So many Mirandas/So few Constitution-refits?

[Praetor]

I don't have much to add to the other ongoing discussion regarding the cadet mission, but I would like to point out a line from the original script of "In Thy Image" from before it became TMP.

When Lt. Xon, Spock's replacement, beams on board, he's unrecognizable as a Vulcan. Paraphrasing, Kirk sees Xon's Lieutenant stripes and tells McCoy "He's yours," to which McCoy replies, "He's yours. Vulcans also graduate as Lieutenants." So the it would appear to be the intention that medical officers and Vulcans get to jump straight to lieutenant when they graduate, in the case of medical officers perhaps reflective of additional medical education achieved separately from the Academy. In the case of Vulcans, who knows. Maybe they're able to handle additional honors courses that let them jump. Anyhoo, perhaps this explains Saavik.

OTOH, as others have suggested, perhaps Saavik was a command school cadet, and had already been through the regular Academy?

Which is interesting since Picard complained that it was underpowered. "Peak Performance" showed the ship to have only one bulky warp core. Still, she seemed pretty roomy with thick primary hull.

Wasn't it in "The Battle" that Picard complained, and about the Stargazer? "She was an overworked, underpowered vessel..." I think. Perhaps he meant the four engines were underpowered by the warp core? Might explain why we didn't see many of them. Regarding that thick hull, if we accept the garage door looking details as hangars, as appears to be the case, she may be more hollow inside than we think.

Well, at the time if the Battle at Maxia, Picard wasn't a "hero character" so the Stargazer was fodder. Now put Picard on a shuttlecraft and see how much longer it'll survive against a Jem'hadar attack than say Captain No-name

I guess what I was trying to suggest was moreso that the Stargazer didn't appear to be on the low level of, say, a Lantree. From outward appearances, Stargazer appeared well-armed at least.

 

[Nob Akimoto]

It was in Relics where Picard complained about the Stargazer being overworked and underpowered. But he also described her "always on the verge of flying apart". He was probably exaggerating a bit, and there's the whole fact that he was in command for well over 20 years. By the end of that commission, she probably hadn't seen a major refurbishment or rebuilding, which might explain Picard's belief in her being underpowered and overworked. Perhaps other Constellation class ships got new warp cores or other upgrades if they weren't on super deep space assignments like Stargazer.

 

[Praetor]

Ah, thanks for filling the blank on that one.

 

[blssdwlf]

I'm not familiar with Picard's 20 year command of the Stargazer (where does that come from?).

I know that he took over once when the Captain of the Stargazer was killed. And that it was damaged by Cardassians when he was ordered to approach them with a truce and had to retreat. And 9 years prior to "The Battle" it was abandoned after destroying a Ferengi ship. If he was back near Cardassian space it would sound like he would have opportunities to get the ship refit and upgraded.

 

[Praetor]

As I recall, the timing of his battlefield assumption of command was dated to 2333 in "Tapestry," and Jack Crusher was killed under his command on the ship in 2354. A year later, the Battle of Maxia happened and she was presumed lost.

I have always wondered if Picard actually immediately gained command of the ship in 2333, of if there might actually be a loophole through which he gets to become XO before gaining permanent command. He was a Lieutenant Commander at the time, and twenty years is a long time to command a ship.

 

[Nob Akimoto]

As I recall, the timing of his battlefield assumption of command was dated to 2333 in "Tapestry," and Jack Crusher was killed under his command on the ship in 2354. A year later, the Battle of Maxia happened and she was presumed lost.

I have always wondered if Picard actually immediately gained command of the ship in 2333, of if there might actually be a loophole through which he gets to become XO before gaining permanent command. He was a Lieutenant Commander at the time, and twenty years is a long time to command a ship.

Well, 20 years is a lot, but long tenures seem pretty common in Starfleet. Pike had Enterprise for at least 10 years, Kirk had her for at least 10 (and longer if she became his personal flagship), Picard had the E-D for at least 8 years and would've been longer had the ship survived, and then commanded her successor till at least 2379. Starfleet doesn't seem to have an up or out policy, particularly given that evidently you can stay a lieutenant jg for 40 years ("Tapestry), so I guess letting a captain have a ship for super long duration commissions makes some sense.

 

[blssdwlf]

I checked the "Tapestry" dialogue and I couldn't find 2333 as a spoken date. Was this some sort of background graphic? I don't mind the length as I was just curious as to where it came from. If he had the ship for 20 years, it doesn't sound like there was any lack of opportunities to have the ship stay up to date since the Stargazer participated in various non-exploration activities.

 

[Praetor]

Sorry, turns out I remembered wrong. According to Memory Alpha:

The length of Picard's command of the Stargazer is from the Star Trek: The Next Generation Writers'/Directors' Guide. The year he took command is derived from "The Battle", in which it is stated Picard lost the Stargazer in 2355.

It would seem the 2333 date was derived by working backwards from the 2355 date using the 20 years number given in the Writer's Guide. It also had this to say:

It is unlikely Picard was promoted directly to the rank of captain as he was assigned command of Stargazer, but more likely to the rank of commander before being promoted to the higher grade later. In accordance with naval rank tradition, one does not have to hold a captain's rank to command a vessel (most were actually commanded by officers holding the rank of commander), and anyone who is commanding is called 'Captain' regardless of rank.

Also, even though 20 years seems like a long time to me, I sometimes forget to take into account that humans in the Trekverse live around 130 years.

 

[Crazy Eddie]

That lighting is not visible at the beginning of the explosion. The evidence of it visible after the explosion tells us that they belong to secondary sparks. There is no way that the initial explosion could be between the impulse deck and bridge module.

The initial flash isn't nearly bright enough to expect that it would; it is not, in fact, that much brighter than the torpedo itself, which only illuminates part of the hull directly next to it (mainly because the Enterprise's hull isn't all that reflective in the first place). The ACTUAL EXPLOSION is bright enough that the glare masks the entire saucer section including the bridge.

