance capabilities become available. The Constitution TMP Refit went through a much more extensive change with hull proportions and equipment than the D-7 series did from what we saw on screen.
A successful ship design can go through a number of changes as new equipment and performance capabilities become available. The Constitution TMP Refit went through a much more extensive change with hull proportions and equipment than the D-7 series did from what we saw on screen.
Aye, FASA had several designations for that hull design. D-7A was the K't'aaga class (according to FASA) and D-7M was the K't'inga (named by Roddenberry or that ship's designer). By their logic, they made the K't'inga sound like an uprate/refit. (It is also by their logic that those proportional changes, and internal designs and functionalities made to the Enterprise is what constituted the refit becoming its own class....Enterprise-class.) So they basically got it reversed as to what the (largely) accepted knowledge of the ship designs are today.
FASA: D-7M K't'inga is the refit/uprate of the D-7A. Refit Enterprise is the new Enterprise-class because of its radical redesign.
Accepted Canon/Knowledge today: K't'inga (no D-7 designation attached) is a straight up new design simply based on the older D-7 class). TMP Enterprise is a refit Constitution class.
Regarding the "officialness" of the Hayne's book. I would point out that it contradicts the DS9 TM which was equally "official" and held the exact same authorial pedigree. And that the FASA stuff of the 80's also enjoyed "official" status when it was being made. And if we wish to go back even further, while I don't recall any reference to the D-7 situation, the Spaceflight Chronology was also "official" in it's day (even involving Rick Sternbach as the source of it's extensive illustrations) and that too is mostly disregarded these days. So "official" doesn't carry much weight for me.
Also regarding the idea that Klingons would have always been ridged had the 1960's budget allowed for it: I call BS. The look of Klingons was arrived at by Fred Philllips and Jon Colicos discussing how Kor should look. Roddenberry had no input as far as I've ever heard. Then, when doing TMP, they decided to revamp the Klingon look, but that was about a decade after the fact. Any suggestion that that was the original idea from the beginning but that there just wasn't enough money is flat wrong.
--Alex
Also regarding the idea that Klingons would have always been ridged had the 1960's budget allowed for it: I call BS. The look of Klingons was arrived at by Fred Philllips and Jon Colicos discussing how Kor should look. Roddenberry had no input as far as I've ever heard. Then, when doing TMP, they decided to revamp the Klingon look, but that was about a decade after the fact. Any suggestion that that was the original idea from the beginning but that there just wasn't enough money is flat wrong.
--Alex
