Indeed, cooledie74, it usually does come down to money.
I like the subtle differences from the Enterprise in the Lexington model.
I like the subtle differences from the Enterprise in the Lexington model.
"The Ultimate Computer" Remastered -- Preview? Pix?
- Thread starter Trevacious
- Start date
Me three.
Now that's patently absurd, whether one considers it the will of the producers or the interpretation of the fans.
It would be quite unlikely for any navy to have all its battleships be of identical design, or anything like that. Why evoke improbabilities when there's no need to?
And the very reason Kirk was made to spell out the registry number of the Republic was obviously to establish that this number was lower than the Enterprise's, and that the Republic thus was an older vessel. You know, "it all happened a long time ago"; "it's all in the past"; "Finney is crazy and evil to hold such a long grudge". To suggest that the two ships were identical would go against the very intent of the plot.
If the writer had been able to show the Republic, he would have called for a different, older type of ship to be shown. The producers might have overridden him, of course, but that's a different issue.
The Constellation case is the relevant one here - but it would be better to show a couple of tightly clustered groups of registries for similar-looking or identical designs than to spread the registry range of a supposed mere dozen starships all across the universe. The numbers imitate naval pennant codes, after all - and those aren't all across the universe, for a given group of twelve vessels at least.
Timo Saloniemi
Now that's patently absurd, whether one considers it the will of the producers or the interpretation of the fans.
It would be quite unlikely for any navy to have all its battleships be of identical design, or anything like that. Why evoke improbabilities when there's no need to?
And the very reason Kirk was made to spell out the registry number of the Republic was obviously to establish that this number was lower than the Enterprise's, and that the Republic thus was an older vessel. You know, "it all happened a long time ago"; "it's all in the past"; "Finney is crazy and evil to hold such a long grudge". To suggest that the two ships were identical would go against the very intent of the plot.
If the writer had been able to show the Republic, he would have called for a different, older type of ship to be shown. The producers might have overridden him, of course, but that's a different issue.
The Constellation case is the relevant one here - but it would be better to show a couple of tightly clustered groups of registries for similar-looking or identical designs than to spread the registry range of a supposed mere dozen starships all across the universe. The numbers imitate naval pennant codes, after all - and those aren't all across the universe, for a given group of twelve vessels at least.
Timo Saloniemi
darkwing_duck1
Vice Admiral
According to the production materials cited in "The Making of Star Trek" by Whitfield, the Republic WAS one of the "Starship class" vessels, and thus, a Connie.
As for the hull number issue...that's an easy one to explain away. It is widely accepted that Starfleet uses a number of "standardized" components for building starships (saucers, nacelle casings, etc). Connies with registries older than 1700 obviously started life as ships of another class/configuration, but the same design saucer. Dismount the old secondary hull/nacelle package (if any, consider classes like the "Hermes" and "Saladin"s), and attatch them to their new Engineering components. Result: a "new" Connie (built faster by the reuse of the saucer) with an OLD registry (retained from the original ship).
For the Defiant (with her 1764 registry), you have two choices: either abandon the "13 ship" Connie class in favor of FJs expanded list OR keep the 13 and have Defiant be a "new build" Connie constructed as a replacement for one of those already lost.
Doesn't make the idea any less absurd. Or any more canonical. The episode itself does not require us to believe in such a thing, and indeed apparently was intended by the writer Mankiewicz to convey just the opposite, no matter what Whitfield may have been thinking afterwards. I cannot hold Whitfield as an authority on this matter by any logic - although I could believe if Mankiewicz said something about the issue.
And it's still easier to believe in 65 Constitutions and related designs, or a casualty replacement whose registry is higher than that of the class ship, than in some sort of coherence between registries in the 1300 and 1700 ranges. (Even if we decide not to consider NCC-1700 the class ship of the [iConstitution[/i] class, even though that idea has roughly as much backstage validity as Withfield's writings...)
