Scotty didn't say that it was a new ship, his log specifically states "this new ship". It was new to them, it doesn't mean that it was a new ship.
Weird Things In ST VI: TUC...
- Thread starter Roald
- Start date
Scotty didn't say that it was a new ship, his log specifically states "this new ship". It was new to them, it doesn't mean that it was a new ship.
I disagree, unless the normally heavily-accented Iman was able to completely hide said accent upon occassion.
I've watched footage of her speaking, and her normal speaking voice is the one she used while in character in the movie. During the scenes when she's... shapeshifted, different speaking voices are employed. Her 'hurry, we don't have a lot of time' voice as the little girl is spoken in a British accent, and her 'Sasquatch' scenes are American. Watch the shapeshifting scene again where she transforms from Sasquatch to Iman - her voice obviously shifts from one intonation to another - 'give a girl a chance - iht takes ah loht uv effhart.
"USS Enterprise - shakedown cruise report. I think this new ship was put together by Monkeys. She's got a fine engine, but half the doors won't open, and guess who's job it is to make it right... let's see what she's got said the captain, and then we found out, didn't we?"
"All I can say is, 'they don't make them like they used to!'"
<You told me you could get this ship operational in 2 weeks, I gave you 3, what happened?>
"I think you gave me too much time, Captain."
Shakedown cruises don't happen when a ship is just renamed. Perhaps after a major overhaul and refit (TMP, see real life Iowa class), or after a ship was deactivated and reactivated (see Iowa class), but not just a refit.
You also wouldn't expect the chief engineer to insult the assembly people if the ship had been built 20 years ago and was just now having problems. He'd insult the people at the dockyard who did the upgrades or repairs, or the previous chief engineer who let her go to hell. Or he'd curse Starfleet for giving him a washed up lemon.
It's clear it was a new ship that had a bunch of problems.
If I sell my 1995 Toyota, and then I buy a used 1996 Toyota, would it make sense for me to say 'well they don't make them like they used to!' when my power windows stop working? No. No it wouldn't.
The writing and spirit of STV and IV was that it was a new ship. GR for whatever reason, gave another hypothesis, which doesn't solve any story or continuity problem, and also messes up the drama of the situation.
Making the 1701 Alpha an old ship creates more problems than it solves.
So maybe it is a majorly overhauled refit from a TOS version, just like the first Enterprise was in ST:TMP?
If that were true it wouldn't have looked so worn out just a short time later in STVI.
I think someone high up didn't realize it wasn't meant to be the same ship that we saw in "Where No Man Has Gone Before".
I think someone high up didn't realize it wasn't meant to be the same ship that we saw in "Where No Man Has Gone Before".
It looked worn out in ST VI?
Huh? That ship was refitted for TMP and destroyed in ST III.
The ship at the end of ST IV has a whole new bridge module fitted - it's stark white - and it has lots of glitches throughout the ship during ST V, but it's still functional in ST VI. It seems that the class is being retired, especially since we don't see any Constitutions (I or II) in TNG.
We only know Ent-A was decommissioned, that does not preclude being recommissioned under a new name and serving another 30 years.
If new in 2286 we can probably assume she is the last of her class as the Excelsiors become the starship of choice therefore her active life would be shorter than the others as spare parts etc become scarcer.
Im quite keen on the idea that she was a testbed for fitting transwarp (as some of the displays indicate) onto older shiptypes, and this moved it very far, very fast in ST V but the stresses on the hull were unacceptably high, hence the failure of transwarp in general and the A being old before her time.
If new in 2286 we can probably assume she is the last of her class as the Excelsiors become the starship of choice therefore her active life would be shorter than the others as spare parts etc become scarcer.
Im quite keen on the idea that she was a testbed for fitting transwarp (as some of the displays indicate) onto older shiptypes, and this moved it very far, very fast in ST V but the stresses on the hull were unacceptably high, hence the failure of transwarp in general and the A being old before her time.
If you're referring to the 1701-A bridge graphics shown in Mr Scott's Guide, I once read (admittedly in a rant by a crackpot) that Shane Johnson modified Mike Okuda's original Okudagrams for inclusion in the Guide.
Maybe someone with HD would care to zoom in on the consoles behind Kirk in the final scene of STIV and see if it says "warp" or "transwarp"?
I don't buy that the Enterprise suffered damage warping to the centre of the galaxy, simply because there was no evidence of strain on the ship during the journey (unlike Excelsior rushing to Earth in STVI, or the NX01 at warp 5.2). The idea that the entire class is being decommisioned may be the best I've heard to explain it all.
Back to "Weird Things in STVI":
The Excelsior bridge. Does anyone else think the STVI version (a barely re-dressed version of the Enterprise bridge) looks far more low-tech than the Excelsior bridge did in STIII? The STIII one said "the next generation of starfleet" and the STVI one said "The same as the Enterprise but bigger"
Maybe someone with HD would care to zoom in on the consoles behind Kirk in the final scene of STIV and see if it says "warp" or "transwarp"?
