Miranda Class???

[robjkay]

Yes thats right I do! And all you did there was complain.

Also there is nothing that shows or says that everything that Paramount says is canon.

Also there is nothing to suggest that the name is Miranda Class is canon. It was never stated in a episode, movie or screenplay.

 

[MarianLH]

If only people who have "info proving that the name Miranda Class exist" can consider themselves Trekkies, what does that make you?

Zero to ignore list in 8 posts.


Marian

 

[robjkay]

First off I am not trying to be rude, if I seemed that way then I am sorry.

Now there is suppose to be several signage somewhere in the movies or episodes showing the name Miranda Class. But it seems that I am hearing things other then that like watch the dvd on a Hi-def TV, Paramount said this or Paramount is GOD which to me is pretty annoying.

See here is the thing if there is a recreated plaque which is based off of the original plaque and if MA was able to transcribe it from I guess the original plaque. Where is a picture of the original plaque then? Or where is the so called several signage showing the Miranda Name of which I am asking! I thought it would be a simple thing to ask but I guess not.

In the end its not a matter who says what or who to believe. A simple picture of the original plaque or something stating the class is all I am asking.

Anyway if that to much whining for you to read, feel free to go somewhere else!

 

[robjkay]

I never said that!

 

[robjkay]

Here is something outstanding I found to where you cannot believe everything you hear from Okuda or others.

There is a note at the bottom of page 32 names the "Reliant" (from ST II), the "Saratoga" (from ST IV), the "Lantree" (from "Unnatural Selection"), and the "Brittain" (from "Night Terrors") as all being "Miranda" class starships. Treknically this is as wrong as the movie "Enterprise" is a "Constitution" class starship. The "Reliant" in ST II was an "Avenger"
class heavy frigate according to its designer Andrew Probert (who also, I might add, designed the "Enterprise" model for both the films and TNG but apparently is hardly given any credit in this manual). Every tech-nical reference and blueprint outside of F**A classifies her as an "Avenger" class starship. The "Saratoga" in ST IV is aimproved "Avenger" class vessel called a "Cyane" class heavy frigate. The "Lantree" and "Brittain" from the 24th Century, however, are apparently "Miranda" class starships, which have on occassion been classified as supply and research vessels with a complement of under 50. The "Reliant" and "Cyane" have each had a complement in excess of 355 per ship. Externally similar but not internally obviously. These two ships also were armed with 4 torpedo tubes (2 fore/2 aft) 4 megaphaser cannons (2 fore/2 aft) and a total of 12 standard phaser emplacements (6 banks: 2 each). Pretty heavy stuff for a supply ship like the "Lantree"... Speaking of the "Brittain," she's not spelled that way in this book, in the Okuda "Chronology," or in any other reference. She's spelled as "BrAttain" in all of these despite it's name Clearly being legible as "BrIttain" in "Night Terrors" on her primary hull. So why do these people call her "BrAttain" all the time? Because Okuda did the ship's near-impossible to read dedication plaque shoved away in a dark corner on the ship's bridge. He therefore says that "BrAttain" is the correct spelling. The opposite happens in "Inheritance" when we see the name "NooniEn Soong" appear in little letters on a data screen. For over 6 years the name has always been "NooniAn" but Okuda apparently goofed just as he did previously in his "Chronology" (and also with "NooniEn Singh" of all people!. Maybe he wants to rewrite Trek history, but up until now the correct spellings have always been "NooniAn" throughout countless
novels, novelizations, and the various episode guides. Sadly, these exact same blunders have been carried over into the more recent Okuda book The Star Trek Encyclopedia...

 

[SeerSGB]

As I said on ST.com, if you can't accept that the bulk of canon is composed of this production art that you can't see on screen or blink and you miss it, then you're going to have to chuck 99% of 'Trek canon.

Whether you like it or not, yes Paramount decided what is and isn't canon-- which is why there is a gray area with TAS. And officially Paramount has deemed the name Miranda class to be canon.

