Unseen TOS....

[drt]

Besides I have already included an unseen prop of TOS by designing a TOS era phaser rifle.

Nice!

One thing I like about the Phaser 2 design is how the Phaser 1 integrates into the top. I'd maybe incorporate similar into your rifle to continue that design lineage. It's about 90% of the way there already.

 

[Warped9]

^^ I tried that and could never make it come out in a way I liked.

 

[fireproof78]

I have seen other attempts and few work for me. They all feel very clunky, or too busy to be an effective and usable weapon in the field. Something I also didn't like in the original rifle. This one looks like a natural outgrowth of the phaser pistol, possibly even with swapable power packs*, while still being it's own thing.

*Similar to Beretta's current line of 9mm carbines which are designed to accommodate pistol magazines as well as bigger magazines.

 

[Tallguy]

I'm certainly happy to go with Constitution Class (Heavy Cruiser, if you please). But the phaser diagram seems like an awful stretch when the words "Starship Class" was plainly visible in all three seasons and spoken aloud (well, Starship was) on multiple occasions.

But we sure as heck got to Constitution anyway.

 

[UssGlenn]

I'm certainly happy to go with Constitution Class (Heavy Cruiser, if you please). But the phaser diagram seems like an awful stretch when the words "Starship Class" was plainly visible in all three seasons and spoken aloud (well, Starship was) on multiple occasions.

Once again I'll promote my head-canon that the Enterprise and her sister ships were named after famous Starships, until some Admiral realized that was too confusing and renamed the class after the first built ship, the USS Constitution.

 

[Warped9]

In an interview Matt Jefferies once said that the 17 in 1701 denoted the 17th major class of starship for the Federation/Starfleet, and that the 01 denoted the first ship of that class built. Then wouldn’t that make them Enterprise-class ships rather than Constitution?

That becomes problematic if we consider ships without a 1700 series registry also being of that same class. But if those other ships without a 1700 series registry merely resembled the Enterprise, overall or superficially, but were actually of a different class altogether then that means there are Constitution-class ships we never saw or heard referenced. And I personally like that explanation because it smooths out the wrinkles caused by the Republic 1371 and Constellation 1017.

Now one must decide how much weight to give the list of names referenced in The Making of Star Trek. Strictly speaking nothing is actually official until its onscreen. And TOS did deviate from that list when they presented us with the starship Defiant in “The Tholian Web.” There is a Defiance on a list of candidate names in The Making of Star Trek for the major starships, but it didn’t make the cut.

The Making of Star Trek also states that Enterprise type ships have been around for “about forty years.” But subtext and later info argue the Enterprise herself isn’t that old. So that means ships similar to the Enterprise might have been around for about forty years. Or it might mean more broadly that major cruisers similar in function as the Enterprise have been around for forty years.

Finally one must decide how much weight to give Matt Jefferies’ explanation in an interview given long after TOS had ended production.

A final couple of points. I have little doubt the creators of TOS would have liked to show us other classes of Federation starships, but lack of time and money prohibited them from doing so. But given a bit more time and money we just might have seen other Starfleet designs. Lastly it must be noted that in all of TOS we learned of only three registry numbers matched with ship names: Enterprise 1701, Republic 1371 and Constellation 1017. As for the Intrepid mentioned in "Courtmartial" it's most likely her registry number was on Commodore Stone's wall chart only we can only guess which registry number it was. Everything that came after the series ended was conjecture and interpretation after the fact. Yes, I know Roddenberry signed off on Franz Joseph's Booklet of General Plans, but it's still strictly interpretation and conjecture, particularly given how much the ship Franz Joseph drew deviates in many respects from the ship we saw in TOS.

 

[STEPhon IT]

I'm certainly happy to go with Constitution Class (Heavy Cruiser, if you please). But the phaser diagram seems like an awful stretch when the words "Starship Class" was plainly visible in all three seasons and spoken aloud (well, Starship was) on multiple occasions.

But we sure as heck got to Constitution anyway.

My hypothesis is the Starship Class, like the space capsule, started with 4 then 8 then 10 and finally 12; completed their purpose and by TMP these vessels were refitted because of some galaxy technological collapse. Whatever was simple and logical for star travel became more complicated. Transporters don't work, warp engineers has to wear hazmat suits for operations - WARP CORES - which are constantly unstable TO THIS DAY!!! Create artificial wormholes which feels to me like Starfleet has went 100 years backwards. The Bridge now had an abundance of redundant working parts something which look very complicated for a five year mission and wasn't surprised the Enterprise had to launch from Earth in every movie because it wasn't equipped for extended star travel, the Constitution Class demanded constant repairs. TMP launching the Enterprise from Earth instead of a planet 100 trillion lightyears away. Everything about it felt like pioneering, and the struggle from which I accepted TMP Enterprise and its copies are Constitution Class, but TOS series didn't rely on monitor diagrams we couldn't see or behind the production Easter eggs. The series spoke for itself and gave me all indications that it was a Starship and it was of "ITS" class.

