The Oberth-class in ENT, TOS, and VAN

[Christopher]

Quite frankly, I find that Trek fans' hoop-jumping leaps of logic in order to justify what is essentially 80's and 90's budgetary limitations is nothing short of amazing. That's why I keep saying that if there ever is going to be a TNG-R, that there'd be absolutely no reason why those old movie models couldn't be replaced by new CGI models of newer and different classes. Like I said in another thread, it's not like the scriptwriters for such episodes as "The Naked Now" and "The Pegasus" actually envisioned the ships to be the same class as the Grissom from 80 years before. The VFX people were working with what they had available at the time and with their budget, whether whatever model they ended up filming made logical sense or not.

Right. I'm okay with the Excelsiors, I guess, but there are some cases where I'd appreciate a substitution. I've already pointed out that the Lantree in "Unnatural Selection" was clearly scripted to be something much smaller than a Miranda. And I'd definitely like to see the "large Klingon Birds of Prey" replaced with something more like a K'tinga, though that might require redoing a lot of DS9/VGR effects as well as TNG.

 

[BrotherBenny]

I'm clearly in the minority here so I'll let it drop. I'm aware that the model was reused because it was cheap, but we don't have any evidence of what ships existed in the mid-22nd century other than the NX-class, the Intrepid-type ship, and the Daedalus-class ships. Surely they had more than that after the war?

 

[Dukhat]

I'm okay with the Excelsiors, I guess, but there are some cases where I'd appreciate a substitution.

The thing about the Excelsiors and Mirandas is that although they were clearly shown to still be in use, they weren't clearly shown to still be in production. The same can't be said for the Oberth.

...but we don't have any evidence of what ships existed in the mid-22nd century other than the NX-class, the Intrepid-type ship, and the Daedalus-class ships. Surely they had more than that after the war?

They did. Reed comments about Starfleet's newest "Warp 7 beauties," but unfortunately we never see them. Some have speculated that he's referring to the Daedalus class, but there's no evidence for that. And don't forget all those DY-class ships throughout the 22nd century (although there's no evidence that they were Starfleet vessels).

I also want to point out that the special features on the Star Trek '09 bluray indicate that even as of 2233, the Kelvin was an old ship. So it's entirely possible that she (and similar ships like her) could have been in production at any point after 2161.

The thing is, if there's ever a future Trek production that focuses on the period of time between 2161 and 2233, I can almost guarantee that we won't be seeing an Oberth class ship, even one that looks like that horrid TOS version someone above me posted.

 

[danellis]

So try installing the engine, systems, and whatnot of a 2008 Ford Mustang into the frame of a 1908 Ford Model T and see how good that works out.

Bad example since they have completely different chassis. The Oberth would have the same spaceframe from first production to last.

Maybe a fairer comparission would be to put an '08 Mustang's systems into a '64 Mustang. Wonder how that would work out.

dJE

 

[F. King Daniel]

I'm clearly in the minority here so I'll let it drop. I'm aware that the model was reused because it was cheap, but we don't have any evidence of what ships existed in the mid-22nd century other than the NX-class, the Intrepid-type ship, and the Daedalus-class ships. Surely they had more than that after the war?

You missed out the "Warp Delta" seen a couple of times. It was a slightly modified version of the ship seen flying over the moon(was it the moon? I always skip the intro coz of the rancid theme) in the intro.

And... erm... there were a couple of Steamrunner-class ships in the fleet at the end of "Storm Front" part 2. Ahem. Glitch in the restored timeline, perhaps?

 

[Tiberius]

I was referring to the TNG timeframe, not Voyager. In TNG, there is ample evidence that the Oberth class was still in regular production at least up until the launch of the Enterprise-D. The Pegasus was only twelve years older than the Ent-D, and according to the dedication plaque for the Tsiolkovsky, she was commissioned in the same year as the Ent-D, TMP-style bridge chairs and everything.

So they took the old spaceframe, put in stuff to replace the old worn out stuff (such as the old chairs that they made thousands of back in the 2270s) and refitted the whole ship and launched it again. new name, new registry, for whatever reason. And the dedication plaque we saw reflects the latest launching of it.

So try installing the engine, systems, and whatnot of a 2008 Ford Mustang into the frame of a 1908 Ford Model T and see how good that works out.

