The Making of Star Trek, and several other sources. (The other sources may have been referencing TMoST, though.) If I remember right, CVN-65 may have been the latest and greatest at the time, but CV-6 had quite the illustrious history behind it.
^^IIRC it's CV-6 that is pictured on the TMP rec deck.
Slight tangent, but I've often wondered how the navy at large feels about the NCC-1701 in relation the CV-6 or CVN-65. Do they feel that the starship Enterprise overshadows the real ships, or that her fame helps bring those famous ships' real feats to a greater audience?The Making of Star Trek, and several other sources. (The other sources may have been referencing TMoST, though.) If I remember right, CVN-65 may have been the latest and greatest at the time, but CV-6 had quite the illustrious history behind it.
I don't doubt that's true, but damned if I can find it in TMoST. I did see carrier names discussed as other starship names, Forrestal mentioned wrt starship tonnage, and CVN-65 used for a size comparison diagram.
Not knowing the details of the name choice, "Enterprise" would seem to be a happy two-for-one: The storied lone survivor of the early carrier battles for WW2 appeal, and the new super-carrier much covered in the press for its revolutionary propulsion and being the largest mobile structure ever built.
Slight tangent, but I've often wondered how the navy at large feels about the NCC-1701 in relation the CV-6 or CVN-65. Do they feel that the starship Enterprise overshadows the real ships, or that her fame helps bring those famous ships' real feats to a greater audience?
The Making of Star Trek, and several other sources. (The other sources may have been referencing TMoST, though.) If I remember right, CVN-65 may have been the latest and greatest at the time, but CV-6 had quite the illustrious history behind it.
I don't doubt that's true, but damned if I can find it in TMoST. I did see carrier names discussed as other starship names, Forrestal mentioned wrt starship tonnage, and CVN-65 used for a size comparison diagram.
At least according to Memory Alpha, it's on page 164. (I'll admit I don't have the book myself.)
Fair enough. And there's no denying that many people have more respect for the exploits of the real USS Enterprises thanks to the fictional ones.Slight tangent, but I've often wondered how the navy at large feels about the NCC-1701 in relation the CV-6 or CVN-65. Do they feel that the starship Enterprise overshadows the real ships, or that her fame helps bring those famous ships' real feats to a greater audience?
In my own anecdotal experience, they consider the Star Trek ships to be basically "part of the family," fictional descendents of the USN ships. No negative feelings, in my experience.
At least according to Memory Alpha, it's on page 164. (I'll admit I don't have the book myself.)
I dunno. I do remember hearing that it was named after CV-6 even before Memory Alpha came into existence, but darned if I can remember where from.
We use essential cookies to make this site work, and optional cookies to enhance your experience.