The initial explosion put a green glare to the right almost to the "U" of USS. If the explosion point was at the back of the bridge at "1701" as you've described then the light would have easily lit up the front of the impulse deck.

It IS in the frame you're referring to (though partially obscured behind the actual flash) wherein the entire starboard side of the ship all the way up to the first "S" in "USS" and the starboard nacelle is also illuminated. The frame before that, the initial flash of detonation (or impact?) lights up nothing at all except the starboard side of the bridge.

In EITHER case, there is significant illumination on the starboard side of the bridge dome and a portion of the hull starboard-forward of it. This remains inconsistent with an impact point on the port aft.

I mean you're IMAGINING the equipment they'd have on board for such a mission would be specialized for training purposes in particular.

That's standard procedure on a real world training vessel. Why would it be different on a fictional one?

Based on that, you also CAN'T learn at the Academy how to explore a planet from a starship.

Of course you can. That's how we've been training Marines for hundreds of years. They learn how to fight and operate effectively on the ground long before they ever set foot on an actual naval vessel.

That's not a good excuse when the ship can visit planets every few days.

Typically does not. Most of the gaps between episodes are on the order of one or two MONTHS, and as I already pointed out, not all of those episodes actually involve beaming down to a planet (and even the ones that do, it's the same three or four bridge officers on almost every mission).

And for Saavik to go on an away mission

That's not part of her TRAINING mission. In fact, the only reason she gets to on the Regula-1 mission is by quoting regulations at a really convenient time.

We do know 172 were at duty stations and 248 were off duty and 11 in sickbay in TMP. If we were to assume that half were on watch at that time because of the V'ger situation then the ship really only needs 344. The other 86 are non-essential to the ship...

And would therefore have no reason to GO on a training mission if they have no jobs on board the ship.

Since we don't know how high a rank a cadet can hold in Starfleet

Yes we do. "Cadet." In conventional terms, that's an actual rank referring to an officer in training who has not yet received a full commission. A cadet may ENTER the officer's corps at various ranks, but he cannot hold that actual rank and be a cadet at the same time (unless, of course, "Cadet" is just shorthand for "space cadet" and Starfleet actually has no such defined status for its trainees).

We have a reason to assume red means cadet. She's wearing it at the beginning of the movie where "cadets" were being rated in the bridge simulator. Since Saavik felt the test was unfair to her

She felt it was an unfair test of her COMMAND ABILITIES. Which is part of what is reflected in Troi's question to Riker "Is there a solution? Or is this simply a test of my ability to handle a no-win situation?"

The whole reason for the simulator room is that Starfleet vessels don't have holodecks yet and can't test certify command-level officers in realistic situations anywhere but highly specialized facilities designed to generate these kinds of scenarios. If Deanna Troi, in particular, had been serving aboard the original Enterprise, she would have had to wait until the ship got back to Earth to take the Bridge Officer's Test; in the 23rd century, "The no-win scenario" is one of the tests; by the 24th, that scenario is sufficiently well known that it has been replaced by the "Win by terrible sacrifice" scenario, which serves a very similar purpose.

Let's see in the movie era for Kirk's Enterprise

There's nothing to see. You can argue extenuating circumstances all you want, but the BUREAUCRATS wouldn't see it that way.

You're forgetting:
1. "Errand of Mercy" - multiple Klingon ships attacked Enterprise while she was orbiting Organia. She safely withdrew back to the fleet.
2. "The Deadly Years" - 10 Romulan ships were attacking her while flying through the RNZ. Stocker didn't put up a fight but her shields were holding for the duration of the attack. She escaped after Kirk tricked them into backing off.

The job of an escort vessel is to deter/prevent an enemy from attacking the object of your protection. If your escort ship's most effective tactic is to run away, it's probably not a very good escort.

Those are two different Enterprises against a different era of enemy ships. How those fair isn't the same comparison to the Enterprise under Kirk.

Three 100 year old Klingon warships manage to overwhelm the most powerful and most advanced ship in Starfleet; in Rascals, it requires only TWO, and those ships are flown by Ferengi.

The Enterprise-A is NOT the most powerful or most advanced ship in Starfleet at the time of TUC. It would be fortunate if it was even on par with its latest Klingon counterparts. By no stretch of the imagination is it up to facing two-to-one odds.

Gorkon requested him by name? I thought Spock volunteered them?

It's why Spock had to personally vouch for Kirk: Gorkon wouldn't have come in the first place if Kirk wasn't part of the package.

I wrote, "There really isn't anything specific about the ship that tells us that it couldn't be upgraded like all the other ships to keep up with technology. "

"All the other ships" is in reference to just that, all the other ships that have been upgraded to keep up with the technology like the gazillions of Reliants and Excelsiors in DS9's time...

None of which have registries in the low 2000s or even 3000s and appear to be relatively new vessels. What's more significant is that we've never seen an active Constitution class in the 24th century (the point of the OP, remember?). This pales in comparison to the fact that that other than Enterprise, we never see one in the movie era either.

This at least suggests that the Enterprise has ALREADY been upgraded to (possibly even beyond) the reasonable limits of its basic design and they are well post the point of diminishing returns for what they can do with it. I'd go so far as to say the TMP refit was the "Break even" moment at that point: it was the most drastic overhaul of any starship before or since, a project so expensive and complicated that it was just barely cheaper than building a new ship from scratch. The Constitution design is suped as far as the engineers can push it, in which configuration the ship is at rough parity with the Miranda class and still a notch or two beneath the (volumetrically) larger and almost certainly more powerful Constellations.

So they've figured out that any further upgrades to the Last Constitution would be prohibitively expensive and would leave the ship STILL inferior to its contemporaries. There's no reason ton continue at that point, especially since Kirk -- the only thing that really made Enterprise special -- is due for retirement.

Klingon stories go better when they can say, "and yes, the Federation feared Gorkon so much that they sent the might Excelsior...

To which the hearer of the story would reply "What the hell is an Egg Seltzer?"

