what's NCV then, clever clogs? (as in the Relativity)
Ship Registries Questions
- Thread starter CuttingEdge100
- Start date
what's NCV then, clever clogs? (as in the Relativity)
Gene signed off on a lot of screwy things back then, for the sake of a check and keeping Star Trek's visibility above water.
However, another of Roddenberry's quotes, via David Gerrold, that he invoked during TNG's development stage and he'd bring up something that contradicted something already established, "Allow me the consistency of my inconsistencies."
I like this one. It covers the apparent inconsistency, it doesn't require a giant leap in something or other, and it fits what we've seen. I say we go with it.
That one actually had a recent answer. Something like 'Naval Chrono-Vessel' or something. I don't remember exactly what it was. (I never liked the idea of an entire ship type being made JUST for time-travel.)
How about...
Naval Combat Vessel
or
'Nuther Creative Vacillation
or
Nothing Contrary Visible
or
Never Contradict Verisimilitude
(IMHO-this one should be every Trek Fan's Mantra)
I've also seen Naval Chrono-Vessel mentioned recently.
A standard rant here...
If NCC stands for something like Naval Construction Contract, then it is basically common to all the ships: they all have naval construction contracts. It does not differentiate between the ships. So there is no plausible reason for adding those letters to the ships! They serve no acceptable role there, any more than it would be plausible that each automobile registry on Earth began with the letters CAR.
The role of any letters painted on that part of the ships must be informative rather than merely decorative. Uniform pennant art is all right, but registry numbers and letters must "make a difference", so to say. Those three letters have to tell something about, say, this particular class of ships that is different from other classes of ships.
And we do see this happen: some ships have NCC, some have NX, some have NSP and so forth. The registry letters tell ship groups apart in some fashion that adds to the way the registry numbers differentiate between individual ships. But the division does not happen by class, or design, or mission profile, at least not very clearly. It seems that what we are left with is that the letters sort out the ships by their operating agency or operational status. That is, NCC might mean active Starfleet, NX might mean Starfleet under evaluation, NAR might be some sort of reserve, NSP isn't Starfleet but is Federation, and YLT isn't even Federation but a marker for certain foreign ships (Yridian) in Federation records.
Timo Saloniemi
If NCC stands for something like Naval Construction Contract, then it is basically common to all the ships: they all have naval construction contracts. It does not differentiate between the ships. So there is no plausible reason for adding those letters to the ships! They serve no acceptable role there, any more than it would be plausible that each automobile registry on Earth began with the letters CAR.
The role of any letters painted on that part of the ships must be informative rather than merely decorative. Uniform pennant art is all right, but registry numbers and letters must "make a difference", so to say. Those three letters have to tell something about, say, this particular class of ships that is different from other classes of ships.
And we do see this happen: some ships have NCC, some have NX, some have NSP and so forth. The registry letters tell ship groups apart in some fashion that adds to the way the registry numbers differentiate between individual ships. But the division does not happen by class, or design, or mission profile, at least not very clearly. It seems that what we are left with is that the letters sort out the ships by their operating agency or operational status. That is, NCC might mean active Starfleet, NX might mean Starfleet under evaluation, NAR might be some sort of reserve, NSP isn't Starfleet but is Federation, and YLT isn't even Federation but a marker for certain foreign ships (Yridian) in Federation records.
Timo Saloniemi
Last edited:
^ THANK YOU!!
I would interprit NCV as Naval- Carrier N=Naval and CV= carrier
I have always been partial to the Star FLeet Battles manner of being adhereant to NCC as meaning Naval Construction Contract and the alpha coding system of classes. Granted they are not used in the registries of the ships, but do make classifying them easiy to identify. Example....NCL=New Light Cruser, CVL= Light Carrier, CA= Armored Cruiser or heavy cruiser, DD=destroyer, SC= scout, BCH= Heavy Battlecruiser...and so on.
Well, that's all fine and good for SFB, but that's not the way it works on the shows.
