You are mixing "obsolete" as in "no longer in use" with "over-writing" or "re-writing" as in "a new story alters the previous story's details". "Starship class" is obsolete in the Trek story simply because the TMP Enterprise, aka "Enterprise Class", was upgraded from it after TOS. The TUC Enterprise is a different ship from the destroyed TWOK Enterprise and it's a "Constitution Class". The 24th century stories refer to the Enterprise as "Constitution Class" based likely on it's final form. Just like most 24th century stories refer to Captain Kirk and omit his time as Admiral Kirk. There is no "over-writing" involved here.
Well if there is a Starship class, I hope one of the ships is the the Jefferson.
NVM...Well if there is a Starship class, I hope one of the ships is the the Jefferson.
There are ten more like her in the fleet. Why not?
I wouldn't mind a Starship Class USS Journey![]()
I can't reward bad research at the expense of the original producers ("They didn't know what they were doing") by accepting it as "canon".
NVM...Well if there is a Starship class, I hope one of the ships is the the Jefferson.
There are ten more like her in the fleet. Why not?
I wouldn't mind a Starship Class USS Journey![]()
![]()
Yeah, I seem to recall at least some non-canon sources referring to the Enterprise-class refit.
I think FASA originally came up with that terminology for their RPG, in which the Enterprise was the only one of the original Constitutions to survive its missions intact and Scotty's ideas for refitting and improving the ship after five years required more extensive modifications than originally thought. Hence why the ship wound up looking so different in TMP. The actual FASA rosters are a little hazier, as more than a few names were copied directly from the Constitution list to the Enterprise list without a "II" designation (USS Eagle II, for example; only the Enterprise would have been allowed letters) to suggest they were newer builds carrying the older names.
FWIW, in the TMP blueprints from Pocket Books, that Gene Roddenberry signed off on, the specs on the refit Enterprise sayModel: MK-IX-ARather than settling anything, IMO this really supports all three competing interpretations of "Starship Class", Jein's, and FJ's. Since "MK IX" comes from the Space Seed graphic [http://en.memory-alpha.org/wiki/The_Case_of_Jonathan_Doe_Starship], these specs give weight to that graphic.
Type: HEAVY CRUISER
Class: STARSHIP II
This idea always worked for me.My "in-universe" explaination was that they had numbered it the same as an earlier Constellation. However, it was a different numbreing system back then, and instead of adding a letter (such as ncc-1701-A), they just used the same number.
The one and only school of thought that will have to go on recess would be the one following Jeffries' original idea about the 17th design... This would be more contradicted than supported by the terminology used here.
The existence of the "Starship Class" plaque pretty much excluded the possibility of the Enterprise being the "1st bird of the 17th design". Then again, it isn't the first time the artist's intent is trumped by other production decisions.
The existence of the "Starship Class" plaque pretty much excluded the possibility of the Enterprise being the "1st bird of the 17th design". Then again, it isn't the first time the artist's intent is trumped by other production decisions.
Apparently "Starship Class" is just an umbrella term for the most powerful Starfleet vessels and helps to distinct from destroyers and scouts.
However, it wouldn't allow the distinction of inherently differently "Starship Class" designs like the USS Enterprise compared to the USS Reliant, a "starship", too.
Consequently, you have a sub-classification, that's proven canon by the (long range) primary phaser schematic seen in "The Trouble With Tribbles".
It's a phaser of a "starship" (= Starship Class) which obviously belongs to the "Constitution Class".
All the ships of the 16th design (Constitution Class), 17th design (Enterprise Class) and of the 18th design (Miranda Class) are "starships".
Which tends to support what I'm saying. For a time during the 23rd century a starship was seen as something special.Merick's comment does make it seem like there is a difference between a "Spaceship" and a "Starship." While it may be a matter of quality over quantity, it still lends support to the idea that 23rd century nomenclature makes a distinct difference between the two.
Let's say the TOS Enterprise belonged to the Constitution Class. That again negates the "1st bird of the 17th design" idea. The USS Constitution would've been the 1st ship.
What we do have in TOS is the bridge plaque with "Starship Class" and the tech diagram with "Constitution Class" but nothing about Nth design. The Enterprise doesn't get to be the "1st bird" or lead ship until her big moment in TMP and confirmed in TWOK that she's her own class (or subclass of the Constitution Class). That puts suspect to the whole "Nth design" idea, IMHO.
We use essential cookies to make this site work, and optional cookies to enhance your experience.