Klingons know the name of Kirk and they know Enterprise is his ship. They're warriors, not technicians; they're not doing side-by-side comparisons between the Enterprise and Excelsior (whose specifications they don't even have access to in the first place) and thinking "Ya know? Enterprise is kind of a paper tiger when you really think about it."

Not that the movie era's portrayal is exactly "flailing barbarianism," but the phrase "Let's stop and think about this rationally..." isn't exactly the first thing you expect to hear on a Klingon warship.

 

[Crazy Eddie]

It was in Relics where Picard complained about the Stargazer being overworked and underpowered. But he also described her "always on the verge of flying apart". He was probably exaggerating a bit, and there's the whole fact that he was in command for well over 20 years. By the end of that commission, she probably hadn't seen a major refurbishment or rebuilding, which might explain Picard's belief in her being underpowered and overworked. Perhaps other Constellation class ships got new warp cores or other upgrades if they weren't on super deep space assignments like Stargazer.

That was the basis of my assumption that Starfleet explores in "tiers" that back fill as new frontiers open up. In the Constellation's heyday, the "five year mission" zone was the ragged edge of explored space; by the time Picard commands the Constellation, that same region is mostly farms, towns and industrial ports (notice the Enteprise-D never revisits any of the worlds the original Enterprise did; bet you two bars of gold pressed latinum that Picard had to run at least one peacekeeping mission to Sigma Iota-II).

"Overworked" because they're the workhorses of the fleet now; Starfleet is sending them to do literally everything from space patrol to law enforcement, anti-smuggling, safety inspections, search and rescue and so on. "Under powered" because the ship's original 2280s warp drive is barely up to speed with some of its civilian counterparts and Stargazer is sometimes in the awkward position of being outrun by suped-up smugglers.

 

[blssdwlf]

The initial flash isn't nearly bright enough to expect that it would; it is not, in fact, that much brighter than the torpedo itself, which only illuminates part of the hull directly next to it (mainly because the Enterprise's hull isn't all that reflective in the first place). The ACTUAL EXPLOSION is bright enough that the glare masks the entire saucer section including the bridge.

The initial explosion put a green glare to the right almost to the "U" of USS. If the explosion point was at the back of the bridge at "1701" as you've described then the light would have easily lit up the front of the impulse deck.

It IS in the frame you're referring to (though partially obscured behind the actual flash) wherein the entire starboard side of the ship all the way up to the first "S" in "USS" and the starboard nacelle is also illuminated. The frame before that, the initial flash of detonation (or impact?) lights up nothing at all except the starboard side of the bridge.

That's glare - which increased the brightness by a small amount for the entire frame. Again, what we'd expect to see from an initial flash from where you're describing it to be should have lit up the front of the impulse deck as my example shows. Since it does not, it's still glare and the impact point could only be further back on the port side.

We both see two different things and it's not going to change unless there is new evidence.

That's standard procedure on a real world training vessel. Why would it be different on a fictional one?

"Recoverable munitions" (you), "Training drones" (me). Because they've got live torpedoes instead of the training ones that you were expecting makes it different from a real world training vessel.

Of course you can. That's how we've been training Marines for hundreds of years. They learn how to fight and operate effectively on the ground long before they ever set foot on an actual naval vessel.

Just to be clear, I was commenting on what you wrote, "You go on training missions to practice the things you CAN'T learn at the Academy, namely operating a starship on a day-to-day basis. "

And that is still true even in your example - those marines once they've learned to be effective on the ground will then need training on a live starship for ship-to-shore operations. In your own example you list operating a starship can't be learned at the academy so transporting explorers (or marines) down would fall under requiring a starship.

Typically does not. Most of the gaps between episodes are on the order of one or two MONTHS,

The gaps between episodes can include other missions that aren't shown. We've seen that IN episodes, the Enterprise has no problem going from one planet to another planet in a different system in DAYS.

and as I already pointed out, not all of those episodes actually involve beaming down to a planet (and even the ones that do, it's the same three or four bridge officers on almost every mission).

Which again isn't accurate. We've seen other crewmen, including Yeomans, go down on away missions.

That's not part of her TRAINING mission. In fact, the only reason she gets to on the Regula-1 mission is by quoting regulations at a really convenient time.

Do you have a checklist of what her training mission was? She could've volunteered to just to get it checked off for going on an away mission.

And would therefore have no reason to GO on a training mission if they have no jobs on board the ship.

Sure they do. They can go on planetary survey missions, operate the science gear and be part of the lab guys that report up their findings to department heads. They just wouldn't necessarily be needed for starship combat operations.

Yes we do. "Cadet." In conventional terms, that's an actual rank referring to an officer in training who has not yet received a full commission. A cadet may ENTER the officer's corps at various ranks, but he cannot hold that actual rank and be a cadet at the same time (unless, of course, "Cadet" is just shorthand for "space cadet" and Starfleet actually has no such defined status for its trainees).

No we don't. We have no idea what the highest rank a cadet can have in Starfleet. "Lieutenant" Saavik could be an example that cadets have ranks.

She felt it was an unfair test of her COMMAND ABILITIES. Which is part of what is reflected in Troi's question to Riker "Is there a solution? Or is this simply a test of my ability to handle a no-win situation?"

Saavik isn't Troi and they are not in the same era for training.

Kirk pretty much describes them as cadets and as you've pointed out all the other cadets on the simulator wore red turtlenecks which points to Saavik being a cadet.

KIRK: Aren't you dead? I assume you are loitering here to learn what efficiency rating I plan to give your cadets.
​

There's nothing to see. You can argue extenuating circumstances all you want, but the BUREAUCRATS wouldn't see it that way.

You wrote, "1) We have seen the Enterprise come under conventional attack four different times in the movie era. All four times, she took heavy damage and on one of those occasions was thoroughly disabled."

Which 4 times where she came under conventional attack and suffered heavy damage and with one thoroughly disabled?

The job of an escort vessel is to deter/prevent an enemy from attacking the object of your protection. If your escort ship's most effective tactic is to run away, it's probably not a very good escort.