Don't like it, oh well, they're not going to change it for you. Okdua, Drexler, Sternbach, etc, all worked on the show, they made the decesions and Paramount went with them. Don't like Paramount's canon, change in your personal fanon and move on with life.

Treknically this is as wrong as the movie "Enterprise" is a "Constitution" class starship.

And in sentence you prove you don't know what you're talking about. Screncaps of Scotty's Schematics from STVI labeling the refit as a "Constitution Class" starship.

The "Reliant" in ST II was an "Avenger"
class heavy frigate according to its designer Andrew Probert (who also, I might add, designed the "Enterprise" model for both the films and TNG but apparently is hardly given any credit in this manual).

Really? That's be news to Joe Jennings and Mike Minor-- the men who designed and built the Reliant.

 

[aridas sofia]

For those that care about what is and isn't canon, per TWOK the refit 1701 is Enterprise-class. Per TUC, the 1701-A is Constitution-class. Different ships, a decade or more apart, different classes.

Here is the much-vaunted and equally overwrought "visual evidence":

http://www.trekplace.com/article02.html

As for Avenger, it isn't canon. I should know. But it is a damn good name IMO, based on the original title for the movie -- "Vengeance of Khan". The name was originally going to be La Vengeance after the French Napoleonic frigate that fought the American frigate Constellation in a very TWOK-like battle, but I thought that would be lost on most people so I made it Avenger.

 

[SeerSGB]

aridas sofia said:
For those that care about what is and isn't canon, per TWOK the refit 1701 is Enterprise-class. Per TUC, the 1701-A is Constitution-class. Different ships, a decade or more apart, different classes.

Here is the much-vaunted and equally overwrought "visual evidence":

http://www.trekplace.com/article02.html

As for Avenger, it isn't canon. I should know. But it is a damn good name IMO, based on the original title for the movie -- "Vengeance of Khan". The name was originally going to be La Vengeance after the French Napoleonic frigate that fought the American frigate Constellation in a very TWOK-like battle, but I thought that would be lost on most people so I made it Avenger.

And have a slight problem with the whole "Enterprise Class" issue, not the class per say, but the fact that TNG's ties the Connie Class name to both the refit and the original config.

 

[Unicron]

They wouldn't have had much choice, because that's what Gene wanted. He seemed to think that without reusing the class name for what was altogether a new design, people wouldn't think it was the Enterprise.

As for Paramount, they own the rights to the franchise. Therefore, what they say is canon. Books do not count because of how the policy is structured.

The name Miranda is also used for the smallest moon of Uranus, so that is another origin for the Trek name.

 

[CoveTom]

Hey robjkay, given that the Reliant, the Enterprise, and everything else seen on Star Trek are fictional there is really no such thing as a "factual" answer as to what class they are. Most of the people here are willing to accept the word of the people involved who say that the dedication plaque said "Miranda class." If that's not sufficient, I suspect you're going to have to go elsewhere to continue your search for information.

 

[USS Excelsior]

I can't believe that the quest for this truth can be so much of a passion.

 

[CoveTom]

If you're looking for an answer that has been stated in an official Star Trek television episode or film, or clearly shown on a plaque or readout seen in an official Star Trek television episode or film, you're not going to find one. To the best of my knowledge, no such canon reference exists. If that's the only type of answer you're willing to accept, then you must give up and just accept the fact that your question has no answer.

If, on the other hand, you're willing to accept non-canon but reliable sources, then Doug Drexler duplicated the original plaque from the USS Brattain in the Star Trek Encyclopedia and, thus, we have credible evidence of what the original plaque said. You want a readable photo of the actual original set piece, but such a photo may simply not exist. No one on the set likely even thought of taking such a photo, and Drexler might have created the graphic by looking at the set piece itself and not a photo.