The producers and showrunners had many opportunities from dialogue or whatever to call the Enterprise Constitution Class like the ridiculous fanboy trademarks been done in every incarnation of Star Trek since TNG - Galaxy Class this, Intrepid Class that -. Reason, because it wasn't important TOS put elements in the series to indicate to the audience what mattered; which is why the ship's plaque didn't get altered. It is what it is, and in my interpretation TOS USS Enterprise is a Starship Class vessel, limited of only 12 because they were not like anything or ship we have ever seen. Make it Constitution Class, and gives the impression they're like 747 airplanes; producing them in a bunch which I believe was what happened in the movie - verse. I'd like to look at the Enterprise from the series I love was limited, one of a kind, and special.

 

[aridas sofia]

All navy ships designed for warfare are termed warships. They can operate independent of base. Support ships are attached to base. These are big, overarching categories. There is no reason that “starship class” can’t mean something as simple as a ship designed for star flight which can operate independent of base. Support or auxiliary spacecraft would be attached to their base. Enterprise can thus be both “starship class” and “Constitution class”. Antares might be both “auxiliary class” and “Independence class” (older fan conjecture not current law from on high which holds it to be Antares class).

 

[UssGlenn]

As for the Intrepid mentioned in "Courtmartial" it's most likely her registry number was on Commodore Stone's wall chart only we can only guess which registry number it was.

I always disagreed with the assignment of 1631 to the Intrepid. Putting aside that the chart actually says 1831, that ship is complete, so there shouldn't be any crews working on her to reassign. I think she's either 1709 or 1703 which are the two other numbers he was looking towards.

 

[STEPhon IT]

All navy ships designed for warfare are termed warships. They can operate independent of base. Support ships are attached to base. These are big, overarching categories. There is no reason that “starship class” can’t mean something as simple as a ship designed for star flight which can operate independent of base. Support or auxiliary spacecraft would be attached to their base. Enterprise can thus be both “starship class” and “Constitution class”. Antares might be both “auxiliary class” and “Independence class” (older fan conjecture not current law from on high which holds it to be Antares class).

That's a fair assessment and I believe what you mentioned has been engrained retroactively if you believe all Star Trek is continuity. Hard to swallow but that doesn't mean you can't swallow it, I see your point but its not for me.

I always disagreed with the assignment of 1631 to the Intrepid. Putting aside that the chart actually says 1831, that ship is complete, so there shouldn't be any crews working on her to reassign. I think she's either 1709 or 1703 which are the two other numbers he was looking towards.

Greg Jein assigned those names to registry numbers at random, I think what you're saying is as plausible.

 

[Warped9]

I'm often in the minority of opinion when it comes to Trek (and many other things), but personally I like the idea that the Enterprise's sister ships, those only twelve like her in the fleet (at that time), all have registries in the 1700 series. To that end it means that ships which do not have a 1700 series number may look similar to the Enterprise, and they are indeed starships, but they are of a different class and differ in some manner or other.

That means a ship like the Republic is indeed a starship and it may even resemble the Enterprise (or not), but it was of a different class. And given it was several years prior the Republic might not even be in operational service by the time of "Courtmartial." Of course, it's entirely possible Starfleet commissioned a new starship Republic since, and it might even carry a 1700 series registry.

There is concurrent anecdotal evidence for the above idea. In TOS we hear of two different ships named Valiant. The first is a vessel lost some two centuries prior--obviously it wasn't a Starfleet vessel. The second Valiant was referenced in "A Taste Of Armegeddon" and it's said to have been lost fifty years pror. Now that could indeed have been a Starfleet vessel, but I'd be inclined to dismiss the notion it could have been the same class of ship as the Enterprise. I resist that notion because it pushes the existence of the Enterprise class ships too far back in the past. And later we will learn that Daystrom's duotronic computer systems helped revolutionize Federation starships twenty-five years before TOS, which dovetails with a few things. It suggests the Enterprise and her kin are relatively recent ships and still at the forefront of Starfleet's ships. It supports the idea of Robert April being the Enterprise's first commander, followed by a lenghty tenure by Pike and then most recently Kirk wherein later in TAS we get to see Robert April as he is about to retire. So it's entirely possible Starfleet has a current starship Valiant in service with a 1700 series registry.

That brings us to the Constellation. If it is indeed an older vessel, possibly even predating the Republic 1371, how is it still in service and commanded by a Commodore no less? Wouldn't a Commodore rate a more prestigious command than an older vessel possibly on its last legs?

Well, maybe the Constellation is a highly decorated vessel. And maybe Decker had quite a bit of success with her and he had eough pull to keep her in service longer than usual.

At any rate thats my two cents...


On another note, and more relevent to the project at hand. I took an evening to quickly throw this oversimplified model together to serve as a place holder when designing an orbital facility around it.

 

[STEPhon IT]

That is really nice.

I had the suspicion the Constellation along with the Enterprise and probably the Exeter were vessels which were created first to be the forefront for farther space travel, and as those ships with their alleged history had upgrades. I think Starship Class vessels were made to last for a century based on the level of travel across the galaxy; these ships were made to endure the calamities of space and continue to move forward. It would've been cool to see the Constellation before it was ravaged by the Doomsday Machine but I think it was a sister ship of the Enterprise and was a Starship Class vessel.