Just because you can't do it with cars doesn't mean that you can't do it with starships. I mean, they do it with planes I(all the old 747s given the new avionics), they did it with the space shuttles, they do it with ships in the navy. After all, a car is only built to last... how long? Starfleet builds it's ships to last. Like I said, the TNG tech manual made it clear that teh Galaxy class was designed for a lifespan of at least a century. do you really think the designers were there saying, "We'll build it tough enough to last for a century, but we won't need to upgrade the systems. In a hundred years, no one will mind serving on a ship with systems a hundred years out of date." Hell, they even upgraded the 1701 (no bloody A, B, C or D) several times. Including putting new engines on the thing, and a new warp core, new deflector and probably a helluvalotta other stuff too.

 

[Dukhat]

So they took the old spaceframe, put in stuff to replace the old worn out stuff (such as the old chairs that they made thousands of back in the 2270s) and refitted the whole ship and launched it again. new name, new registry, for whatever reason. And the dedication plaque we saw reflects the latest launching of it.

And as Christopher said, if that procedure was Starfleet's modus operandi for all their old ships, then that would be fine. But it's not. Starfleet clearly produced many newer ship classes in the intervening time. Why would they bother doing the convoluted thing you describe to one particular old ship class when a) they didn't do it with any other class for that long a period of time, and b) why would they even bother with that when they were mass-producing the 15 or 20-odd newer classes at the same time?

...the TNG tech manual made it clear that teh Galaxy class was designed for a lifespan of at least a century...

Just because something was designed to last a long time doesn't mean that it still won't be obsolete and useless even though it's long-lasting. I can still use an old 1960's Smith-Corona typewriter today (provided all the parts are in working order), but why on Earth would I use it when I have a brand-new laptop?

 

[Tiberius]

And as Christopher said, if that procedure was Starfleet's modus operandi for all their old ships, then that would be fine. But it's not. Starfleet clearly produced many newer ship classes in the intervening time. Why would they bother doing the convoluted thing you describe to one particular old ship class when a) they didn't do it with any other class for that long a period of time, and b) why would they even bother with that when they were mass-producing the 15 or 20-odd newer classes at the same time?

Because the newer ships they designed are the front-line vessels. They are out there doing the dangerous missions. First contacts with hostile species, military action etc. The Oberths get the easy jobs. The jobs where the risk of damage is small to nil.

So is it any wonder that the bigger ships are being replaced with newer designs? No. because they are the ones copping the most wear and tear, and they are the ones with spaceframes that get fatigued the fastest.

Why didn't we see Picard and crew on an old Connie that had been refitted 50 times? because the nature of the Connie's mission placed a great deal of strain on the spaceframe. No point refitting a ship if the spaceframe is practically falling apart. When you refit a ship, you want to be sure that it is going to be actually capable of performing the jobs you want it to.

Why do we still see people flying refitted Oberths? because their spaceframes, never having been subject to the stresses that the Connies faced everyday, are still in pretty good condition. Sure, it might need a new bridge module. So put a new one in place. Needs a new warp core? Again, just slot the new one in. Easy and feasable on an Oberth, not so much for a Connie.

The smaller specialised science ships on the other hand... There's nothing particularly stressful about point a packet of sensors at something. so their spaceframes will naturally last longer.

Just because something was designed to last a long time doesn't mean that it still won't be obsolete and useless even though it's long-lasting. I can still use an old 1960's Smith-Corona typewriter today (provided all the parts are in working order), but why on Earth would I use it when I have a brand-new laptop?

Perhaps you missed the part where I said the old ships were UPGRADED? You're talking about using an old piece of technology in its original state. I am not. Like I said, the Oberths could have had many upgrades over the years they were in service.

 

[tenmei]

Wasn't there a "present day" (TNG/DS9/VOY) vessel (a Prometheus iirc) shown in the Battle of Procyon V in Azati Prime. Admittedly, this is presumably an alternate future - but it's three hundred years into the future from TNG so would suggest that Starfleet does hold spaceframes for several hundred years.

Which would add credence to the suggestion that the Oberth's were put into service roughly around the same time as the Daedalus Class in the aftermath of the Earth / Romulan War.

