Spoilers The new (massive spoiler) ship!
- Thread starter NCC-73515
- Start date
Maybe the B was de-refitted at some point during its life... all those extra fairings and fins and engines didn't seem to do it much good after all!
We already have, in a movie. Could be museums.
Those buildings or whatever are bloody huge. Yeah maybe or they could be where the nacelles are made then attached, or they are vertical launch stations for ships
Seems odd they'd remove the extra bits from the Enterprise B but leave them on the Lakota.
I don’t think we should take some fan art made for a calendar that seriously.
Unless they’re the same ship.
Unlikely. According to those in the know, it's considered unlucky to change a ship's name after it's already in service. Considering how faithfully Starfleet adheres to Earth nautical customs...
Interesting. I wasn’t aware of that custom.
Perhaps they unstuck them from the B and glued them to the Lakota
Some Admiral was like, "I want those pontoons!
Except when the Yorktown gets broke by a whale probe and Kirk needs a new Enterprise?
And the São Paulo which became the second Defiant on DS9. Starfleet clearly doesn't care about some stupid superstition about renaming ships, and neither do many people in real life.
Nothing in the canon lore says The Enterprise was the Yorktown. Even the non-canon lore is inconsistent on that front.
Last edited:
Actually what if those stupidly huge buildings in Star Trek 2009 were some kind of gravity lift, since they built the ship on the ground they move it into one of those towers and help it into orbit.
They were tall, but not tall enough to reach orbit.
They don't need to be, all they need is to give the ship a little boost after which thrusters can get it into orbit since they used those in the atmosphere in Into Darkness
That would seem oddly inefficient in a setting that has tractor beams and antigravity and structural integrity fields.
I believe production notes said they were arcologies.
Well, the São Paulo had just been commissioned, so it saw no service before having its name changed.
And not to change the subject, but the São Paulo still annoys me to this day. It’s existence completely negated the feeling of loss that was felt when the original Defiant was destroyed, and it was created solely so they could reuse all the stock footage from a previous battle for their series finale because they were too cheap to make a new ship and a new battle for their final episode.
Last edited:
Oh its a big thing for nautical folks to rename a ship. My great uncle served in the Canadian Navy is WW2. He was on the HMCS Fraser (Nee HMS Cresent) it accidentally collided with an Allied cruiser...which he survived. after that.. he was assigned to the HMCS Margaree (Nee HMS Diana) which collided with an Allied freighter it was escorting which sank as well. Not a good idea to rename a ship!
and then there was the HMCS Chicoutimi, former HMS Upholder, which caught fire because someone left a hatch open and sea water caused a electrical short.
Star Trek really has a problem with disposable/replaceable ships. "Oh no, the ship we've anthropomorphised into virtually being another member of the cast has been destroyed! ...Oh look, here's another one."
What would have been preferable to replacing the Defiant with an identical copy at the last minute? I quite like the idea of Sisko and crew getting the Venture, or some other Galaxy-class ship, as a fleet command vessel for the final push.
Similar threads