You said, "2) NO ship named Enterprise has EVER withstood a conventional attack from more than one Klingon (or Romulan) ship at a time."

I provided evidence that you were wrong because the TOS Enterprise did withstand a conventional attack from more than one Klingon or Romulan ship at a time.

Both your points fail to show that the ship wouldn't be effective against a conventional attack or that she is less advanced.

Three 100 year old Klingon warships manage to overwhelm the most powerful and most advanced ship in Starfleet; in Rascals, it requires only TWO, and those ships are flown by Ferengi.

Then if age has nothing to do with it what's to stop Kirk on the Enterprise from destroying 3 attacking BOPs? Kirk isn't Riker and the Enterprise-A isn't the Enterprise-D.

The Enterprise-A is NOT the most powerful or most advanced ship in Starfleet at the time of TUC.

That's very different than you arguing that she's obsolete which is what I disagree with. With the Excelsior around, of course she's not the most powerful or most advanced. However that doesn't make her obsolete either.

It would be fortunate if it was even on par with its latest Klingon counterparts.

Again, what proof that it is not? The head of Starfleet didn't have any qualms about sending the Enterprise instead of a different ship.

By no stretch of the imagination is it up to facing two-to-one odds.

Again, proof? As far as we know, she could take half-a-dozen Klingon BOPs on if she outgunned a single one so badly.

It's why Spock had to personally vouch for Kirk: Gorkon wouldn't have come in the first place if Kirk wasn't part of the package.

Okay - what dialogue is that? The only time Spock talks about vouching for Kirk is in volunteering to Starfleet for the mission.

I wrote, "There really isn't anything specific about the ship that tells us that it couldn't be upgraded like all the other ships to keep up with technology. "

"All the other ships" is in reference to just that, all the other ships that have been upgraded to keep up with the technology like the gazillions of Reliants and Excelsiors in DS9's time...

None of which have registries in the low 2000s or even 3000s and appear to be relatively new vessels.

That's not true either. Memory Alpha lists these 2 Reliant-types in TNG/DS9 with sub-3000 registries:
1. USS Trial (NCC-1948)
2. USS Lantree (NCC-1837)

The USS Repulse (NCC-2544) an Excelsior class was also serving in TNG/DS9.

What's more significant is that we've never seen an active Constitution class in the 24th century (the point of the OP, remember?).

Why should we when they were supposedly retired in the 23rd century?

This pales in comparison to the fact that that other than Enterprise, we never see one in the movie era either.

The Enterprise-A would be the second we see. Perhaps you meant we've never seen a third TMP-Enterprise-type ship in the movie era?

So they've figured out that any further upgrades to the Last Constitution would be prohibitively expensive and would leave the ship STILL inferior to its contemporaries. There's no reason ton continue at that point, especially since Kirk -- the only thing that really made Enterprise special -- is due for retirement.

That is one possibility that a complete conversion from TOS-model Enterprise to TMP-model Enterprise was impractical in the long run. However we don't really know why the Enterprise-A and the rest of her class of ships were to be retired. There isn't any technological reason to believe that the ship could not be further internally upgraded as her contemporaries, the Reliants and Grissoms, remained viable into the future. The only other viable reasons for her retirement are political or financial, IMHO.

Klingon stories go better when they can say, "and yes, the Federation feared Gorkon so much that they sent the might Excelsior...

To which the hearer of the story would reply "What the hell is an Egg Seltzer?"

Oh come on, Klingon's would love cracking a joke about that!

Klingons know the name of Kirk and they know Enterprise is his ship. They're warriors, not technicians; they're not doing side-by-side comparisons between the Enterprise and Excelsior (whose specifications they don't even have access to in the first place) and thinking "Ya know? Enterprise is kind of a paper tiger when you really think about it."

I don't think you give the Klingons enough credit. Besides, Kirk's a magnet for young Klingons trying to prove themselves (see TFF) so the Enterprise is going to get tested by the Klingons more than any other ship

Not that the movie era's portrayal is exactly "flailing barbarianism," but the phrase "Let's stop and think about this rationally..." isn't exactly the first thing you expect to hear on a Klingon warship.

No, it'd be,

KLAA: Enterprise? That's Kirk's ship. ...If I could defeat Kirk...
VIXIS: ...you would be the greatest warrior in the galaxy.


​

 

[Crazy Eddie]

That's glare - which increased the brightness by a small amount for the entire frame.

At the point of impact, yes. However:

Again, what we'd expect to see from an initial flash from where you're describing it to be should have lit up the front of the impulse deck

IF it was significantly brighter than the torpedo itself, which -- judging by the illumination on the bridge dome -- it was not.

And in the very next frame at the point of detonation, the starboard side of the saucer is illuminated brightly (to the same degree as the inside face of the starboard nacelle).

"Recoverable munitions" (you), "Training drones" (me).

Yep. The first is a thing used in the real world by real navies on training missions. The second is a thing used by nobody -- not even Starfleet -- on training missions.

You said, "2) NO ship named Enterprise has EVER withstood a conventional attack from more than one Klingon (or Romulan) ship at a time."

I provided evidence that you were wrong because the TOS Enterprise did withstand a conventional attack

No it did not. Both times it was overwhelmed by their attacks and forced to retreat. Which, again, is not something they could afford to do on an escort mission.

Then if age has nothing to do with it what's to stop Kirk on the Enterprise from destroying 3 attacking BOPs?

The fact that he barely managed to defeat ONE bird of prey in "Balance of Terror", and even then against a ship that had nearly exhausted its fuel reserves.

Besides which, it isn't a matter of SURVIVING that attack by being able to flee at an opportune moment. Enterprise is supposed to be protecting Gorkon, for whom fleeing may not necessarily be an option. That would explicitly put Enterprise in the same situation that Saavik faced in the simulator: one ship vs. Three Klingons in an attempt to save a different vessel that you cannot afford to abandon. That, if you recall, is the hypothetical that Admiral James T. Kirk calls "The no-win scenario."