Well we can debate whether the economy of the United Federation of Planets has taxation, but the prefix could mean the tax status, space lane tax, or vehicle registration fees charged each year to license the space craft? NCC, NX, and NAR are government vehicles that are exempt. NSP is a civilian Federation starship subject to yearly registration fees?
The problem is that other people decided to add letter prefixes after Jefferies devised his system. Then TNG comes along and their are no rules expect that the numbers are assigned chronologically. But I don't have to remind any one about that.
Would Jefferies have given civilian starships the NCC registry prefix in addition to Starfleet ships if he had been given the chance?
Though when the word Naval is used the presumption is that it is a military/government ship and not a civilian one.
We presume that the X in NX means eXperimental. But it could also mean X for eXempt. Like exempted from a spaceworthiness certificate.
Jefferies could have adopted the designation scheme used by the United State Navy, but he chose not too. Using the US Navy scheme, the Enterprise would have been CA-1701.
Don't know when they decided to have matter/anti-matter propulsion, but the NCC could have stood for Nuclear-propelled Combat Cruiser and NX could have stood for Nuclear-propelled combat eXempt.
Last edited:
Tough call, but it doesn't seem like it, since dialog mentions other types, but only mentions the NCC prefix when discussing 'ships of the line'.
The problem is that other people decided to add letter prefixes after Jefferies devised his system. Then TNG comes along and their are no rules expect that the numbers are assigned chronologically. But I don't have to remind any one about that.
That's just it, there was no system, by Jefferies or anyone else! He was just putting together a mishmash of elements that looked good on camera and had enough of a ring of familiarity for the audience to connect with the idea that the Enterprise was an Earth ship without running afoul of the real system he was pinching from, aviation tail numbers. Everything else is after-the-fact rationalizations, including Jefferies' own "first ship of the seventeenth class" explanation for 1701 (which was really more of a "if anyone asks, how 'bout this?" kind of explanation, and since nobody asked, it's largely irrelevant).
It's also interesting that the fanon Ships of the Star Fleet, Starfleet Dynamics, and Starfleet Prototype had NCC registry numbers and a variation on the United States Navy classification scheme.
IIRC, they had CH for Cruiser Heavy and the Enterprise was CH-1701.
But we are presuming that the NCC registry prefix is English, it could be an abbreviation in the Vulcan, Andorian, Tellarite native language. Starfleet could have adopted an existing Vulcan starship registry scheme?
IIRC, they had CH for Cruiser Heavy and the Enterprise was CH-1701.
But we are presuming that the NCC registry prefix is English, it could be an abbreviation in the Vulcan, Andorian, Tellarite native language. Starfleet could have adopted an existing Vulcan starship registry scheme?
Jefferies would have made it so much easier if he had pinched the naval scheme and they would have painted 1701 on the Enterprise model.
True, but my point is 'barring any other official explanation', that is the official explanation, as it currently stands.
I guess what we have to determine is which agency is actually registering starships and for what purpose. Is it the United Federation of Planets Department of Licensing that assigns these numbers and maintains information about the vehicle that was assigned this number? Like I said in a previous post, starships might be taxed differently based on their prefix designations while military/government starships are exempt from licensing fees and taxation.
Well, how official is it when, a) Roddenberry officially decanonized the FJ stuff (which includes the "Naval Construction Contract" stuff), and b) the Trek art department hasn't shown any adherence to that notion anyway, and came up with a bunch of registry numbers that Roddenberry also signed off on?
I think that these days, the entire registry question is just a personal preference. Me, I don't think that "NCC" stands for anything. I also think that with a few minor issues aside, registries are supposed to be chronological. Other people may feel different. And that's OK.
Roddenberry also decanonized episodes of the Original Series, all the movies past the first one, and pretty much everything else he couldn't/didn't take credit for. :P
But, like I said, to this point, it's the only official nomenclature given, and - to this day - there hasn't been something official which supplants it.
The only thing we can say for certain is that registry numbers of Starfleet ships have a prefix of "NCC". There is no onscreen verification of any specific meaning, and the offscreen stuff is all over the map.
