I haven't bothered to check Memory Alpha, as I don't think there's an entry on the Abrams Enterprise. Anyone know? If it hasn't been identified, how many of you would like it if it were called Enterprise-class?
What Class Starship is Nu-Enterprise?
- Thread starter Red Ranger
- Start date
http://memory-alpha.org/wiki/USS_Enterprise_(alternate_reality)
"The ship's dossier on the official movie website identifies the Enterprise as a Constitution-class heavy cruiser, the same as her prime universe counterpart, although this detail is not stated in the film."
Honestly, it will take me longer to post this than to find it.
"The ship's dossier on the official movie website identifies the Enterprise as a Constitution-class heavy cruiser, the same as her prime universe counterpart, although this detail is not stated in the film."
Honestly, it will take me longer to post this than to find it.
The dossier at the official site says "Constitution Class heavy cruiser" (the Memory Alpha entry agrees with this) while the ship's dedication plaque reads "Starship Class", same as the one on the original TOS bridge.
^Yeah but that plaque says the ship was built in San Fran, and we see it getting built in the Iowa shipyard.
The Star Trek DAC game goes with "Flagship Class", which not only goes with Pike's line about "our newest flagship", but fits the new 725m deluxe size very well. I just hope there isn't a "USS Flagship" out there, somewhere
.
The Star Trek DAC game goes with "Flagship Class", which not only goes with Pike's line about "our newest flagship", but fits the new 725m deluxe size very well. I just hope there isn't a "USS Flagship" out there, somewhere
.One might say that Pike's wording on "our newest flagship" paints the Enterprise as the most recent member in a class that already sports at least a couple of keels. If the Enterprise were qualitatively different from other, older flagships, Pike would probably be tempted to use/add an adjective other than "new" to describe her...
As for the new dedication plaque, it at least says that "San Francisco Yards" are on "Earth", rather than in "Calif." like in the original ship's plaque. Makes it possible that San Francisco Yards operates construction docks in six states of the United States, some more in Uzbekistan and Thailand, plus has R&D offices in downtown Marseilles and an archives department on the Outer Hebrides.
Timo Saloniemi
As for the new dedication plaque, it at least says that "San Francisco Yards" are on "Earth", rather than in "Calif." like in the original ship's plaque. Makes it possible that San Francisco Yards operates construction docks in six states of the United States, some more in Uzbekistan and Thailand, plus has R&D offices in downtown Marseilles and an archives department on the Outer Hebrides.
Timo Saloniemi
YARN
Fleet Captain
Really? Is it still about 300 meters long?
For an alleged Constitution-class ship, it is much closer in size to a Galaxy-class ship. At the point that Kirk's Enterprise is the size of the Battlestar Galactica, there does not seem much point in referring to it as Constitution-class, but rather (like everything else) the nu-Constitution class.
JJ decided that the new Enterprise needed to be bigger and bolder. As the creative leader of the new effort he is the final judge the design of the ship. He is, apparently, an activist judge since the Constitution has been thrown out the window (ba-dump-ching).
The massive size, ironically, seems to be an indication that the Prime universe was actually more technologically advanced than this new universe. The old Starfleet built a slim ship that got the job done without all the bloat and bulk. I recall Scotty marveling at the prospect of warp engines the size of walnuts, but the nacelles of the nu-Enterprise are longer than the original "constitution" class ship.
"Constitution class" is a name, nothing more. It could be assigned to a freighter, a science vessel, a warship or anything else. Size has nothing to do with it.
In the prime universe, the name Enterprise could have been given to a 23rd century version of a smaller Intrepid-class ship, rather than a large Galaxy-class equivalent. Since we only ever saw one type of TOS-era ship, who's to say bigger ones didn't exist, unseen until now?
In the prime universe, the name Enterprise could have been given to a 23rd century version of a smaller Intrepid-class ship, rather than a large Galaxy-class equivalent. Since we only ever saw one type of TOS-era ship, who's to say bigger ones didn't exist, unseen until now?
Memory Alpha takes surprisingly minor liberties with onscreen "truth" this time. It's claimed that the new ship was a "Federation flagship" while the only wording used in the movie itself is "our newest flagship". Could be the one and only Federation flagship, or then the newest of the dozen or so flagships operated by Starfleet at the time.
The entry fails to mention the aft-pointing torpedo tubes under the secondary hull, nicely visible in their image of the shuttlebay. OTOH, we don't really know if the facility where redshirts pushed small cylinders into revolver magazine lookalikes was the torpedo loading bay. Could have been a buncha chaps preparing deployable jammers or priming the shield generators with fresh igniters. But that's just minor speculation there. And the thorough discussion on the changing size is quite informative...