Doing a little research, it's reported we saw not only Prometheus but also Nova Class vessels in the battle.

TBH, I actually agree with Tiberius on this one.

The initially low registry numbers and the fact we know Starfleet intends for vessels to stay in service for a hundred years (the Galaxy Class, but also seen the Miranda and Excelsior Classes) and still has ship classes in service after three hundred years (the Prometheus and Nova in Azati Prime) has a more credible argument than 'It doesn't make sense' which seems to be the opposing argument.

 

[Dukhat]

Because the newer ships they designed are the front-line vessels. They are out there doing the dangerous missions. First contacts with hostile species, military action etc. The Oberths get the easy jobs. The jobs where the risk of damage is small to nil.

But there's no evidence to support that theory. As a matter of fact, the Oberths shown do the same jobs other ships do, whether it be exploration (Tsiolkovsky), front-line vessels (the Oberth that got destroyed at Wolf 359 in "Emissary" and the Oberths in "First Contact"), transport (Cochrane), or prototype (Pegasus). And any of those jobs could also be classified as "dangerous."

Why didn't we see Picard and crew on an old Connie that had been refitted 50 times? because the nature of the Connie's mission placed a great deal of strain on the spaceframe. No point refitting a ship if the spaceframe is practically falling apart. When you refit a ship, you want to be sure that it is going to be actually capable of performing the jobs you want it to.

So again, if that were true, just what makes the Oberth frame so much better and longer-lasting than the Connie frame? Mission profiles have nothing to do with anything. It's been consistently shown that the style of ship makes absolutely no difference to it's mission profile.

Why do we still see people flying refitted Oberths? because their spaceframes, never having been subject to the stresses that the Connies faced everyday, are still in pretty good condition. Sure, it might need a new bridge module. So put a new one in place. Needs a new warp core? Again, just slot the new one in. Easy and feasable on an Oberth, not so much for a Connie.

Again, you're saying this but you're not actually backing it up with proof. How do you know what Oberths face as opposed to Connies, and vice-versa, other than your opinion about their mission profiles?

The smaller specialised science ships on the other hand... There's nothing particularly stressful about point a packet of sensors at something. so their spaceframes will naturally last longer.

And yet, as has been shown a multitude of times in TNG, the Oberth class tends to always be the type of ship that has malfunctions and is unreliable, requiring the Ent-D to rescue it's crew.

Perhaps you missed the part where I said the old ships were UPGRADED? You're talking about using an old piece of technology in its original state. I am not. Like I said, the Oberths could have had many upgrades over the years they were in service.

I can get newer, "upgraded" ribbons, levers, buttons, etc. for the typewriter, but there's only so much I can upgrade it before I can't upgrade it any longer. And even then, I'm still going to use my laptop over it.

Honestly, you're more than welcome to believe what you want about why the Oberth lasted as long as it did. But when it comes down to it, that's just being an apologist for 1980's/90's budget limitations.

Wasn't there a "present day" (TNG/DS9/VOY) vessel (a Prometheus iirc) shown in the Battle of Procyon V in Azati Prime. Admittedly, this is presumably an alternate future - but it's three hundred years into the future from TNG so would suggest that Starfleet does hold spaceframes for several hundred years.

Just like the kitbashed background ships in DS9, those ships were never meant to be scrutinized up close. They were used only because they didn't have the time or budget to create any true 26th century vessels. Hell, even the Enterprise-J CGI was incomplete, showing only the underside of the saucer.

 

[F. King Daniel]

Since I'm cool with the 225+ year old D7, the idea of Nova's and Prometheii in use 200 years ahead of VOY is fine by me. There was also a Vor'cha Klingon ship.

Dunno how to explain the Dauntless NX-01-A being there, tho! (I know... generic futuristic starships, we weren't supposed to freeze-frame etc)

 

[BillJ]

I think Daniels when he came back in time was using a cloaked Oberth class. Making the spaceframe close to a thousand years old.

 

[JD]

And as Christopher said, if that procedure was Starfleet's modus operandi for all their old ships, then that would be fine. But it's not. Starfleet clearly produced many newer ship classes in the intervening time. Why would they bother doing the convoluted thing you describe to one particular old ship class when a) they didn't do it with any other class for that long a period of time, and b) why would they even bother with that when they were mass-producing the 15 or 20-odd newer classes at the same time?