The modularity idea is interesting enough, though. And there's nothing to say that Starfleet wouldn't alter registry numbers just for the heck of it (many navies of today do exactly that).
Timo Saloniemi
I don't think it's so absurd, patently or otherwise. I'm going by what was said and shown onscreen. Any time we were shown a "starship", it was always identical to the Enterprise. In "The Doomsday Machine", Spock's line concerning the Constellation indicates that all starships are of the same design (I believe the exact quotation is "...by configuration, a starship"). If a US Navy captain asked for information concerning a vessel in the vicinity, would his First Officer say "It's a boat"? No, he'd give specific information. When Spock called the Constellation a "starship", he was being specific.
In "Bread and Circuses" Merrick makes the comment that there is a distinction between a spaceship and a starship, indicating that a starship is a unique vessel.
The most obvious indicator is the dedication plaque on the bridge, reading "Starship Class".
So what do I base my ideas on? That which is written in non-canonical sources (Franz Joseph's Starfleet Technical Manual or The Making of Star Trek), by fans, or that which I hear and see on the screen?
Yet all that Spock's line tells us is that the Constellation meets the criteria for a starship configuration, not that ships of some other configuration wouldn't be starships.
In the broader picture, yes, we only see one class of starships. But we are never told that there would only be one class of starships. The talk about "starship being a unique sort of vessel" does not offer any backing for the theory that there would only be one design of starship out there. That theory rests solely on the unfortunate fact that we did not see other designs on TOS; the additional bits can accommodate that theory, but they can accommodate the opposite view as well.
TOS also indicates that a starship skipper is a unique breed. This doesn't mean all starship skippers should be middle-aged white men like Kirk, Decker and Wesley. (And fortunately, we have at least Stone to prove that at least some time in the past, Starfleet also allowed middle-aged black men to that job.)
Timo Saloniemi
In the broader picture, yes, we only see one class of starships. But we are never told that there would only be one class of starships. The talk about "starship being a unique sort of vessel" does not offer any backing for the theory that there would only be one design of starship out there. That theory rests solely on the unfortunate fact that we did not see other designs on TOS; the additional bits can accommodate that theory, but they can accommodate the opposite view as well.
TOS also indicates that a starship skipper is a unique breed. This doesn't mean all starship skippers should be middle-aged white men like Kirk, Decker and Wesley. (And fortunately, we have at least Stone to prove that at least some time in the past, Starfleet also allowed middle-aged black men to that job.)
Timo Saloniemi
Excellent point. I had never noticed that. It is the first piece of onscreen evidence I've seen quoted from TOS that answers the question of what "starship class" must mean to any degree of satisfaction.
I recall reading long ago that the original intention was a very small Starfleet, with just the thirteen "starships" and numerous other support craft. In my mind, that meant that "starships" were the extended duration, deep space craft, and other ships of similar outward configuration, but different endurance/systems etc, would be simple "heavy cruisers".
Spock's line draws that long-held belief into question. A starship can't be any interstellar spacecraft if it can be discerned from its configuration (unless the defining element is those saucer and warp nacelles). And it can't be a configuration that is shared between starships and non-starships.
Given the modular nature of the saucer and nacelles, I'd say a "starship class" vessel was likely meant to be any ship equipped with those units -- a saucer for a large mission crew, and the nacelles for extended duration and range.
Perhaps the defining element for the 5YM ships would be that secondary hull, with its capacity for an even greater supply of stores for even greater duration and range.
And that's about as loose as I think we can make it given Spock's statement.
One might look at this from the 20th century viewpoint for clarity.
Today, not all ships that do battle are "battleships" - those are a special breed. Similarly, not all the ships that ply the vacuum between stars need be "starships".
If the lookout shouts that he has identified a vessel that is of "battleship configuration", this doesn't yet necessarily mean that the spotted vessel is uniquely identifiable. All it means that he has seen multiple heavy gun turrets, rather than the light turrets typical of cruisers, or the torpedo banks typical of destroyers, or the flat tops typical of carriers.
