OK so there was no Enterprise in Starfleet before the NX-01 Enterprise while there were other (lame) ships. LOL.
There goes my theory making Enterprise the name of the 'flagship' because its been in service continuously.
Flagship
- Thread starter Spot261
- Start date
OK so there was no Enterprise in Starfleet before the NX-01 Enterprise while there were other (lame) ships. LOL.
There goes my theory making Enterprise the name of the 'flagship' because its been in service continuously.
Did not Archer display a image of a Human built ring ship on his wall? There was a similar image on the rec room wall in TMP, Decker indicated to the Ilia-bot that it was named Enterprise.
There have been multiple ships which had names reused. But as far as we know, with the exception of one brief mention in "Where Silence Has Lease" from TNG, we've never seen a case other than the Enterprise where the registry number was reused. Well, okay, the very last few episodes of DS9 with the Defiant, but that was only because it was the final few episodes and they didn't want to spend the money to refilm all their stock shots. We know that "really" the new Defiant would at least have been changed from an NX prefix to an NCC prefix since they were now production-line models.
Therefore, it seems that the registry number being preserved is the thing that makes the Enterprise unique.
Of course it wasn't the same ship, debatably the ship that was named the Enterprise D if give a different name and hull number would still have been the "Flagship of the Federation."
Whatever Galaxy class was launch at that time would have been carried that title.
We only saw several reporters, today most US Navy launches have some reporters present, and usually hundreds of people (sometimes thousands) in attendance. There are speeches, bands, etc.
In comparison the launch of the Enterprise B was pretty low key.
.
Last edited:
Did not Archer display a image of a Human built ring ship on his wall? There was a similar image on the rec room wall in TMP, Decker indicated to the Ilia-bot that it was named Enterprise.
No. Archer's ready room displays the wooden sailing ship, the aircraft carrier, the space shuttle and the NX-01. The ringship was displayed in the bar in First Flight.
Again I do like all of Timo's suggestions above and I do also think #3 sounds plausible.
Here's another question: if Ent-B ever were the flagship, it does beg a question of "what makes it that special"? I mean, the Constituion Enterprise was going to be mothballed in STIII, so the name Enterprise evidently meant nothing to Starfleet at the time (and certainly there's no indication in the first three movies - or even in TFF and TUC come to that - that the Connie Enterprises are held in any particular high regard by Starfleet). USS Excelisor would seem to be a more logical flagship too, given its obvious technological advances over the Connie Enterprise. But we all tend to assume that the 1701-B at least was the flagship of the fleet. It's hard to make the case for the 1701-A being the same as it was really just an old rust bucket that bearly held itself together in TFF, staffed by a geriatric crew who bearly held themselves together in TUC.
... unless... maybe a new Enterprise had been on the cards for a while? The Excelisor project was evidently centered around one ship, but that doesn't mean plans hadn't already been drawn up for a second one (named Enterprise). And maybe the idea was that this new Enterprise would be the flagship... a refreshing of the Enterprise "brand" with a new crew... while still carrying the great name, and also benefitting from the good publicity of being broadly associated with the legendary James T. Kirk? Without, you know, actually being commanded by him?
Maybe 1701-B was the first Enterprise to be a flagship... as a kind of publicity drive on the part of Starfleet Command.
and I do also think #3 sounds plausible.Here's another question: if Ent-B ever were the flagship, it does beg a question of "what makes it that special"? I mean, the Constituion Enterprise was going to be mothballed in STIII, so the name Enterprise evidently meant nothing to Starfleet at the time (and certainly there's no indication in the first three movies - or even in TFF and TUC come to that - that the Connie Enterprises are held in any particular high regard by Starfleet). USS Excelisor would seem to be a more logical flagship too, given its obvious technological advances over the Connie Enterprise. But we all tend to assume that the 1701-B at least was the flagship of the fleet. It's hard to make the case for the 1701-A being the same as it was really just an old rust bucket that bearly held itself together in TFF, staffed by a geriatric crew who bearly held themselves together in TUC.