Again, what proof that it is not? The head of Starfleet didn't have any qualms about sending the Enterprise instead of a different ship.

A different ship wouldn't generate the kind of respect that Enterprise would.

Okay - what dialogue is that? The only time Spock talks about vouching for Kirk is in volunteering to Starfleet for the mission.

Apart from the implication of how Spock describes it -- he set it up on his own initiative and "personally vouched" for KIRK to go along with it -- there's the fact that the script for the movie has the CnC saying: "As it happens, Kirk, the Chancellor specifically requested you and your officers." This is the line immediately before Spock announces his voucher (and is consistent with Spock's "only Nixon could go to China" line later).

That's not true either. Memory Alpha lists these 2 Reliant-types in TNG/DS9 with sub-3000 registries:
1. USS Trial (NCC-1948)
2. USS Lantree (NCC-1837)

AFAIK, neither registry is actually seen on screen. Repulse is an interesting case, but since we never see the interior we have no idea what her internal technology looks like.

OTOH, Lantree had a crew of 26 at the time it was destroyed and is classified as a "supply ship." Not really suggestive of an "upgrade" there.

That is one possibility that a complete conversion from TOS-model Enterprise to TMP-model Enterprise was impractical in the long run. However we don't really know why the Enterprise-A and the rest of her class of ships were to be retired.

The painfully obvious reason is that they were retired because they had become obsolete by that point. It's likely the Enterprise-A held out for as long as it did because of Jim Kirk's personal awesomeness field.

Well, that plus the fact that Scotty is pretty much the ascendant god of engineering and has been single handedly holding the entire ship together -- both the nil and the -A -- since at least TOS. In that sense, Enterprise is a bit like the 1993 Dodge Charger my boss still drives around sometimes: it's such a rusty old piece of shit you couldn't sell it for a candy bar, but he somehow manages to keep it running regardless.

There isn't any technological reason to believe that the ship could not be further internally upgraded as her contemporaries, the Reliants and Grissoms, remained viable into the future.

The Reliants and grissoms were still in production at the time, however; new hulls could be built that specifically accommodate new technologies and advances in warp field theory without having to completely redesign them in a fundamental way.

The Navy went through something like this in the 1990s when USS Bainbridge was slated for decommissioning; there was a cottage industry of engineers who swore on a stack of Bibles that the Bainbridge could/should be upgraded with modernized VLS systems and combat software to preserve the nuclear cruiser benefit in a modern battlespace. It turns out that the deck structure couldn't really support the VLS system anyway, and the electrical and computer systems installed in the 1970s had been so ad hoc that upgrading the ship a second time would require totally rebuilding it -- AGAIN -- with no gaurantee of improvement over existing (newer) designs.

Technologically it was doable... to the extent that a rube goldberg machine that fires pingpong balls at the speed of sound is doable. But when they got to the point that even the ship's most basic systems were over 50 years old, it was realized that the cost of replacing and upgrading the ship was greater than the cost of building a new one. The same exact thing happened to the old Albany class ships, which were rebuilt from WW-II cruisers to carry the amazingly complicated Tartar missiles; refitting them to carry the newer Standard missiles would have required completely ripping them apart and rebuilding the superstructure for the third time in as many decades in addition to other systems overdue for replacement. The navy simply didn't bother.

That's what "obsolete" basically means in engineering. It's the point where a system/ship/technique is so far behind current technology that it is actually more complicated to upgrade to keep pace with current technology than it is to replace it altogether. It would be like ripping apart an old Apple-IIe and trying to convert it to run Snow Leapord; it's 50 times easier to just buy a new computer.

I don't think you give the Klingons enough credit.

These are Klingons we're talking about...

 

[blssdwlf]

That's glare - which increased the brightness by a small amount for the entire frame.

At the point of impact, yes. However:

Again, what we'd expect to see from an initial flash from where you're describing it to be should have lit up the front of the impulse deck

IF it was significantly brighter than the torpedo itself, which -- judging by the illumination on the bridge dome -- it was not.

We have an example of what it would look like with a small light source between the impulse drive and bridge module and the initial explosion frame does not fit that look.

Yep. The first is a thing used in the real world by real navies on training missions. The second is a thing used by nobody -- not even Starfleet -- on training missions.

Really? "Rejoined" and "Sons of Mogh" both have dialogue that talks about "target drones".

Air force training uses/used towed target drones.

Oh and Jedis in training used some kind of training drones that kept zapping them.

No it did not. Both times it was overwhelmed by their attacks and forced to retreat. Which, again, is not something they could afford to do on an escort mission.

Yes it did survive by your own points. She was attacked by multiple ships and you're unwilling to back up your examples of the 4 incidents where she was heavily damaged from conventional fire.

The other thing is retreat should always be an option for an escort mission as in escorting the protected ship away from danger.

The fact that he barely managed to defeat ONE bird of prey in "Balance of Terror", and even then against a ship that had nearly exhausted its fuel reserves.

The "Balance of Terror" battle was against a ship with a new weapon and new cloaking device. "The Deadly Years" we see that shielding tech had improved to where she could withstand fire from 10 Romulan BOPs.

Besides which, it isn't a matter of SURVIVING that attack by being able to flee at an opportune moment. Enterprise is supposed to be protecting Gorkon, for whom fleeing may not necessarily be an option. That would explicitly put Enterprise in the same situation that Saavik faced in the simulator: one ship vs. Three Klingons in an attempt to save a different vessel that you cannot afford to abandon.

If Gorkon's ship becomes too damaged to flee the Enterprise will have a tough situation of trying to rescue Gorkon and then retreating. However what other ship that doesn't have ablative armor would fair any better in that situation?

That, if you recall, is the hypothetical that Admiral James T. Kirk calls "The no-win scenario."

And it can apply to any ship, not just the Enterprise.

A different ship wouldn't generate the kind of respect that Enterprise would.