Timo Saloniemi
The entry fails to mention the aft-pointing torpedo tubes under the secondary hull, nicely visible in their image of the shuttlebay. OTOH, we don't really know if the facility where redshirts pushed small cylinders into revolver magazine lookalikes was the torpedo loading bay. Could have been a buncha chaps preparing deployable jammers or priming the shield generators with fresh igniters. But that's just minor speculation there. And the thorough discussion on the changing size is quite informative...
Timo Saloniemi
^I think those tube-things are phaser power cells, as seen previously in DS9 on the Defiant.
YARN
Fleet Captain
Yes and No
Yes
What you wrote, is another way of putting what I already said. "Constitution" is a name and nothing more (i.e., it refers to nothing and is just a free-floating label).
No
Asking question "What Class Starship is Nu-Enterprise?" implies a frame of reference in which it makes sense to speak of the old Enterprise. It implies that someone (question and/or answerer) knows the class of the old Enterprise. "Class" implicitly serves here as a coordinating concept by which we can orient the new Enterprise in relation to the old. At the point that the term, however, functions, as you put it, as "a name, nothing more", it becomes evident that some caution may need to added to the discussion.
That is, one could be significantly mislead by the implication that Constitution class functions as anything more than a name, that it suggests regularities by which we might make predictions and evaluations (goodness of fit).
One obvious and gross expectation/norm would be the general size of ships within that class. If one were to (reasonably) expect that ships within the same class should have similar size, one could easily be mislead in learning that the old and new Enterprise are from the same class.
That is, one could be significantly mislead by the implication that Constitution class functions as anything more than a name, that it suggests regularities by which we might make predictions and evaluations (goodness of fit).
One obvious and gross expectation/norm would be the general size of ships within that class. If one were to (reasonably) expect that ships within the same class should have similar size, one could easily be mislead in learning that the old and new Enterprise are from the same class.
"Bigger ones" meaning what? Bigger ships named Enterprise? Bigger ships of the Constitution Class?
^What I'm suggesting is that there may have been larger ship types than the TOS Constitution class that co-existed with it, the way the Galaxy and Intrepid classes co-exist in the 24th century.
The Constitution-class in STXI clearly isn't the same Constitution-class from TOS. They share a name, as does the STXI Enterprise with the TOS one. It's the product of a timeline that diverged many years prior to the first Connies in TOS appearing. You wouldn't say "they're both Constitution class ships", you'd say "they're two universe's alternate versions of Constitution-class ships" (if it is meant to be Constitution-class. There's nothing mentioned about the ship in the movie beyond the name "Enterprise" and that it's "our newest flagship")
The Constitution-class in STXI clearly isn't the same Constitution-class from TOS. They share a name, as does the STXI Enterprise with the TOS one. It's the product of a timeline that diverged many years prior to the first Connies in TOS appearing. You wouldn't say "they're both Constitution class ships", you'd say "they're two universe's alternate versions of Constitution-class ships" (if it is meant to be Constitution-class. There's nothing mentioned about the ship in the movie beyond the name "Enterprise" and that it's "our newest flagship")
YARN
Fleet Captain
Hmm....
I find this hard to believe given what we get from the screen. When the Enterprise ran into sister ships they were indistinguishable from her (save, of course, for name and registry number).
Enterprise started off as "Starship Class" but was later specified to be "Constitution Class". Despite this inconsistency, however, it was apparent that there were only a dozen (or a baker's dozen depending on how you interpret Kirk's off-hand comment) or so ships in her class. It was always emphasized that she was a special ship in a special class of ships.
What we get off-screen is even more limiting. The geek-spec books specify that the Constitution class is of a particular size, mass, shape and so on. The spec-books rule out the sort of deviations you speculate about and confirm what we are led to believe on-screen.
No disrespect, but this bit seems too much like wild speculation.
Right. That's basically my point (i.e., the term Constitution doesn't really designate anything that links both verses - we can't judge one by the other).
It's interesting to note that the new verse has already shown a wide variety of starship varieties.
One wonders if the Enterprise is nothing more than an arbitrary arrangement of nacelles a saucer and a cylinder. Why is the Enterprise, for example, any better than the 3-nacelle job that we saw in the first film?
YARN said:
It's more of a retcon. 2233's USS Kelvin was larger than the TOS Enterprise (457m vs. 285m) and had a bigger crew (at least 800 vs. 430). 25 years later in the alternate universe, the fleet that left for Vulcan were all made of the same components as the Kelvin, with the exception of the brand-new Enterprise.
