Pocket's '08 -'09 schedule - LOTS of new covers!

[captcalhoun]

NX: I was referring to the horrifying possibility of Dubya getting a carrier named after him in...2015 or something... eeeeewww...

Chris: but, although as I pointed out there's no HMS County in the County class, the ships were categorised as being in two sub-types in the class, which were named for the original ship of the sub-type. EG 'Kent' class sub-type of the 'County' class. i still think it's not unreasonable to expect a 'U.S.S. Vesta', Vesta class ship.

 

[ToddCam]

If we are using the fiction as a source, then there have been an established Sovereign and Constitution. I believe that other ships of the class that the Prometheus is have been called Prometheus-class. The Luna was the prototype of the Luna-class. Outside the books, we do have Excelsior-class being started by the Excelsior and Defiant-class started by the Defiant.

It may not be the rule, but it is definitely a tendency.

 

[Christopher]

^^A tendency, sure, but there's no proof that there's any kind of regulation about doing it differently. Heck, most classes don't have "theme" names, but a few do. That alone is proof that there's no uniform code to how these things are done. So why couldn't there be a "theme-named" class where the class name is representative of the overall theme rather than being the name of the first actual ship in the class? Sure, it's unusual, but does that make it wrong?

 

[Trent Roman]

A better question would be: what's the in-universe reason for the human-centric naming patterns? Twelve starships named after moons in the Sol system, now seven after the hills of Rome... vessels named in non-human traditions like the Solok seem to be exceptional.

Fictitiously yours, Trent Roman

 

[Mysterion]

As stated above, that's not true; there are real-world ship classes whose overall names are not shared by any specific vessel within the class.

Very true. Indeed, the British Royal Navy does it (or has done it) this way quite often. Examples: the County and Tribal classes, neither of which had an HMC County or HMS Tribal (respectively) but were named after various counties and tribes (also respectively).

 

[tenmei]

I guess my question would be what would be the point in not naming the class after the first production model - as we have come to expect? Why not just name it the Aventine Class? Or the Palatine Class? Or ... etc. Why give the class of ship a different name (and no ship bearing that name in the class) that's only tenuously related to the names of the ships?

People keep citing the RN tradition - which is different to Starfleet tradition as we know it - but that isn't really apt, is it. That would be apt if the Aventine and her sister ships were of the Roman Hill Class, wouldn't it!

RN tradition generally uses, as you have said, names of cities, names of castles, names of islands, names of tribes and names of battles for their vessels. But that describes the names of the classes of the ships - whilst Vesta doesn't.

PB have even had themes for ship classes - dervied from names, the mentioned Archer Class and the Luna Class. So why abandon that routine now?

Naming the Aventines class of ships as a Vesta class is giving the class a new name for giving it a new name's sake. There is no reason why the class name should not have been the same as one of the ships.

 

[Dancing Doctor]

I thought it went U.S.S Galaxy, *then* the U.S.S Yamato, and *then* the U.S.S Enterprise-D.

"Meet with Triumph and Disaster" establishes that at least the Yamato had been launched before the Enterprise-D, and Michael and I assumed that the Galaxy had been as well.

The Star Trek: The Next Generation Technical Manual also has it go Galaxy, Yamato, Enterprise-D

 

[Trent Roman]

I don't really know that the connection is tenuous. Vespa was the Roman goddess of the heath. Rome was built on and across those seven hills, so in many way the hills were the heath of Rome as a city.

Fictitiously yours, Trent Roman

 

[tenmei]

What I mean is, it's not like you've got the rest of the class named after Roman gods and godesses - or the class type named after some famous Roman hill. You could use the same justification that's been given for naming the class of the ship after anything to do with Rome, really, I mean the Appian Class, the Rubicon Class, the Augustus Class, the Caesar Class, the Centurion Class or even the Diocletian Class.

Every time in the modern trek era that we've seen a prototype ship (Excelsior, Prometheus, Defiant) the subsequent vessels of the same class have been named after the prototype - we also know that the Galaxy was the first ship of her class and that the Luna was the first of her class.

But all of this has been ignored.

 

[Mr. Laser Beam]

i still think it's not unreasonable to expect a 'U.S.S. Vesta', Vesta class ship.

Quite.

The Vesta doesn't have to be an operational ship; it could simply be a prototype. It may or may not have ever actually been used in the field. But its existence is, shall we say, strongly implied by the use of the term Vesta class.

(For example, there's the space shuttle Enterprise; it was the first, but was never used in actual service, AFAIK. So if the Air Force used classes, the shuttle would be 'Enterprise class'.)

 

[Christopher]

I guess my question would be what would be the point in not naming the class after the first production model - as we have come to expect?

Why does there need to be a point? Why assume that what we expect is automatically the "right" way or that anything else needs special justification? What does it matter anyway? The point of a class name is to identify the class as distinct from other classes. As long as it does that, who gives a flying felgercarb how the name is arrived at?