... unless... maybe a new Enterprise had been on the cards for a while? The Excelisor project was evidently centered around one ship, but that doesn't mean plans hadn't already been drawn up for a second one (named Enterprise). And maybe the idea was that this new Enterprise would be the flagship... a refreshing of the Enterprise "brand" with a new crew... while still carrying the great name, and also benefitting from the good publicity of being broadly associated with the legendary James T. Kirk? Without, you know, actually being commanded by him?
Maybe 1701-B was the first Enterprise to be a flagship... as a kind of publicity drive on the part of Starfleet Command.
That's right, so the ring ship type of starship existed prior to the NX-01. Either the ring-Enterprise preceded the NX-01 (more likely), or it was a subsequent starship after the NX-01 was decommissioned (less likely).
Adding a nuance to that, perhaps the ringship was operated by a different organization altogether - allowing it to be parallel to UE Starfleet's Enterprise if need be?
An interesting question in this context is whether some Defiant or Hood has been immediately followed by a vessel of that name but more modern class.
There's a big gap between the Constitution class Defiant and the Defiant class one, but we know there was a Constitution class Hood and then an Excelsior class one. Perhaps the latter pair represents a "continuity of naming" of sorts, with the refitted former Hood retiring just prior to the naming of the latter Hood?
The photographic model of the Excelsior class Hood carried a low registry number, NCC-2541, that would support the "immediate succession" theory. Okudagrams and a later CGI model support a different registry, NCC-42296, speaking against such immediateness. But perhaps there were two Excelsior class Hoods? (It'd be a bit odd for the older to be replaced by the latter during TNG's first season, of course - and there's no onscreen evidence for the "actual" existence of the older one.)
Timo Saloniemi
An interesting question in this context is whether some Defiant or Hood has been immediately followed by a vessel of that name but more modern class.
There's a big gap between the Constitution class Defiant and the Defiant class one, but we know there was a Constitution class Hood and then an Excelsior class one. Perhaps the latter pair represents a "continuity of naming" of sorts, with the refitted former Hood retiring just prior to the naming of the latter Hood?
The photographic model of the Excelsior class Hood carried a low registry number, NCC-2541, that would support the "immediate succession" theory. Okudagrams and a later CGI model support a different registry, NCC-42296, speaking against such immediateness. But perhaps there were two Excelsior class Hoods? (It'd be a bit odd for the older to be replaced by the latter during TNG's first season, of course - and there's no onscreen evidence for the "actual" existence of the older one.)
Timo Saloniemi
Of course nothing canon confirms what I am about to say, but at least during the Enterprise-B's time, if there were a flagship, I don't know if the Enterprise-B would be it, at least under Harriman.
With the retirement of Kirk, the Enterprise-A, and most of her crew, probably the most celebrated captain at that time would have been Captain Sulu. And since the Excelsior was the first of its class, I would tend to think if any ship at that time was going to be a flagship, it would be the Excelsior.
As for the Enterprise C, it may have had some kind of posthumous status, but we don't know enough about it or her captain to know if it were a flagship.
Again I do like all of Timo's suggestions above
Here's another question: if Ent-B ever were the flagship, it does beg a question of "what makes it that special"? I mean, the Constituion Enterprise was going to be mothballed in STIII, so the name Enterprise evidently meant nothing to Starfleet at the time (and certainly there's no indication in the first three movies - or even in TFF and TUC come to that - that the Connie Enterprises are held in any particular high regard by Starfleet). USS Excelisor would seem to be a more logical flagship too, given its obvious technological advances over the Connie Enterprise. But we all tend to assume that the 1701-B at least was the flagship of the fleet. It's hard to make the case for the 1701-A being the same as it was really just an old rust bucket that bearly held itself together in TFF, staffed by a geriatric crew who bearly held themselves together in TUC.
... unless... maybe a new Enterprise had been on the cards for a while? The Excelisor project was evidently centered around one ship, but that doesn't mean plans hadn't already been drawn up for a second one (named Enterprise). And maybe the idea was that this new Enterprise would be the flagship... a refreshing of the Enterprise "brand" with a new crew... while still carrying the great name, and also benefitting from the good publicity of being broadly associated with the legendary James T. Kirk? Without, you know, actually being commanded by him?