Because the newer ships they designed are the front-line vessels. They are out there doing the dangerous missions. First contacts with hostile species, military action etc. The Oberths get the easy jobs. The jobs where the risk of damage is small to nil.

So is it any wonder that the bigger ships are being replaced with newer designs? No. because they are the ones copping the most wear and tear, and they are the ones with spaceframes that get fatigued the fastest.

Why didn't we see Picard and crew on an old Connie that had been refitted 50 times? because the nature of the Connie's mission placed a great deal of strain on the spaceframe. No point refitting a ship if the spaceframe is practically falling apart. When you refit a ship, you want to be sure that it is going to be actually capable of performing the jobs you want it to.

Why do we still see people flying refitted Oberths? because their spaceframes, never having been subject to the stresses that the Connies faced everyday, are still in pretty good condition. Sure, it might need a new bridge module. So put a new one in place. Needs a new warp core? Again, just slot the new one in. Easy and feasable on an Oberth, not so much for a Connie.

The smaller specialised science ships on the other hand... There's nothing particularly stressful about point a packet of sensors at something. so their spaceframes will naturally last longer.

I don't know, this just seems overly complicated when there could be a much simpler explanation, that IMO would make alot more sense.

 

[tenmei]

Wasn't there a "present day" (TNG/DS9/VOY) vessel (a Prometheus iirc) shown in the Battle of Procyon V in Azati Prime. Admittedly, this is presumably an alternate future - but it's three hundred years into the future from TNG so would suggest that Starfleet does hold spaceframes for several hundred years.

Just like the kitbashed background ships in DS9, those ships were never meant to be scrutinized up close. They were used only because they didn't have the time or budget to create any true 26th century vessels. Hell, even the Enterprise-J CGI was incomplete, showing only the underside of the saucer.

The argument against the Oberth being two hundred years old appeared dependant on the fact that there was no on screen canonical evidence of other spaceframes being used when they were two hundred years old - but when evidence (on-screen and, presumably therefore canonical, no less) is presented showing spaceframes in use of two hundred plus years old, it's thrown out.

 

[BillJ]

Wasn't there a "present day" (TNG/DS9/VOY) vessel (a Prometheus iirc) shown in the Battle of Procyon V in Azati Prime. Admittedly, this is presumably an alternate future - but it's three hundred years into the future from TNG so would suggest that Starfleet does hold spaceframes for several hundred years.

Just like the kitbashed background ships in DS9, those ships were never meant to be scrutinized up close. They were used only because they didn't have the time or budget to create any true 26th century vessels. Hell, even the Enterprise-J CGI was incomplete, showing only the underside of the saucer.

The argument against the Oberth being two hundred years old appeared dependant on the fact that there was no on screen canonical evidence of other spaceframes being used when they were two hundred years old - but when evidence (on-screen and, presumably therefore canonical, no less) is presented showing spaceframes in use of two hundred plus years old, it's thrown out.

But that Starfleet was probably in the midst of a long protracted war requiring them to use every available asset. The Starfleet of the 22nd/23rd/24th century era weren't in the same position.

 

[Santaman]

I've always assumed the Oberth to be like the Antonov AN-2, thats a biplane aircraft designed and build since 1947, its believed that its still build in China..
There are thousands of them around and they are everywhere.. why? because it does what it has to do.
Same goes for the Oberth, 200 years old design? whatever, it works, there are probably a bazillion of them around, parts are cheap, everyone knows them and knows how to keep them flying, no fuzz no blah blah.

 

[tenmei]

Now that argument I could agree with, BillJ - but, even still, it shows a willingness to keep spaceframes operational for two hundred years, presumably upgrading the components periodically.

 

[BillJ]

Now that argument I could agree with, BillJ - but, even still, it shows a willingness to keep spaceframes operational for two hundred years, presumably upgrading the components periodically.

My argument isn't with whether Starfleet could keep a spaceframe operational for multiple centuries. I'm just wondering why people have latched onto the Oberth class as that vessel?

 

[Santaman]

^^ My guess would be the unique look and feel of the class..

 

[captcalhoun]

i hate it. always have.