 

[Warped9]

Side note first: if I had been involved with TOS-R I would have pushed for the Constellation to look more like a Cage era starship to be more consistent with its lower registry number.

Now for a heads-up. When I get to modelling the Constellation (in pristine condition) I’m planning to use Shaw’s drawings of the AMT model kit as a template for the ship. Since thats what was used in the show my intent is to expand on that approach as if someone had taken pains to make up the model properly. That means decent detailing and a decent paint job to minimize the obviousness of using a model kit. But even with a more pro job on finishing the miniature it will still be apparent (to those who notice such things) that this starship differs from the familiar Enterprise.

One of the first things I noticed while looking over Shaw’s drawings is that the windows on the model are oversized. That would have to be addressed as the larger windows make the ship overall look smaller in scale—it just doesn’t look right.

The other idea percolating in my head is the feasibility of using the AMT model to kitbash one or two other Starfleet designs. Doing it in 3D means not having to actually cut and shape styrene plastic.

The use of the ever-so-apparent AMT kit is an example of fx that made TOS look “cheap” in many eyes. TOS did a lot of respectable effects at the time and some of them still hold up well. But certain shots, like those of the AMT kit, simply fell flat even back in the day. Of course, this was a direct result of not having a bit more time and money—the very notion behind this project. Ideally a completely new and slightly larger scratch built miniature would serve better (essentially a companion to the 33 incher), but given the AMT kit was now available it’s worthwhile to see what could be done with it. We know today that some modellers over the years have done respectable jobs modifying/accurizing the AMT kit to look closer to what was seen onscreen—thats more or less the route I’m thinking here only using 3D to illustrate it rather than cutting plastic.

 

[Warped9]

All navy ships designed for warfare are termed warships. They can operate independent of base. Support ships are attached to base. These are big, overarching categories. There is no reason that “starship class” can’t mean something as simple as a ship designed for star flight which can operate independent of base. Support or auxiliary spacecraft would be attached to their base. Enterprise can thus be both “starship class” and “Constitution class”. Antares might be both “auxiliary class” and “Independence class” (older fan conjecture not current law from on high which holds it to be Antares class).

This fits—the idea that “Starship Class” more denotes mission profile than specific type of vessel. The Enterprise can be Starship Class, Heavy Cruiser and Constitution-class all at the same time and none of it is a contradiction. I like it.

That is really nice.

Thanks! It’s interesting how something simple can be made to look good. My basic model is lacking in so many details yet colour and lighting manage to create a respectable effect. This is essentially what I’m thinking when I get to modelling the Constellation, but it holds true for all the miniatures in this project.

 

[blssdwlf]

This fits—the idea that “Starship Class” more denotes mission profile than specific type of vessel. The Enterprise can be Starship Class, Heavy Cruiser and Constitution-class all at the same time and none of it is a contradiction. I like it.

Yep. Or the Enterprise was re-classified as Constitution-class before or after TOS which isn't that different than the US Navy re-classifying ships during different points in time and that doesn't contradict what we see on screen in TOS.

Thanks! It’s interesting how something simple can be made to look good. My basic model is lacking in so many details yet colour and lighting manage to create a respectable effect. This is essentially what I’m thinking when I get to modelling the Constellation, but it holds true for all the miniatures in this project.

At a certain distance details even on the 11' model are just not visible anymore. For example, the 8 circles or exhaust ports on the impulse engine that are visible at 2:03 completely disappear as the ship grows more distant in the same shot.

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

 

[Warped9]

What really hurt the Constellation shots as done originally is when they got in closer—thats where the fx failed even on a smallish CRT television. But those longer distance shots, like when we first see the wreck are still reasonably decent.

The worst shot was seeing the model from aft as it approached the planet killer. Yeesh!

 

[blssdwlf]

What really hurt the Constellation shots as done originally is when they got in closer—thats where the fx failed even on a smallish CRT television. But those longer distance shots, like when we first see the wreck are still reasonably decent.

The worst shot was seeing the model from aft as it approached the planet killer. Yeesh!

For a long time I agreed with that sentiment but now I appreciate more of the look of the Constellation at that distance imagining her with closed exhaust ports on the impulse engine and nacelles and crumpled hull from collisions.

 

[UssGlenn]

One of the first things I noticed while looking over Shaw’s drawings is that the windows on the model are oversized. That would have to be addressed as the larger windows make the ship overall look smaller in scale—it just doesn’t look right.

But having the Constellation be a smaller ship, with less decks, would be the easiest way to differentiate her class from that of the Enterprise.

 

[Warped9]

But having the Constellation be a smaller ship, with less decks, would be the easiest way to differentiate her class from that of the Enterprise.

Yeah, but as is the decks look too compressed. It looks toy like.

 

[STEPhon IT]

With some thought the decks could be revised, but does the Constellation had to be smaller; could she be the same size but shared "The Cage"'s aesthetics? A proto-type of the upgrades would come to future Starship Class vessels.