• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Kirk Enterprise - the Enterprise(a)?

Do we know for SURE that the original 1701 was built in 2245? IIRC, there's no canon reference to the year that it was constructed.

In any case, even if it was built in that year in the prime timeline, Starfleet may have decided to build it earlier in the Abramsverse. The same ship, built in 2233 rather than 2245. Or something like that.

The closest thing to canon we have is the Defiant's database in Enterprise's Mirror Universe story, though that portion wasn't actually visible on screen.

The only concrete reference to the Enterprise's age was in Trek III when Admiral Morrow says it's twenty years old, but that contradicts The Cage.
 
But my point still stands - the original NCC-1701 could simply have been built earlier in the Abrams timeline. It doesn't violate anything established in canon if that happens.
 
But my point still stands - the original NCC-1701 could simply have been built earlier in the Abrams timeline. It doesn't violate anything established in canon if that happens.

That it could have. While technically everything before the Nerada would have been the same, we never got a cannon date on when the Enterprise was launched, just than Spock had served on it in 2254 under Pike.
 
Do we know for SURE that the original 1701 was built in 2245? IIRC, there's no canon reference to the year that it was constructed.

In any case, even if it was built in that year in the prime timeline, Starfleet may have decided to build it earlier in the Abramsverse. The same ship, built in 2233 rather than 2245. Or something like that.

That's what I'm guessing. The Abramsverse Starfleet was on track to design the Constitution Class as we knew her UNTIL the Kelvin disaster (and the scans from the Nerada) forced them to scrap everything and start over from scratch. In the meantime, it was easy to slap existing Kelvin-era technology together in the intended configuration and launch that using the already-reserved names as a stopgap until the new Constitution v2 were finally ready. So April's Enterprise likely launched a decade early (2235), looking pretty much as Tobias Richter kitbashed her (check out the bottom three pics in the link):

http://www.startrek.pl/article.php?sid=680
 
...April's Enterprise likely launched a decade early (2235), looking pretty much as Tobias Richter kitbashed her (check out the bottom three pics in the link):

http://www.startrek.pl/article.php?sid=680

All I see at that link are three vids of the Kelvin. No pictures at all. Not of an Enterprise, not of any ship.
If you scroll past the videos on that page, there are indeed one, two, three images.
Actually, all I get are the three vids also...

Must be something about ie9 that blocks them.
 
All I see at that link are three vids of the Kelvin. No pictures at all. Not of an Enterprise, not of any ship.
If you scroll past the videos on that page, there are indeed one, two, three images.
Actually, all I get are the three vids also...

Must be something about ie9 that blocks them.
Hmm, they're just .jpg files hosted on Photobucket - nothing out of the ordinary about them. Maybe IE9 doesn't get along well with older-style html page coding. Are the images visible when you click on my links above?
 
If you scroll past the videos on that page, there are indeed one, two, three images.
Actually, all I get are the three vids also...

Must be something about ie9 that blocks them.
Hmm, they're just .jpg files hosted on Photobucket - nothing out of the ordinary about them. Maybe IE9 doesn't get along well with older-style html page coding. Are the images visible when you click on my links above?
Yeppers. :)
 
On ST:TMP, Captain Decker had said; All those vessels were call Enterprise. Were, is a past tense word. Meaning that the Constitution class looking starship in the picture is not the same Enterprise as the one they are on, but a different ship.
 
On ST:TMP, Captain Decker had said; All those vessels were call Enterprise. Were, is a past tense word. Meaning that the Constitution class looking starship in the picture is not the same Enterprise as the one they are on, but a different ship.

Never heard that line of thought before. The Connie on display is just showing the 1701 before her refit.
 
On ST:TMP, Captain Decker had said; All those vessels were call Enterprise. Were, is a past tense word. Meaning that the Constitution class looking starship in the picture is not the same Enterprise as the one they are on, but a different ship.

Never heard that line of thought before. The Connie on display is just showing the 1701 before her refit.

I think from Decker's perspective, the Enterprise is a new ship after the refit.
 
^ Yeah, in another scene he says that it's "an almost totally new Enterprise". So in a sense, yenny is correct. It's the same ship, but it's also not. :p

Like I said - it's the Ship of Theseus!
 
On ST:TMP, Captain Decker had said; All those vessels were call Enterprise. Were, is a past tense word. Meaning that the Constitution class looking starship in the picture is not the same Enterprise as the one they are on, but a different ship.


I think from Decker's perspective, the Enterprise is a new ship after the refit.
I don't think so. They would had the photo of the before refit Enterprise separate from the pass Enterprises; And also Decker would had knew that the before refit Enterprise and the ship he is on are the same ships. Also, those who had put those photos on the Rec wall, would had know as well; And they would never had put a photo of a existing starship with past starships of the same name, regardless it had been refitted or not next to one another. They would had ben separate from each other, on different walls.

On ST:TMP, Captain Decker had said; All those vessels were call Enterprise. Were, is a past tense word. Meaning that the Constitution class looking starship in the picture is not the same Enterprise as the one they are on, but a different ship.

Never heard that line of thought before. The Connie on display is just showing the 1701 before her refit.

Maybe, but I don't think so. It could easily just as well be another Connie name Enterprise.
 
Last edited:
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top