She'd still need to be able to carry out the mission because not everyone respects the Enterprise and she's a magnet for young Klingon captains that want to make a name for themselves.

Apart from the implication of how Spock describes it -- he set it up on his own initiative and "personally vouched" for KIRK to go along with it -- there's the fact that the script for the movie has the CnC saying: "As it happens, Kirk, the Chancellor specifically requested you and your officers." This is the line immediately before Spock announces his voucher (and is consistent with Spock's "only Nixon could go to China" line later).

That line isn't in the filmed movie so they changed the premise. There isn't evidence in the movie that Gorkon requested Kirk.

AFAIK, neither registry is actually seen on screen. Repulse is an interesting case, but since we never see the interior we have no idea what her internal technology looks like.

Hmm, will have to look into that.

OTOH, Lantree had a crew of 26 at the time it was destroyed and is classified as a "supply ship." Not really suggestive of an "upgrade" there.

From a typical TWOK crew of the hundreds to just 26 in TNG would suggest her systems were upgraded to at least reduce her crew size.

The painfully obvious reason is that they were retired because they had become obsolete by that point. It's likely the Enterprise-A held out for as long as it did because of Jim Kirk's personal awesomeness field.

It's only painfully obvious the bridge crew were getting old. However the ship itself showed no signs of obsolescence.

Well, that plus the fact that Scotty is pretty much the ascendant god of engineering and has been single handedly holding the entire ship together -- both the nil and the -A -- since at least TOS. In that sense, Enterprise is a bit like the 1993 Dodge Charger my boss still drives around sometimes: it's such a rusty old piece of shit you couldn't sell it for a candy bar, but he somehow manages to keep it running regardless.

Your boss may drive something that physically looks like it might be falling apart but the E-A is lacking any physical signs of wear-and-tear or technical problems.

There isn't any technological reason to believe that the ship could not be further internally upgraded as her contemporaries, the Reliants and Grissoms, remained viable into the future.

The Reliants and grissoms were still in production at the time, however; new hulls could be built that specifically accommodate new technologies and advances in warp field theory without having to completely redesign them in a fundamental way.

But that's the rub isn't it? The old Reliants and Excelsior(s) in TNG/DS9 don't really change their shapes. They just accommodate the new technologies. The Soyuz class also got retired but she also has about the same or slightly more volume than the Reliant. So pinning it to a technological reasoning is alot harder without more specifics.

The Navy went through something like this in the 1990s when USS Bainbridge was slated for decommissioning; there was a cottage industry of engineers who swore on a stack of Bibles that the Bainbridge could/should be upgraded with modernized VLS systems and combat software to preserve the nuclear cruiser benefit in a modern battlespace. It turns out that the deck structure couldn't really support the VLS system anyway, and the electrical and computer systems installed in the 1970s had been so ad hoc that upgrading the ship a second time would require totally rebuilding it -- AGAIN -- with no gaurantee of improvement over existing (newer) designs.

Technologically it was doable... to the extent that a rube goldberg machine that fires pingpong balls at the speed of sound is doable. But when they got to the point that even the ship's most basic systems were over 50 years old, it was realized that the cost of replacing and upgrading the ship was greater than the cost of building a new one. The same exact thing happened to the old Albany class ships, which were rebuilt from WW-II cruisers to carry the amazingly complicated Tartar missiles; refitting them to carry the newer Standard missiles would have required completely ripping them apart and rebuilding the superstructure for the third time in as many decades in addition to other systems overdue for replacement. The navy simply didn't bother.

Those are good examples but they're because of financial reasons and not technological. Perhaps the Federation didn't want to pay for continuing upgrades or the E-A was more expensive to maintain?

That's what "obsolete" basically means in engineering. It's the point where a system/ship/technique is so far behind current technology that it is actually more complicated to upgrade to keep pace with current technology than it is to replace it altogether. It would be like ripping apart an old Apple-IIe and trying to convert it to run Snow Leapord; it's 50 times easier to just buy a new computer.

I just read the definition for obsolete as "no longer in use or no longer useful, no longer current." For the Enterprise-A:

1. Is the E-A no longer in use? - No, she's still in service and in use.
2. Is the E-A no longer useful? - No, she's still going on missions and was even carrying same type of gear that the Excelsior was using.
3. Is the E-A no longer current? - Unlikely as she had same gear as Excelsior and her interior technology appeared to be equivalent to Excelsior's.

I don't think you give the Klingons enough credit.

These are Klingons we're talking about...

So?

 

[Praetor]

You know, I think if Crazy Eddie and blssdwlf were locked in a room long enough, you guys might find a cure for the common cold. Or go all Thunderdome and try to kill each other.

In all seriousness, I've really been enjoying the thoughts coming out of your discourse, and like I assume others following this thread, haven't had a ton to add because you've both had very well thought out, well expanded arguments.

That said, I'll reiterate my belief that there was something significantly special about the 1701 refit, which may or may not have included other ships that shared that tech look, which set it apart.

For whatever reason, this refit was more extensive than what was required to allow the Miranda and Excelsior to remain in service another hundred years, even assuming the 1701 level tech was only around 25 years old or so at the time of her big refit.

It could be that the leaps made in the 23rd century were faster and more exponential than those made in the movie period, or it could simply be that the 1701 refit was an experiment in refitting that ultimately proved inefficient or overly expensive. Thus, older tech performing at a lesser rate was deemed acceptable for Excelsior and Miranda. (Indeed, this casts the Lakota refit in a whole new light.) Or it could be that the members of the Miranda class (or at least some members of the class) were built in the form we saw her, and somehow bypassed problems related to Constitution refits (TFF).

And what about Oberth? Most of the registries we see on them in the 24th century are higher, as is the case with many Mirandas and Excelsiors. Unless Starfleet is in the habit of issuing refit ships higher registry numbers (which I suppose is possible) I think this supports the notion of later ship batches built with newer tech already incorporated, possibly negating the need for refits.