I'd agree with aridas on there being a few telltales that would be shared with ships like Constitution, Miranda, Ptolemy, Saladin and Federation. All those would have the elements of "starship configuration", these being a saucer hull plus a large nacelle or two or three. The other vessel types seen in TOS or TOS-R so far would not meet those criteria.
Now that the 1600-range numbers are visual canon, it's easy to forget that they were originally fan-invented against apparent "Court Martial" writer / set decorator wishes. For a desperate last-ditch defense, I might point out that there are occasions where ships temporarily or permanently change their registry numbers. Interestingly enough, wargames represent one such occasion e.g. for the Russian and Chinese navies... That's admittedly due to the fact that pennant numbers in those navies reflect a ship's assignment and not his identity - but those that dislike the Jein interpretation could argue that Starfleet does something similar.
Timo Saloniemi
Today, not all ships that do battle are "battleships" - those are a special breed. Similarly, not all the ships that ply the vacuum between stars need be "starships".
If the lookout shouts that he has identified a vessel that is of "battleship configuration", this doesn't yet necessarily mean that the spotted vessel is uniquely identifiable. All it means that he has seen multiple heavy gun turrets, rather than the light turrets typical of cruisers, or the torpedo banks typical of destroyers, or the flat tops typical of carriers.
I'd agree with aridas on there being a few telltales that would be shared with ships like Constitution, Miranda, Ptolemy, Saladin and Federation. All those would have the elements of "starship configuration", these being a saucer hull plus a large nacelle or two or three. The other vessel types seen in TOS or TOS-R so far would not meet those criteria.
Now that the 1600-range numbers are visual canon, it's easy to forget that they were originally fan-invented against apparent "Court Martial" writer / set decorator wishes. For a desperate last-ditch defense, I might point out that there are occasions where ships temporarily or permanently change their registry numbers. Interestingly enough, wargames represent one such occasion e.g. for the Russian and Chinese navies... That's admittedly due to the fact that pennant numbers in those navies reflect a ship's assignment and not his identity - but those that dislike the Jein interpretation could argue that Starfleet does something similar.
Timo Saloniemi
In regards to the Starship Republic issue, isn't it possible that the ship mentioned in "Court Martial" was an earlier class retired sometime after the events mentioned in the episode, and that a Constitution Class starship named Republic was commissioned later. After all, the aircraft carrier Enterprise which was in service at the time this episode was filmed, is an entirely different ship from the other aircraft carrier named Enterprise in service twenty years before.
It seems that star fleet keeps the same handful of names for their top of the line ships much in the way that the first few nuclear aircraft carriers had the same names as their world war two counterparts.
It seems that star fleet keeps the same handful of names for their top of the line ships much in the way that the first few nuclear aircraft carriers had the same names as their world war two counterparts.
This would indeed be possible - it's just that we never hear of a Republic canonically in the TOS timeframe, apart from that old vessel. And those fan sources that say there is a Constitution class USS Republic also insist that this ship has the registry number spoken in "Court Martial", nullifying the easy solution.
Certainly Starfleet is likely to have had a long succession of first-rate starships: class after class must have come and gone between the founding of the organization and the days we witness in TOS. And it is also likely that at any given time, at least one older class continues service alongside the most modern starships. In that sense, it would be perfectly reasonable for there to be multiple classes of starships on Commodore Stone's "Star Ship Status Chart" - some in the 1600 range, some in the 1700 range associated with the Constitution class, and some in the 1800 range that may represent a more modern design. That would be in the spirit of Jeffries' original logic, and would also be less unlikely than the theory that so many Constitution class starships would be undergoing simultaneous repairs at Starbase 11!
Indeed, if each number range represented a different design, this would mean a reasonably large Starfleet, further making it reasonable that a dozen of its starships (of assorted types) would be at Starbase 11 while dozens upon dozens would be operating elsewhere.