I don't buy that the Enterprise suffered damage warping to the centre of the galaxy, simply because there was no evidence of strain on the ship during the journey (unlike Excelsior rushing to Earth in STVI, or the NX01 at warp 5.2). The idea that the entire class is being decommisioned may be the best I've heard to explain it all.
Back to "Weird Things in STVI":
The Excelsior bridge. Does anyone else think the STVI version (a barely re-dressed version of the Enterprise bridge) looks far more low-tech than the Excelsior bridge did in STIII? The STIII one said "the next generation of starfleet" and the STVI one said "The same as the Enterprise but bigger"
They still had to get back!
That would make perfect sense in line with Cartwrights comments on scrapping the fleet if it wasnt for the fact that the Constitution class were obviously Starfleet's premier long range exploration vessels before Excelsior came along. Peace with the Klingons surely makes this kind of ship in greater demand than ever as Starfleet refocuses.
I'm kinda with you on the Excelsior bridge a modified TSFS bridge would have been a more futuristic way to go imo, but it would have been wildly out of line with the bridges of older ships as portrayed in TNG before TUC came out.
Well, hold on a minute...
The Constitution/Enterprise-class were indeed ships of the line explorers. Outclassed in that role, finally, by Excelsior - a more modern interpretation of the heavy cruiser arrangement. But how do we know that Starfleet didn't have other kinds of ships suited for exploration? Could it be the expensive package of the Constitution/Enterprise was finally deemed to be too expensive compared to what was actually required of it, and it was actually capable of?
Constellation-class ships had to come from somewhere.
IRL, there were dozens of ships that were perfect for fighting a war that wouldn't come, in a world that never came to be in the 1990s. Fantastic ships. Nuclear propulsion. The re-built battleships. Seawolf subs. But ultimately, not needed for the new world.
I'm sure the Klingon talks included arms reductions.
Dismantaling Constitution/Enterprise-class ships could have been part of that, meanwhile, Starfleet could keep Excelsior and develop Constellation.
All of this is assuming that they were decommissioned permanently at all, it is not uncommon for ships to drift in and out of commission as the situation demands. If there were only 12(13 with A) (a hotly debated issue I know) and in mothballs, to not encounter them in TNG would be no surprise at all. That there were at least some in mothballs is supported by Constitution wreckage at Wolf 359.
[Edit] Actually your mention of expense makes me wonder if there are too few Connies to make them economic compared to the seemingly huge amounts of Mirandas (and soon to be large numbers of Excelsiors) that same lack of economies of scale could have done for the Soyuz too (if it is not considered a Miranda varient) even though equipment for spying can probably find peaceful charting applications.
[Edit] Actually your mention of expense makes me wonder if there are too few Connies to make them economic compared to the seemingly huge amounts of Mirandas (and soon to be large numbers of Excelsiors) that same lack of economies of scale could have done for the Soyuz too (if it is not considered a Miranda varient) even though equipment for spying can probably find peaceful charting applications.
Hm. Er, well, I'm pretty sure few have contested that there were still only 12/13 Constitutions by the time of the movies. That might not be that controversial.
Well Memory Alpha gives 24 (less 4 known destroyed) including those listed as 'uncertain.'
Of which, since we are on the topic, many of them come from the Operation Retrieve briefing - a paper briefing?
I wonder if the president had difficulties specifically with reading computer screens.
Meyer mentioned he was blind so why bother with visual aids at all?
How come no one saw or detected the patch/tracking device that Spock put on Kirk's back, before he and McCoy left the ship?
What makes you think it was a "device"?
It's a stain of some sort, and it even appears to change shape from scene to scene. It looks like Spock slapped a load of some chemical onto Kirk's shoulder and it began seeping in, eventually probably permeating his body (although that was unnecessary because the Klingons didn't remove his jacket!), and that this chemical could be tracked from orbital heights.
The real problem here is, how did Spock have this chemical so readily available on the bridge? Generally, exotic chemicals have to be fetched from the lab, or from the depths of McCoy's medical pouch. How come Spock had a viridium patch somewhere next to the bridge turbolift? (Or perhaps in his pocket?)
We could argue the substance is as common as the dye markers used for locating downed pilots, and indeed analogous to it: every starship has those viridum marker patches distributed, along with other survival gear, in most of the interior spaces including the bridge.
Timo Saloniemi
It's a stain of some sort, and it even appears to change shape from scene to scene. It looks like Spock slapped a load of some chemical onto Kirk's shoulder and it began seeping in, eventually probably permeating his body (although that was unnecessary because the Klingons didn't remove his jacket!), and that this chemical could be tracked from orbital heights.
The real problem here is, how did Spock have this chemical so readily available on the bridge? Generally, exotic chemicals have to be fetched from the lab, or from the depths of McCoy's medical pouch. How come Spock had a viridium patch somewhere next to the bridge turbolift? (Or perhaps in his pocket?)
We could argue the substance is as common as the dye markers used for locating downed pilots, and indeed analogous to it: every starship has those viridum marker patches distributed, along with other survival gear, in most of the interior spaces including the bridge.
Timo Saloniemi
Similar threads