I think, also, there is certainly some element of economy and treaty requirements that played into the Constitution class's apparenty wholesale retirement. Coupled with any or all of the other factors that have been identified, I think it makes a great degree of sense. It's not just one thing; it's a combination of them.

Personally, I'll go with this:

• 2240 - Constitution (Class I Starship) designed; Gen 2 tech
• 2265 - Wholesale fleetwide refit planned for previous generation (2240) era ships to Gen 2.5 specs
• 2265 - Miranda class designed to incorporate new advances for potential application to Consitution and Surya refits; new members of Miranda class are the first ships launched with Gen 2.5 tech
• 2270 - Starfleet begins an experiment to refit the Enterprise with Gen 2.5 tech
• 2275 - Starfleet develops faster refit methods for Constitution and Surya classes to Gen 2.5 specs
• 2280 - Excelsior construction underway with Gen 3 tech, to replace Constitution
• 2290 - Gen 3 tech considered proven, adaptations to Gen 2.5 ships prove vestigial and mixed
• 2293 - Khitomer treaty limits personnel and vessels, prompting Starfleet to invest in Excelsiors and phase out Constitutions; the versatility and sheer numbers of Miranda, and a desire to commit new resources to replacing the Constitutions with Excelsiors, ensure the Mirandas' continued service
• 2325 - Gen 4 tech (Ambassador family) begins construction
• 2350 - Gen 5 tech (Galaxy family) begins construction

Something like that.

In addition, I think part of the picture should also include the notion that the Ambassador probably didn't start as a heavy cruiser, even if it was referred to as such in "Conspiracy." I've always had the feeling that Excelsior to Ambassador was more of a diagonal jump than a directly upward one, but Ambassador to Galaxy was a more direct successional transition. Sort of like how some old-style aircraft carriers (Excelsior) became a different type of carrier alongside their replacements (Ambassador.)

 

[blssdwlf]

You know, I think if Crazy Eddie and blssdwlf were locked in a room long enough, you guys might find a cure for the common cold. Or go all Thunderdome and try to kill each other.

We don't need another hero something something Thunderdome!

In all seriousness, I've really been enjoying the thoughts coming out of your discourse, and like I assume others following this thread, haven't had a ton to add because you've both had very well thought out, well expanded arguments.

That said, I'll reiterate my belief that there was something significantly special about the 1701 refit, which may or may not have included other ships that shared that tech look, which set it apart.

For whatever reason, this refit was more extensive than what was required to allow the Miranda and Excelsior to remain in service another hundred years, even assuming the 1701 level tech was only around 25 years old or so at the time of her big refit.

It could be that the leaps made in the 23rd century were faster and more exponential than those made in the movie period, or it could simply be that the 1701 refit was an experiment in refitting that ultimately proved inefficient or overly expensive. Thus, older tech performing at a lesser rate was deemed acceptable for Excelsior and Miranda. (Indeed, this casts the Lakota refit in a whole new light.) Or it could be that the members of the Miranda class (or at least some members of the class) were built in the form we saw her, and somehow bypassed problems related to Constitution refits (TFF).

Yeah it would appear that a combination of factors made the Constitution no longer viable for future upgrades forcing the class into retirement. These factors didn't affect the Reliant's and Excelsiors.

Interestingly in DS9 did you notice that Starfleet upgraded the Reliants with additional impulse engines that replaced the stern tubes in the pod?

And what about Oberth? Most of the registries we see on them in the 24th century are higher, as is the case with many Mirandas and Excelsiors. Unless Starfleet is in the habit of issuing refit ships higher registry numbers (which I suppose is possible) I think this supports the notion of later ship batches built with newer tech already incorporated, possibly negating the need for refits.

I think it makes sense that future builds of the same class would have the newer tech already included.

I think, also, there is certainly some element of economy and treaty requirements that played into the Constitution class's apparenty wholesale retirement. Coupled with any or all of the other factors that have been identified, I think it makes a great degree of sense. It's not just one thing; it's a combination of them.

Personally, I'll go with this:

• 2240 - Constitution (Class I Starship) designed; Gen 2 tech
• 2265 - Wholesale fleetwide refit planned for previous generation (2240) era ships to Gen 2.5 specs
• 2265 - Miranda class designed to incorporate new advances for potential application to Consitution and Surya refits; new members of Miranda class are the first ships launched with Gen 2.5 tech
• 2270 - Starfleet begins an experiment to refit the Enterprise with Gen 2.5 tech
• 2275 - Starfleet develops faster refit methods for Constitution and Surya classes to Gen 2.5 specs
• 2280 - Excelsior construction underway with Gen 3 tech, to replace Constitution
• 2290 - Gen 3 tech considered proven, adaptations to Gen 2.5 ships prove vestigial and mixed
• 2293 - Khitomer treaty limits personnel and vessels, prompting Starfleet to invest in Excelsiors and phase out Constitutions; the versatility and sheer numbers of Miranda, and a desire to commit new resources to replacing the Constitutions with Excelsiors, ensure the Mirandas' continued service
• 2325 - Gen 4 tech (Ambassador family) begins construction
• 2350 - Gen 5 tech (Galaxy family) begins construction

Something like that.

Seems fairly logical.

In addition, I think part of the picture should also include the notion that the Ambassador probably didn't start as a heavy cruiser, even if it was referred to as such in "Conspiracy."

Since FJ's drawing of the Heavy Cruiser made it on screen in TSFS, the Ambassador isn't alone as a Heavy Cruiser type

I've always had the feeling that Excelsior to Ambassador was more of a diagonal jump than a directly upward one, but Ambassador to Galaxy was a more direct successional transition. Sort of like how some old-style aircraft carriers (Excelsior) became a different type of carrier alongside their replacements (Ambassador.)

Did we see any Ambassadors during the Dominion War? Or were they only a handful spotted in TNG?

 

[137th Gebirg]

I want to say the last time we saw them was in the "Emissary" episode of DS9.

 

[Praetor]

We don't need another hero something something Thunderdome!

Well played.