Timo Saloniemi
Certainly Starfleet is likely to have had a long succession of first-rate starships: class after class must have come and gone between the founding of the organization and the days we witness in TOS. And it is also likely that at any given time, at least one older class continues service alongside the most modern starships. In that sense, it would be perfectly reasonable for there to be multiple classes of starships on Commodore Stone's "Star Ship Status Chart" - some in the 1600 range, some in the 1700 range associated with the Constitution class, and some in the 1800 range that may represent a more modern design. That would be in the spirit of Jeffries' original logic, and would also be less unlikely than the theory that so many Constitution class starships would be undergoing simultaneous repairs at Starbase 11!
Indeed, if each number range represented a different design, this would mean a reasonably large Starfleet, further making it reasonable that a dozen of its starships (of assorted types) would be at Starbase 11 while dozens upon dozens would be operating elsewhere.
Timo Saloniemi
From "Bread and Circuses":
From "Journey to Babel":
In general, it seems a STARship is a ship (identifiable from it's 'configuration', perhaps visually, but also from power usage) in service with STARfleet (using STARbases). ("The Making of.." quotes D.C. Fontana listing the 12 "starships of the Fleet"). The first quote also defines "spaceship" as the general term for non-Starfleet interstellar craft (specifically, Merrik's merchant service ship is a "class 4 stardrive vessel", which could be a power rating for his engines or something).
The Republic is described only as "United Starship Republic, number 1371." So it's a Starship, that is, a spaceship in service with the Star Fleet. I'm not sure you can say anything more than that about it. It's a ship that Kirk served on earlier, it has a low number to indicate it was the past, and it was a typical Starfleet vessel.
Although, to be honest, if they had to have shown the Republic for some reason, it would've been stock footage of the Enterprise
From "Journey to Babel":
In general, it seems a STARship is a ship (identifiable from it's 'configuration', perhaps visually, but also from power usage) in service with STARfleet (using STARbases). ("The Making of.." quotes D.C. Fontana listing the 12 "starships of the Fleet"). The first quote also defines "spaceship" as the general term for non-Starfleet interstellar craft (specifically, Merrik's merchant service ship is a "class 4 stardrive vessel", which could be a power rating for his engines or something).
The Republic is described only as "United Starship Republic, number 1371." So it's a Starship, that is, a spaceship in service with the Star Fleet. I'm not sure you can say anything more than that about it. It's a ship that Kirk served on earlier, it has a low number to indicate it was the past, and it was a typical Starfleet vessel.
Although, to be honest, if they had to have shown the Republic for some reason, it would've been stock footage of the Enterprise
So let's be thankful that she wasn't shown! 
A starship might be any Starfleet spaceship - or it might be a specific type of Starfleet spaceship. In "Court Martial", Commodore Stone seemed to think that it would be rather exceptional even for Starfleet captains to have been privileged with the command of a starship, so possibly other such captains have to make do with lesser types of Starfleet vessel...
Timo Saloniemi
A starship might be any Starfleet spaceship - or it might be a specific type of Starfleet spaceship. In "Court Martial", Commodore Stone seemed to think that it would be rather exceptional even for Starfleet captains to have been privileged with the command of a starship, so possibly other such captains have to make do with lesser types of Starfleet vessel...
Timo Saloniemi
The term "starship" as opposed to a simple "spaceship" seems akin to the use of the term Capital Ship.
Capital ships are the most powerful that a navy can field, but represent a wide variety of vessels from battleships to missile cruisers to carriers.
Which gives more credence to the idea that there is a small number of starships, the best of the fleet, limited in number to 12.
Capital ships are the most powerful that a navy can field, but represent a wide variety of vessels from battleships to missile cruisers to carriers.
Which gives more credence to the idea that there is a small number of starships, the best of the fleet, limited in number to 12.
