NCC-1701-A: The Troubleshooter Theory

[Lance]

Enterprise-A: "non-active duty" status?

A little theory of mine for several years.

Starfleet wanted to retire Enterprise in TSFS.

Even allowing for Scotty's meddling on Excelsior, it seems like the next generation (to coin a phrase ) of Starfleet were already being prepared, and good ol' NCC-1701 was already being used as a cadet training vessel anyway.

Following Kirk saving civilization from the whale probe, Starfleet obviously can't be too harsh in sentencing him -- Kirk effectively won himself and his crew protection, even though it seems Starfleet might have otherwise been prepared to prosecute them -- so they rig up another old Connie, slap new decals on her and roster her with Kirk and company as her crew.

BUT, what if it's less straightforward than that? What if, NCC-1701-A is technically part of the fleet, but not on active duty?

Even judging by screen evidence, the two movies featuring her both start with her in spacedock, her crew on 'down time' but drafted back in for a 'special assignment' (the hostage situation on Nimbus, and the Klingon peace escort). Yea in TFF it's more that the crew are on shore leave awaiting the ship's refit, but even so on the other occasion they are blatantly surprised to be all called back together, and very obviously haven't worked together as a crew in an official capacity for some unspecified amount of time, so it isn't much of a stretch to imagine that's what is happening in TFF as well.

I like to think that by the time of the last two movies, Kirk and his crew (and ship!) have basically become 'troubleshooters'; kept off assignment unless a mission of particular importance calls for their specific knowledge and skills. The rest of the time they either take on other lighter duties, or else are in semi-retirement awaiting official orders to decommission the ship and collect their pension. It might also explain a ship being commissioned then retired so quickly, relatively speaking, if in reality she isn't in 'active service' and only gets rolled out to perform missions every so often, but (like her crew) is otherwise off the active duty list.

Just a fun theory I'd come up with a couple decades ago that seems not to be too at odds with screen evidence But what do you guys think?

 

[Allyn Gibson]

That sounds reasonable to me.

 

[JonnyQuest037]

I like it. It fits with all of the available facts, and adds a bit to what we saw onscreen. And it gives us a reasonable explanation for them starting out both movies on Earth!

 

[Timo]

The other alternative is that she's simply a quayside queen, a ship too old-fashioned and decrepit to ever be sent on long assignments and requiring basically constant maintenance. Starfleet might have piles of those, being maintained in case of Klingon war (because they would do no good in any other role but can at least help out there, to no great loss), and the E-A, while a special propaganda piece they trot out for politically convenient missions, would simply add to the piles and thus not detract much from Fleet overall readiness.

Doesn't mean Kirk couldn't be a troubleshooter. Perhaps his career as such begins with ST5, after which he dumps the E-A and gets rides aboard more suitable starships with none of the other TOS heroes in attendance. Hence the surprise at them being summoned for a joint mission in ST6, and on the old ship to boot (because as the old Vulcan saying goes, only the Enterprise could sail to the KNZ).

Timo Saloniemi

 

[J.T.B.]

I like to think that by the time of the last two movies, Kirk and his crew (and ship!) have basically become 'troubleshooters'; kept off assignment unless a mission of particular importance calls for their specific knowledge and skills. The rest of the time they either take on other lighter duties, or else are in semi-retirement awaiting official orders to decommission the ship and collect their pension. It might also explain a ship being commissioned then retired so quickly, relatively speaking, if in reality she isn't in 'active service' and only gets rolled out to perform missions every so often, but (like her crew) is otherwise off the active duty list.

It's hard for me to swallow, since it seems like a waste to have a ship and crew doing nothing but waiting for some trouble to shoot (I'm assuming it takes more than seven people to run an operational starship). It seems like it would be much more efficient to integrate that small group into an already-active vessel if their experience was essential to some mission.

But really, I suppose it's as good as anything to explain the odd situation going on in those latter movies!

 

[Mojochi]

It's hard for me to swallow, since it seems like a waste to have a ship and crew doing nothing but waiting for some trouble to shoot (I'm assuming it takes more than seven people to run an operational starship). It seems like it would be much more efficient to integrate that small group into an already-active vessel if their experience was essential to some mission.

But really, I suppose it's as good as anything to explain the odd situation going on in those latter movies!

I don't think its all about the troubleshooting. Ultimately, the ENT-A always struck me as a trophy ship. By all logic, Kirk & crew had done two different prolonged missions, the original & then with the refit. I doubt anyone expected they'd do one with the A. It's probably ambassadorial, troubleshooting, detached service, even semi-freelance maybe, but more than anything a purely prestige gig for the heroes

Edit: You know, it might the beginning of where people start to think of the Enterprise as the fleet's ceremonial "Flagship"

 

[Dukhat]

I've mentioned this before. I personally feel that the Enterprise-A was just a random ship (either brand-new or older) that was renamed and given to Kirk at the last minute as a reward after the whale probe incident, but was only supposed to be a temporary assignment until the Enterprise-B was built, and then the crew would retire (just like what happened in TUC). The crew would just have light duty assignments in the meantime. That of course contradicts the idea of Kirk helming a hostage rescue, but that's really all hogwash anyway. The "no experienced commanders" line is utter nonsense. Was Styles on vacation?

 

[flandry84]

Geez,I had always considered the Ent-A as a brand new vessel with just the name changed to appease Kirk (btw,changing a ship’s name is seriously bad mojo).
But now when I consider that Starfleet was moving in the general direction of the Excelsior class,maybe the Ent-A was just a cast off clunker.