Yeah it would appear that a combination of factors made the Constitution no longer viable for future upgrades forcing the class into retirement. These factors didn't affect the Reliant's and Excelsiors.

Interestingly in DS9 did you notice that Starfleet upgraded the Reliants with additional impulse engines that replaced the stern tubes in the pod?

I noticed that at least some of them had that - but it appeared that others didn't. It always struck me as odd. I wonder if this was intention or accident on the part of the modelling team? Either way, it could mean that Mirandas didn't use the fancy shmancy driver coil-based impulse engines that the Ambassadors and up are said to have by the TNG TM.

I think it makes sense that future builds of the same class would have the newer tech already included.

I would also throw into the mix - I've wondered if the addition of a warp core in the pod of the Oberth (as seen in the Vico) was an instance of this happening.

Since FJ's drawing of the Heavy Cruiser made it on screen in TSFS, the Ambassador isn't alone as a Heavy Cruiser type

Touchee sir, thanks for pointing that out.

It also kinda makes that family canon, eh?

Did we see any Ambassadors during the Dominion War? Or were they only a handful spotted in TNG?

I want to say the last time we saw them was in the "Emissary" episode of DS9.

Correct... as I recall the filming model was damaged sometime after this, and so it was never scanned for use on DS9. An Oberth and Miranda were created for "First Contact" and ported over, and the Jein Excelsior was scanned for DS9. A CGI Ent-B was created for "Generations" but apparently lost.

Otherwise, all of our DS9-era Excelsiors might have been Ent-B types.

And then of course we have the other ships that were created for FC that were used so extensively.

 

[blssdwlf]

Interestingly in DS9 did you notice that Starfleet upgraded the Reliants with additional impulse engines that replaced the stern tubes in the pod?

I noticed that at least some of them had that - but it appeared that others didn't. It always struck me as odd. I wonder if this was intention or accident on the part of the modelling team? Either way, it could mean that Mirandas didn't use the fancy shmancy driver coil-based impulse engines that the Ambassadors and up are said to have by the TNG TM.

Yeah it's weird. Having a 2nd impulse engine that high on the pod is pretty far off the ship's center of mass. Then again, I lean alot to the idea that impulse engines (in TOS anyway) are part field driven so those extra vents might just be additional heat radiators for the impulse engines.

I would also throw into the mix - I've wondered if the addition of a warp core in the pod of the Oberth (as seen in the Vico) was an instance of this happening.

Could be. I just noticed that the Naked Now Tchaikovsky(sp) Grissom appeared to be large because the E-D flew between the camera and it which put the Tchaikovsky(sp) on the big end of the scale. Perhaps big versions get warp cores in the pod and small versions get compact cores like a mini-version of the Defiant's?

It also kinda makes that family canon, eh?

You may differ on how you count printed material but for myself I only count what was actually shown (and discernible) on screen. So if it's a graphic from FJ's manual, only that counts but not the whole FJ manual. Again though, that's how I process things like that. YMMV.

Did we see any Ambassadors during the Dominion War? Or were they only a handful spotted in TNG?

I want to say the last time we saw them was in the "Emissary" episode of DS9.

Correct... as I recall the filming model was damaged sometime after this, and so it was never scanned for use on DS9. An Oberth and Miranda were created for "First Contact" and ported over, and the Jein Excelsior was scanned for DS9. A CGI Ent-B was created for "Generations" but apparently lost.

Otherwise, all of our DS9-era Excelsiors might have been Ent-B types.

And then of course we have the other ships that were created for FC that were used so extensively.

That's a bummer about the Ambassador model. So I guess the Lakota was only a single use and then it wasn't able to be recreated or scanned into a 3D model? I'm going to have to keep a look out for any Oberth's in the Dominion War.

 

[Praetor]

Yeah it's weird. Having a 2nd impulse engine that high on the pod is pretty far off the ship's center of mass. Then again, I lean alot to the idea that impulse engines (in TOS anyway) are part field driven so those extra vents might just be additional heat radiators for the impulse engines.

Hm, good point. I wonder if we couldn't somehow reconcile it with the bigass impulse additions on the Ent-B? Maybe whatever the explanation is, it's related.

Could be. I just noticed that the Naked Now Tchaikovsky(sp) Grissom appeared to be large because the E-D flew between the camera and it which put the Tchaikovsky(sp) on the big end of the scale. Perhaps big versions get warp cores in the pod and small versions get compact cores like a mini-version of the Defiant's?

That's entirely possible, too. I guess I was thinking that the Oberths as launched probably had something more primitive... like a warp "reactor" tucked in the box behind the "saucer."

You may differ on how you count printed material but for myself I only count what was actually shown (and discernible) on screen. So if it's a graphic from FJ's manual, only that counts but not the whole FJ manual. Again though, that's how I process things like that. YMMV.

Eh, I was halfway kidding. The problem with accepting it as seen is that if we do indeed accept it, then we must also accept that for some reason the refit Enterprise was still using old floorplans of herself for security readouts and the like. Therefore, I like to squint and assume that we don't actually know what those layouts look like.

That's a bummer about the Ambassador model. So I guess the Lakota was only a single use and then it wasn't able to be recreated or scanned into a 3D model? I'm going to have to keep a look out for any Oberth's in the Dominion War.

Well, supposedly the CGI Ent-B model from Gens was lost, and they didn't use a CGI model at all when representing the Lakota, just the original ILM physical model as it had been modified. I'm not able to dig up the link on the spot where this was mentioned, but I'll see if I can find it later.

And one might assume that the Foundation Imaging guys remembered the Oberth as the Grissom from TSFS, and just assumed it would be shit in a firefight.

This really goes back to the core of the OP; either there were very few Ambassadors and Enterprise-B type ships compared to other ships, or we just happened to not see them... and it all appears to stem from fairly logical if convoluted real-world reasons.

 

[137th Gebirg]

^^^ I don't think the Generations B model was lost. It was, as you say, converted into the Lakota for DS9 and wound up being sold at Christie's. There are a ton of photos of it there.