Another interesting subject is the Antares, which is specifically called a "cargo ship"/"survey ship", as opposed to plainly a "spaceship", which might indicate that "starship" is at the top of the scale of spaceship designations that includes such things as cargo ship, survey ship, science probe vessel, scout ship. (Journey to Babel: "Sensors indicate the size of a scout ship ".. sensors can differentiate a starship from a scout ship, then?).
The best fit for plausibility's sake would be to have more starships than just those twelve that are like Kirk's ship - yet not so many starships that commanding one would cease to be a rare privilege. Perhaps something between three dozen and a hundred, in a total fleet of a thousand ships or more (to maintain consistency with later portrayals of Starfleet).
If starships represent 3 to 10 % of Starfleet strength, they might indeed be "capital ships". Or they might be akin to "battleships" - a certain narrow category of vessel, not necessarily the overall best (just like a carrier or a sub might trump a battleship in a real navy) but certainly one of the most prestigious and imposing.
Actually, I'd like to suggest that "science probe vessel" is not a ship type category as such, because the poor Antares was already burdened with two contradictory ones (transport, survey ship). Rather, "Science Probe vessel" might be similar to "United States ship", a formal shorthand term for the operating organization of the vessel.
If the transport Antares were under the (temporary?) authority of the UESPA, then things would make a lot of sense. UESPA would divert the ship to the survey errand that led to Charlie Evans - and when the ship was destroyed, Kirk would send condolences to UESPA HQ, addressing the loss of the SP vessel.
(As for whether the S in UESPA stands for "space" or "science", the evidence is split fifty-fifty. Kirk could easily have made a slip of the tongue either in "Charlie X" or "Tomorrow is Yesterday". Evidence from ENT suggests the former.)
Timo Saloniemi
A STAR-ship?! There are no STARships on Nimbus III!!
Mark
Mark
Some hearsay from Mike Okuda, recycled through Bernd Schneider's Ex Astris Scientia and the Flare Forum:
-The station is supposedly labeled Starbase 6 (also of "Immunity Syndrome" fame)
-The Woden is supposedly registered NCC-325
Whether that falls in the "ducks, Porsches and DC-3s in main shuttlebay" category or the "shuttle was named Tereshkova even though nobody saw the name up close enough" one... You decide.
Personally, I don't like the idea of a NCC registry on that ore transport. If it has to have a Starfleet rego, at least it could be with a G prefix or something...
Timo Saloniemi
-The station is supposedly labeled Starbase 6 (also of "Immunity Syndrome" fame)
-The Woden is supposedly registered NCC-325
Whether that falls in the "ducks, Porsches and DC-3s in main shuttlebay" category or the "shuttle was named Tereshkova even though nobody saw the name up close enough" one... You decide.
Personally, I don't like the idea of a NCC registry on that ore transport. If it has to have a Starfleet rego, at least it could be with a G prefix or something...
Timo Saloniemi
I was really excited when the re-mastered stuff came out- especially this episode, but then I made the mistake of comparing the space scenes to the new SG:Atlantis episodes with space scenes. I think a big part of the difference is the dramatic lighting that SG:A uses, versus the very basic lighting they use for the new STTOS.
That being said, it was cool to see all the ships in greater detail! The space station was a little disappointing, again with the lighting, and lack of detail on it. Maybe a few other ships docked or in orbit around it would have been nice.
That being said, it was cool to see all the ships in greater detail! The space station was a little disappointing, again with the lighting, and lack of detail on it. Maybe a few other ships docked or in orbit around it would have been nice.
Well, I think they actually trying to not go over the top with the new effects, and keep it consistent with the general look and feel of the old effects.
Too many greeblies, or too many bits floating around space stations may not quite fit the overall 'simplistic' (in a good way) style of TOS.
Too many greeblies, or too many bits floating around space stations may not quite fit the overall 'simplistic' (in a good way) style of TOS.
Similar threads