 

[Mojochi]

I never thought it was a renamed vessel. I did think of it as something special from how it was presented at the end of TVH, but then, with the obvious concerns over its state at the beginning of TFF, it sort of hit home for me that this wasn't a top of the line vessel, & maybe they just got whatever was in the pipeline at the shipyards & it was ceremoniously named Enterprise for them, at the last moment, after they'd saved the planet... & it turns out to be a bit of a clunker, which wasn't going to be too huge of a concern, because it was mostly a prestige deal anyhow, & no one ever seriously considered it for long term deep space assignment. It's an iconic ship name, a rock star captain & his famous crew, & that's all they were really preserving

 

[CDP]

Memory Beta has the following: When construction began on the Enterprise-A in the early 2280s, the ship was named the USS Ti-Ho and assigned the registry number, NCC-1798.

This is mentioned in The Autobiography Of James T Kirk

 

[flandry84]

/\Interesting.Thank you.

 

[Mage]

Memory Beta has the following: When construction began on the Enterprise-A in the early 2280s, the ship was named the USS Ti-Ho and assigned the registry number, NCC-1798.

This is mentioned in The Autobiography Of James T Kirk

/\Interesting.Thank you.

Please keep in mind that nothing about that is considered canon. There are a few version how the E-A came about in novels, wtih the most popular one being that it was Yorktown who was renamed. So yeah, take that as you will.
I'm not one of those canon-nazi's, mind you. I don't care who thinks what and takes what from where when it comes canon versus non-canon. Just saying, it's all speculation.

 

[Timo]

I wouldn't include "the next Enterprise" in these considerations. If Starfleet felt it needed to move on and leave the Constitutions behind, it would not get hung up on ship names: the E-A could be succeeded by the Farnsworth functionally. Or if they felt they needed a brave new Enterprise as their flagship, they could rename the E-A the Farnsworth to liberate that other name for use.

No, there isn't much of a tradition against renaming ships today. This is done in the USN and other fighting navies often enough. And in the civilian world, cargo ships swap names more often than they do laundry. It's only the owners of sailing yachts and other small craft who still bother with elaborate Poseidon-soothing ceremonies when changing the names of their beloved boats.

I wouldn't sweat onscreen evidence all that much, either. We only see ST5 and ST6, with years in between - and are told in the latter that nothing much happened during those years, and the heroes certainly didn't stick together, or stick to the E-A. Might be the ship is a museum piece in ST6, only dragged out to flip the bird at Gorkon (the same reason Kirk is sent to command/chauffeur the mission).

What we see in ST5 need not be what Starfleet proscribed, either. There may have been intent A originally, at the end of ST4, but this was defeated by the ship being such a failure. Or by Kirk suddenly being needed to sort out something right up his alley. Or by the people in charge changing, and abandoning intent A in favor of intent B that involved giving Kirk impossible and humiliating jobs, which in turn may have been defeated by Kirk actually pulling off the impossible and thus launching a career C in public limelight again. Or, conversely, abandoning a punitive intent A and instead giving Kirk great troubleshooting jobs, but then dropping those because the movie proved he couldn't really handle those without causing interstellar incidents...

Were there three movies depicting the adventures of the E-A, or two movies back to back in-universe, we'd know more. What we know now is just that the heroes stop doing their usual all-together thing at some point before ST6.

Timo Saloniemi

 

[Longinus]

In FF it is implied that the ship is brand new, so I'll assume that this is the case. In TUC the crew talks about retiring, but it implied that the ship would get a new crew. I think that was Starfleet's original plan, but after assessing the battle damage (there was literally holes through the ship,) they surmised that the ship was not worth repairing, and decided to decommission it and replace with an Excelsior class vessel.

 

[Kemaiku]

Nope.

TUC happens in 2293, the Enterprise B is going to be launched in a few months. Kirk meant the name Enterprise, not the battered, outdated hunk of junk they where limping home in.

E-B was under construction for years as just that. E-A was I don't know, held on to ceremoniously, hence Scotty buying a boat and about to finally get out of Starfleet about the time the ship was originally meant to be scrapped.

 

[Longinus]

Nope.

TUC happens in 2293, the Enterprise B is going to be launched in a few months. Kirk meant the name Enterprise, not the battered, outdated hunk of junk they where limping home in.

E-B was under construction for years as just that. E-A was I don't know, held on to ceremoniously, hence Scotty buying a boat and about to finally get out of Starfleet about the time the ship was originally meant to be scrapped.

An Excelsior class ship that was eventually become Enterprise B had been under construction for a while, just like Constitution class ship that became A had been under construction, but it is perfectly possible that in both instances the name was decided very late in the process. If A had not been so badly battered the ship that became B would obviously still have been launched, but it would have been called something else.

 

[Kemaiku]

An Excelsior class ship that was eventually become Enterprise B had been under construction for a while, just like Constitution class ship that became A had been under construction, but it is perfectly possible that in both instances the name was decided very late in the process. If A had not been so badly battered the ship that became B would obviously still have been launched, but it would have been called something else.

Proof of that would be nice. Like...any.

 

[Longinus]

Proof of that would be nice. Like...any.

Because in FF they say it is a new ship, must have been recently built. Because in TUC they say the ship getting a new crew. This is directly on the film, you may ignore it or interpret is as a metaphor or whatever, but my reading is hardly far fetched, it is just taking what is said at face value.

 

[Kemaiku]

Because in FF they say it is a new ship, must have been recently built. Because in TUC they say the ship getting a new crew. This is directly on the film, you may ignore it or interpret is as a metaphor or whatever, but my reading is hardly far fetched, it is just taking what is said at face value.

So none. Could have just said that.

 

[Longinus]

So none. Could have just said that.

Well, I have way more proof than what you have. My sequence of events actually fits to what is said on the film.