I think it's likely all these Kelvin kitbash ships are from or were designed in the same era as the Kelvin (in the same way the Consitution refit/Miranda/Constellation classes all are all roughly concurrent, as are the Galaxy and Nebula classes) and thus it's very probable that these older ships that pre-date the timeline split would still be in service later in both universes. Star Trek's always kept old ship designs in use for ages.
YARN
Fleet Captain
OK, I get it.
That you note that it is a retcon is, of course, another reason why your line of analysis could be regarded as objectionable (in a universe that admits of contradictions rational discourse is meaningless).
At any rate, we have no reason to believe that any of those, as you put it, Kelvin kit-bashes were Constitution class ships, right? Indeed, everything we are told in both universes suggests otherwise. In the movie we are told that the Enterprise is the latest flagship - she is something new, different. In the series, the Constitution class is held with uniquely high esteem in Starfleet in the TOS era.
Hence, even if we suppose that there were, via retroactive continuity, big honking Kelvins floating around before the TOS/Prime Constitution class emerged, we still have no reason to suppose that Constitution class ships vary so dramatically in size. Constitution class ships are of a type.
Most importantly, we know for a fact that Constitution class ships were of a highly determined size in at least one of these universes. In the prime universe, Constitution class marks a ship of a particular size. It is a meaningful designation in terms of size, mass, and general shape.
The new ship, however, only meets the designation in terms of general shape (in terms of these very basic measures).
In one universe the term is meaningful and precise. We don't know how precise the term is in another universe, but at a bare minimum, we know that it refers to something very different.
^ I think the designation is clear in both universes. In the prime universe, a 300 m ship class was named Constitution; in the alternate reality, that name was given to a 700 m ship class. (By the way, class in naval language refers to design, not type. There might be dozens of ship classes of similar size, mass, and general shape, each representing a different design.)
The difference is akin to the United States Navy naming our new 100,000 ton supercarrier class America (they're calling it Gerald R. Ford), instead of giving our new 45,000 ton amphibous assault/light carrier class that name. Both names are equally meaningful, but their meanings are different.
The difference is akin to the United States Navy naming our new 100,000 ton supercarrier class America (they're calling it Gerald R. Ford), instead of giving our new 45,000 ton amphibous assault/light carrier class that name. Both names are equally meaningful, but their meanings are different.
"Constitution class" will do just fine as a name.
YARN
Fleet Captain
Right. In one universe there is an Enterprise and in another there is a Nu-Enterprise. Similarly, in one universe there is a Constitution class and in another there is a Nu-Constitution class. My point is to emphasize that the fact that the classes have the same name should not mislead us into thinking that there we should have a standing expectation for other similarities.
Your usage here is somewhat puzzling. First you say, class refers to design (not type), but then you say that ships may share the same class without sharing the same design (in which case it would seem that class does not refer to design).
Even if we can make your meaning clear, your point seems to be hairsplitting. To have a shared design is to be of the same type in regard to that aspect. I might say that a Mustang is a type of car and still acknowledge that they come with various engine packages and other options.
What matters is that a type of car has enough in common with its sisters that it makes sense to call it by the same name (i.e., placing it in the same group of objects as a default description).
When is it pushing it to say that two cars are of the same type? Well, a ridiculous size differential could make a significant difference (see link)
http://www.ex-astris-scientia.org/articles/new_enterprise/enterprius-kirk.jpg
IMHO, the difference between class and type is easy: Class is simply whatever the first ship of that class is named. So since Enterprise - in either universe - is Constitution class, that means that the Constitution was the first ship to look like that.
TYPE, on the other hand, is more general. Things like heavy cruiser, light cruiser, frigate, destroyer, etc. So the phrase "Starship class" is a misnomer - that would mean there'd have to be a USS Starship, and that obviously doesn't work.
The Enterprise is a Constitution CLASS, but a starship TYPE.
TYPE, on the other hand, is more general. Things like heavy cruiser, light cruiser, frigate, destroyer, etc. So the phrase "Starship class" is a misnomer - that would mean there'd have to be a USS Starship, and that obviously doesn't work.
The Enterprise is a Constitution CLASS, but a starship TYPE.
I see. I'm sorry for mistaking what you meant.
I meant naval type (e.g. heavy cruiser, destroyer, 44-gun frigate, etc.), which is probably why my point was unclear - and why it seemed like hairsplitting. You're right that class is itself a form of type, but in naval jargon, the two terms are notably separate.
Similar threads