So I guess what I'm saying is this... You seem to be insistent that someone here provide you with indisputable, canon proof of this ship's class. I don't believe such proof exists. Therefore, you need to either accept the commonly accepted designation of "Miranda class" and the evidence its based on, or refuse that and accept that no official name yet exists for that class.

 

[captcalhoun]

there are no dialogue established names for many of the classes. NONE of the classes seen in the battle at the start of FC are named except the Defiant which is even arguable since Sisko said it was an 'Escort' class.

likewise, i don't believe the Ambassador class name was used in dialogue. nor has the Soveriegn IIRC.

hell, i'm not even sure if the Excelsior name was.

(BTW, who came up with the dumbass name Ingram for the Excelsior?)

 

[TeutonicNights]

Worf's human father said he worked on the "old Excelsior class" in "Family"

 

[Unicron]

The Ambassador class was mentioned in TNG's "Conspiracy" and described as a heavy cruiser, even though the actual model did not appear until two seasons later in "Yesterday's Enterprise."

 

[robjkay]

Ok, thanks for the help!

 

[JD]

robjkay said:
As a matter of fact alot of Pocket Book writers do not adhere to ST canon or what Paramount says. Thats why books, or stuff like the Encyclopedia are not considered canon material being there are so many mistakes in them.

Obviously you've never been to the read any of the books or gone to the Trek Lit forum. Because the books have to adhere to canon and listen to what Paramount says. In fact they go through a long, intense process in which they are proofread by someone from Paramount (or now CBS Consumer Products) to make sure that they adhere to canon. Then if they are told to change something they pretty much have no choice they have to change it in order to make sure it does match canon.

 

[robjkay]

Not the books I have read about ST!

 

[robjkay]

My answer to your first paragraph. Nope

My answer to your second paragraph. Nope, also thats news to me that Paramounts decides what is canon and what is not.

My answer to your third paragraph. I could care less what you think or say and the same goes for what you said in ST.com.

Now you pointed a sentence out and the made a statment that said it proves I do not know what I am talking about. Now let me point something out that your the one who does not have a clue about anything.

You queted this: Treknically this is as wrong as the movie "Enterprise" is a "Constitution" class starship.

Notice it does actually say that the Enterprise is a Constitution Class Starship!

Right?

So what did you do? You commented back with proof stating the same exact thing which was....

And in sentence you prove you don't know what you're talking about. Screncaps of Scotty's Schematics from STVI labeling the refit as a "Constitution Class" starship.

Do you see what you just did? You corrected something that was allreay corrected!!! LoL, your amazing!!!!

Also yes if you looked around you would find out that people called the Miranda Class the Avenger Class. There alot of blueprints out there showing that. Also whoever built the reliant, I have no idea being if you noticed I did not write that!!! But it was correct that Andrew Probert did design the Enterprise.

Anyway, if you have anymore whining or crying to do. I will repeat what I told you from ST.com which was to take it somewhere else!

 

[SeerSGB]

Dude the person that made choice the name Avenger is in this thread and admits to "Avenger" not being canon.

As for Avenger, it isn't canon. I should know. But it is a damn good name IMO, based on the original title for the movie -- "Vengeance of Khan". The name was originally going to be La Vengeance after the French Napoleonic frigate that fought the American frigate Constellation in a very TWOK-like battle, but I thought that would be lost on most people so I made it Avenger.

-- aridas sofia

No matter how many blueprints and publications that have been printed in fan-press using the name "Avenger", it isn't canon.

And lets look at the whole quote in context:

There is a note at the bottom of page 32 names the "Reliant" (from ST II), the "Saratoga" (from ST IV), the "Lantree" (from "Unnatural Selection"), and the "Brittain" (from "Night Terrors") as all being "Miranda" class starships. Treknically this is as wrong as the movie "Enterprise" is a "Constitution" class starship.

That reads as saying Enterprise is a Connie is as wrong as calling the Miranda's Miranda