Well, the Enterprise-Be need not be a flag ship to be a celebrated ship. However, that said, the only distinctions we can say canonically about the Enterprise-B, other than being the 4th Enterprise if you count the NX-01, is that it was the first Enterprise without Kirk in command, since Kirk assumed command of the NCC-1701, and was the Enterprise Kirk was "killed" on.
Yes but I was specifically responding to the comment that names are not reused. Registries are a sperate matter.
Not necessarily. They likely chose to give the first Galaxy-class ship in full service the name and registry number for a reason.
"Sure they are we've seen a couple of Defiant's and Hoods in Star Trek.
And what about the fact that they have been fifteen ships in the Royal Navy to bear the name Enterprise?"
I said names are not usually reused. The fact that Defiant and Hood have been used more than once does not indicate that it is a standard practice.
So far we have a couple of Defiants and Hoods, the Enterprise 6 times (7 if you count the retcon of the last series) and the Yamato which had an "E" after her registry. There might be others but those are the exmples that have come to our minds easily. That's 4 names out of a fleet of thousands of ships - not a regular practice.
I'm not sure how Royal Navy practice is relevant here. We don't know why the Royal Navy reused those ship names. Starfleet practice is not necessarily the same as the practice of current navies.
My comment is slightly off topic but it does support the argument that the reuse of the name and number indicates flagship status (in the political or diplomatic or public sense, not in the formal flag officer sense).
And what about the fact that they have been fifteen ships in the Royal Navy to bear the name Enterprise?"
I said names are not usually reused. The fact that Defiant and Hood have been used more than once does not indicate that it is a standard practice.
So far we have a couple of Defiants and Hoods, the Enterprise 6 times (7 if you count the retcon of the last series) and the Yamato which had an "E" after her registry. There might be others but those are the exmples that have come to our minds easily. That's 4 names out of a fleet of thousands of ships - not a regular practice.
I'm not sure how Royal Navy practice is relevant here. We don't know why the Royal Navy reused those ship names. Starfleet practice is not necessarily the same as the practice of current navies.
My comment is slightly off topic but it does support the argument that the reuse of the name and number indicates flagship status (in the political or diplomatic or public sense, not in the formal flag officer sense).
Last edited:
The Enterprise-D was not the first Galaxy-class ship - not only is this self-evident because of the class name, but we have actually seen the USS Galaxy onscreen. So I am not sure where you're going with this.
^"In full service"...I was under the impression that the Galaxy was a test vessel.
In any case, I was responding to T'Girl's assertion that the first Galaxy would have been the flagship by default. If that were the case, and the Galaxy was in full service, then the Galaxy would have been the flagship...but it wasn't.
In any case, I was responding to T'Girl's assertion that the first Galaxy would have been the flagship by default. If that were the case, and the Galaxy was in full service, then the Galaxy would have been the flagship...but it wasn't.
We saw it in some of the Dominion War battle scenes on DS9.
Possibly pushed into service just for the war, then. There was some offscreen source material to that effect concerning the many Galaxies we saw in the battle scenes.
I have always understood the HMS Hood to have been the pride of the British Navy and that is how I have interpreted the description of the Enterprise-D as the flagship of Starfleet, it was the pride of the fleet.
Even if you exempt the Galaxy as the first of her class "operational," the first operational Galaxy class could have been the Challenger, Odyssey, Venture, Yamato and not the Enterprise.
I didn't say the first Galaxy would have been the flagship. It was my assetion that regardless of the name painted on the hull (or which of the Galaxy's it was), the ship that was constructed at that time would have been the flagship. Starfleet ordered a ship built to fulfill a certain role.
It was scheduled to be the flagship.
Then again, when one builds multiple essentially identical ships with such flexibility as demonstrated by the E-D, one probably has completely free choice over which one to appoint as the Federation Flagship... It might even be a title that rotates annually, falling on the E-D once during early TNG and once during ST:GEN (and thus sorta supporting the "six Galaxies" idea).
Timo Saloniemi
Timo Saloniemi
Similar threads
