Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
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!
Could just be "Enterprise Class" was just the version of the simulator, since the Enterprise was the Academy ship at the time, they'd use an Enterprise bridge as a template for the simulator since it would be the ship they'd first serve on.
It's possible. But even in your own sentence you say they'd use an "Enterprise bridge as a template" instead of "Constitution bridge". The simplest explanation is still that the simulator was for an "Enterprise Class" ship, IMHO.
Back to the schematic in TUC. All these years I never once looked at the "pen" Scotty is using. It looks like a telescopic pointer stick repurposed as a futuristic pen prop. Or perhaps it was a pointer and he was going to use it to point in a presentation to direct search parties to look as jackoverfull suggests?
Maybe the Connie bridge had already moved to the ST V version of touch panels, not that far in the future that ST V happened, and the Excelsior bridge as well. Maybe it was the "Connie Bridge" but the ship hasn't been refited with the latest bridge module due to it being a training vessel. So it was just renamed "Enterprise" because the Enterprise was still being a training vessel, and was just one of a number of simulators. I know.. bending a pretzel as a mental excersize
If the Enterprise was the first ship to go through the refit, perhaps she had prototype systems that later refits had different, production versions of, therefore the simulator was built to represent her sub-class.
Or, perhaps the simulator was built to represent the refit at a time when pre-refit Constitutions were still in service and the term "Enterprise Class" was used to differentiate from the simulator for those ships. There must have been some crossover period probably lasting years if not a decade or more when both types were in use. Changing the markings on the simulator doors when that period ended wouldn't be top of anyone's to-do list.
It's as good an explanation as any, I would expect. This would also explain why Scotty was looking at such a simplistic high-level schematic of the ship. No need to examine the rivet patterns when all they need is to make a note of where they've looked.
So would another Doctor. The original, you might say.
...
Shower thought: Any museum in real life will have a collection far larger than what's open to the public. The ships we see at the Fleet Museum may be part of a rotation to encourage people to come back. Last year they may have had a bunch of ships from the 2250s mixed in with the staunch favorites, but this year they wanted to add some new favorites acquired over the last four decades, so they made room for the Defiant, Voyager, Stargazer in honor of the new one plying the spaceways, and so on. And heck, maybe a couple months past, the Leondegrance may have occupied the ring in which Voyager currently sits but her nacelles needed a bit of a shine, so she was taken inside. And after episode ten...
There may be a bunch of empty spaces to fill, if the rumors are true...
It can be argued that the existing ships alone could keep coming back for years - if they're set up remotely like the ships we have as floating museums today, even one of them could keep a visitor occupied for a whole day and leave plenty unseen. As such, there wouldn't be any rush to rotate ships into the public collection. Regardless, if there are depots like Qualor II still around, even accounting for ships pressed into wartime service after retirement there should be ample stock to choose from.
Perhaps they even literally "make room" in the rings- such as reducing the size of the Nebula class ship with spiroid radiation or subspace compression? (I always want Pym particles to be involved somehow!)
Maybe there's a better answer for the small size of the Nebula class seen here- is it a perspective problem? A hologram? A previously unknown class smaller than than, say, USS Sutherland? Is this a K'Vort/B'rel situation?
She was also never definitely stated to be "Constitution Class" in TUC. We're only hearing in dialogue stating that she's "Constitution Class" in-universe many of their years later. The plaque in TWOK is just as correct as the schematic is in TUC in their respective timeframes.
There's ambiguity regarding the plaque in TWoK that simply doesn't apply to the incontrovertible, and clearly legible even at standard definition, Constitution-class label on the plans of the Enterprise in TUC.
Should this new amalgamation of all the Brent Spiner's characters get a new name?
Personally I think he should go with a new name of "Moore"
1) In tribute to Ronald D. Moore who has greatly contributed to Star Trek
2) The new Synth body that can age along with Brent Spiner who portrays the character
3) The famous line from his re-activation:
There's ambiguity regarding the plaque in TWoK that simply doesn't apply to the incontrovertible, and clearly legible even at standard definition, Constitution-class label on the plans of the Enterprise in TUC.
What is ambiguous about a simulator simulating the Enterprise on training mission to Gamma Hydra in TWOK? The plaque is just as clear as the Constitution-class label in TUC. Neither one contradicts the other.
What is ambiguous about a simulator simulating the Enterprise on training mission to Gamma Hydra in TWOK? The plaque is just as clear as the Constitution-class label in TUC. Neither one contradicts the other.
Given that we have the long-standing alternative explanation of "the Enterprise academy class"... what else are we supposed to think, that Constitution-class refers to the paper size!? I am getting a little bored of you hounding me.
Given that we have the long-standing alternative explanation of "the Enterprise academy class"... what else are we supposed to think, that Constitution-class refers to the paper size!? I am getting a little bored of you hounding me.
Not sure why you think I'm claiming against the TUC reference. The Enterprise in TWOK has evidence indicating Enterprise-class and in TUC the Enterprise-A has evidence indicating Constitution-class. I've written that in my replies to you. Where am I am saying the Constitution-class plan is wrong in TUC?
Also, I'm just replying to you replying to me. There is no hounding or ill intent.
The top view seems to have paid greater attention to the scales involved. Except for the Bounty - it's insanely upscaled to K'Vort levels, when it should be a B'Rel.
The promo poster is pretty cool, though.
Some amusing observations about the individual ship pictures:
The schematics they used for the Excelsior look like they came from the Jackill's book (or my site). Strange how they didn't use the official Eaglemoss orthos. Probably because they were based off the Greg Jein Excelsior from VOY's "Flashback" (with the narrower secondary hull) and not quite as accurate as the Jackill's version that were drawn from the original miniature.
The schematics used for the New Jersey appear to be the first pilot Enterprise, with the oversized bridge dome (with big forward window) and nav deflector, and with the nacelle antennas cut off. They also have added some primary hull phaser banks that were definitely not on any version of that ship that I'm aware of. Further, they look like the diagrams that the late, great, Neale "Vance" Davidson did - specifically his template style with the rounded lines in the bussard domes that no other schematics use. Probably an amalgamation of different hull pieces using his templates.
The 1701-A schematics also look like they're straight out of Jackill's books.
The "Kronos One" schematics appear to be the non-modified original K'T'inga schematics from the 1980 David Kimble TMP blueprints set (without the call-outs). The CG model also seems to be missing some of the "bling" details that the original had. Understandable, really, there were a LOT of brass photo-etch bits that ILM put on that thing.
The schematics used for the Saratoga are most definitely the Jackill diagrams ... for a standard Miranda-class with rollbar.
The schematics for the Nebula are also Jackill's, with the more squat (and accurate) secondary hull, used by the original physical Phoenix/Sutherland model, as opposed to the wider Galaxy-style Bonchune secondary that were used in later CG models.