Besides, it's certainly got precedent in the Trek universe. There's no NX-Class ship called the NX, no J-Class frigate called the J. Not only do those names not come from the names of specific ships in the classes, but they don't have any thematic connection either; they're just taken from the ships' registry numbers. Class names can be entirely arbitrary. All that matters is that they distinguish one class of ships from another.

People keep citing the RN tradition - which is different to Starfleet tradition as we know it - but that isn't really apt, is it. That would be apt if the Aventine and her sister ships were of the Roman Hill Class, wouldn't it!

Missing the point. The point is that there doesn't have to be a single universal law to how it's done.

 

[tenmei]

Okay then, what was your reason in throwing tradition out of the window (and, yes, you have - for TOS to VOY (and TTN) at least, ENT operates on a different set of protocols as we've seen) and randomly deciding to not have a ship with the name of the class in that class?

Was it even your decision when the notes on the ship were drawn up? Or is the fault of the guy (KRAD ?) who wrote the follow up (I believe someone said the ships of the class were only named in Singular Destiny) who was apparantly unaware (and I think you were too) that we'd actually seen the Galaxy onscreen twice?!

 

[Thrawn]

Is this seriously that big a deal? In universe, maybe whoever in the Federation was in charge of naming the new classes of ships retired, and the next guy had a different idea. How can this possibly be worth this much debate?

 

[Rosalind]

it's like my old lab has the tradition of naming all the computers after plants, then we had a new system admin who decided to ignore that rule and name the computers something else, or one of professors decided he wanted to name his computer Snoopy.

 

[Christopher]

What I mean is, it's not like you've got the rest of the class named after Roman gods and godesses - or the class type named after some famous Roman hill. You could use the same justification that's been given for naming the class of the ship after anything to do with Rome, really, I mean the Appian Class, the Rubicon Class, the Augustus Class, the Caesar Class, the Centurion Class or even the Diocletian Class.

Every time in the modern trek era that we've seen a prototype ship (Excelsior, Prometheus, Defiant) the subsequent vessels of the same class have been named after the prototype - we also know that the Galaxy was the first ship of her class and that the Luna was the first of her class.

Yes, yes, you don't need to explain that; we all know it perfectly well. Disagreement is not ignorance. The point is simply that there's no reason to assume it has to be that way.

Okay then, what was your reason in throwing tradition out of the window (and, yes, you have - for TOS to VOY (and TTN) at least, ENT operates on a different set of protocols as we've seen) and randomly deciding to not have a ship with the name of the class in that class?

First of all, I didn't make the decision. I had nothing to do with the creation of the Aventine or the Vesta class. My name isn't David Mack.

Second, as I've already said, we have no proof that it has been a consistent tradition. There have been a number of ship classes where it appeared to be the case, and fans (and the Okudas) have extrapolated from those examples to assume it's been a consistent pattern, but canonically there's no proof of that.

Third, WHO CARES?????? What harm does it do to diverge from the "tradition" even if there is one? What's so all-fired wonderful about tradition? It's just something lazy people embrace so they don't have to think of new things.

Was it even your decision when the notes on the ship were drawn up? Or is the fault of the guy (KRAD ?) who wrote the follow up (I believe someone said the ships of the class were only named in Singular Destiny) who was apparantly unaware (and I think you were too) that we'd actually seen the Galaxy onscreen twice?!

Okay, fourth, you're becoming irrational and downright insulting about this, and it's an incredibly trivial thing. We didn't shoot your dog or insult your mother. So lighten up.

 

[tenmei]

I am not being irrational, I am not being insulting. Not once have I insulted you, yet you've in one post said I'm becoming irrational and lazy. In that lost post you've quoted, I'm simply asking who made the decision to have the ship and the name of a different class.

If you're referring to the fact I mentioned about the USS Galaxy. It's true. At least two members of PB staff were oblivious to the fact that there were at least two instances of the Galaxy being seen on-screen.

You say there's no proof that there's been a consistent tradition, but we've been shown the tradition to be there - and no evidence that the tradition isn't consistent.

Yes, I got you mixed up with David Mack, for that I apologise.

 

[Christopher]

God, what a silly thing to waste so much effort arguing about.

 

[tenmei]

It takes two, Christopher. It takes two.

We were both involved in the argument. Look, I'm willing to say that we've got different thoughts on this and that we're never going to change our opinions. I think the Vesta thing was silly, you don't, that's fine.

I'd still like to know why the decision was made to go against what we've been told before, though.

 

[William Leisner]

I'd still like to know why the decision was made to go against what we've been told before, though.

To drive people on the internet into a tizzy.

I wonder if it'll work?

 

[pookha]

It takes two, Christopher. It takes two.

We were both involved in the argument. Look, I'm willing to say that we've got different thoughts on this and that we're never going to change our opinions. I think the Vesta thing was silly, you don't, that's fine.

I'd still like to know why the decision was made to go against what we've been told before, though.

didnt this whole thing grow out of fanon.
as far as i know there never was a constitution seen in tos.

and just because one tradition is used for the major class ships dosnt mean other types of ships wouldnt have their own naming system.