Where did the Enterprise A come from?
- Thread starter Citizen Cook
- Start date
Could also mean that this class of cadets are being assigned to the Enterprise.
Or that the simulator itself is a deliberate replica of the Bridge of the Enterprise (which it is, since they used the same set), rather than a generic Constitution Refit. Kirk totally would have made that call when the simulator was being built.
Last edited:
If TMP takes place 2.5 years after the end of TOS (as suggested by dialog) and TWOK takes place 15 years after "Space Seed," there is ample opportunity for a whole five year mission under Admiral Kirk.
Some arbitrary dates for the sake of discussion:
Space Seed 2266
End of 5YM 2270
TMP 2272 or 2273
TWOK 2281
If Kirk took the E out for a second 5YM, he could have been back by 2277 and still had a few years of retirement before deciding to rejoin Starfleet.
In my head canon, this is what happened. And they were wearing the TMP uniforms until about 2279 or 80.
--Alex
Right, but framing it as "Enterprise Class" implies that it's a generic model for the entire, well, an entire ship class based on the Enterprise. Otherwise, it would just be "ENTERPRISE SIMULATOR."
Saying it's the class that goes to the Enterprise I guess implies that the Enterprise holds a special place as a training ship in the academy... enough to have a signpost made for it? Either way I don't feel like it's strong enough of an explanation to moot the understanding that the Enterprise became a class ship. Not unless you want to willfully set aside visual evidence of 2 for 6.
There is another way this could work though. Enterprise Class refers to all Constitutions that were altered from their 2260s configurations. "Constitution Class" applies to all ships build on Constitution specifications from the keel up, even if the design got successive updates. So the newbuild Ent-A is a "Constitution" while the refitted 1701 became "Enterprise Class", along with any other former 2260s configurations that received alterations.
Saying it's the class that goes to the Enterprise I guess implies that the Enterprise holds a special place as a training ship in the academy... enough to have a signpost made for it? Either way I don't feel like it's strong enough of an explanation to moot the understanding that the Enterprise became a class ship. Not unless you want to willfully set aside visual evidence of 2 for 6.
There is another way this could work though. Enterprise Class refers to all Constitutions that were altered from their 2260s configurations. "Constitution Class" applies to all ships build on Constitution specifications from the keel up, even if the design got successive updates. So the newbuild Ent-A is a "Constitution" while the refitted 1701 became "Enterprise Class", along with any other former 2260s configurations that received alterations.
I prefer the explanation that the movie refit is essentially the Enterprise class/subclass of the Constitution family, as some sources like FASA suggested the scale of the refit proved to be far larger than anyone anticipated. FASA also assumed that the Enterprise was the only ship of the original "12 batch" to survive its missions, although that idea doesn't entirely mesh with their roster for both designs.
Jackill's seemed to take a similar approach with some of their TMP era refits, with the class names shifting to the vessels of the old design that were presumably refitted first. Sisko's USS Saratoga, for Jackill purposes, was refit as the lead ship of a new subclass and was the vessel from the movie era. This is also a common tradition in real life.
Jackill's seemed to take a similar approach with some of their TMP era refits, with the class names shifting to the vessels of the old design that were presumably refitted first. Sisko's USS Saratoga, for Jackill purposes, was refit as the lead ship of a new subclass and was the vessel from the movie era. This is also a common tradition in real life.
Or then this just verifies McCoy's conviction that Starfleet trains whole crews for specific ships and missions, NASA style, and the effort is currently underway to give the Enterprise a crew for her next mission. (And the Endeavor a crew for hers, at 1100 hours, and the T'rump one for hers, at 1200 hours.)
I see "signposts" like that printed for assorted classes all the time, whenever the assistant doing the printing has access to a color printer. The one doing the printing at the Academy would assuredly have a better printer! (Or then could simply touch the "plaque" to alter its text and appearance.)
It just deviates a bit from how these things are done ITRW, is all.
But so does the competing model, where a bunch of ships is refitted in part rather than in whole (this happens all the time) but then gets another round of refits (this happens all the time) that ends with a certain round looking exactly like a certain other round (this is quite often the intent, what with streamlining and all, but basically never succeeds).
Then again, the E-A and the E-nil-refit are not identical inside, and we still can't tell whether that's merely cosmetic (that is, the TMP ship had the TUC warp core somewhere belowdecks and the TUC one had the swirly TMP plasma conduits abovedecks) or significant (that is, the E-A had a wholly new type of powerplant and enjoyed drastically improved performance as the result).
Timo Saloniemi
That's just because the simulator is Enterprise Class.
The only piece of canon information on this comes from Star Trek V when Scotty says it must have been built by monkeys. This implies that the ship is brand new. The panel displays in TUV agree with that because it appears this was a different transwarp test vehicle.
It is only in behind the scenes that Yorktown, Tai-Ho, or other names come in. So none of that is canon. None. I don't think the name particularly matters. No one cares that when the first real navy aircraft carrier was originally named Constitution when it was laid down. We only care that when it was launched and commissioned it was Lexington. It only matters if it was a reused ship, but if so it had just completed a refit with a brand new warp core and had not seen a shakedown cruise. The Yorktown was in TVH. So either the crew survived or they didn't. With the timing and other TOS stories, they should have survived so it would be weird to take that ship from its crew and rename it Enterprise. It would be even weirder if the crew had died and the renamed the ship. And I keep coming back to Scotty's dialog which indicate it was a new ship and not the Yorktown. He wouldn't make a comment like that about a ship that had been out on duty when it was drained by the probe.
Yorktown came from Roddenberry (not one to be terribly beholden to continuity on a film he did not work on). That was the first name he picked during TOS development before he changed the name to Enterprise. I think that is what is behind his comment, because it does not fit with TVH or TFF.
It is only in behind the scenes that Yorktown, Tai-Ho, or other names come in. So none of that is canon. None. I don't think the name particularly matters. No one cares that when the first real navy aircraft carrier was originally named Constitution when it was laid down. We only care that when it was launched and commissioned it was Lexington. It only matters if it was a reused ship, but if so it had just completed a refit with a brand new warp core and had not seen a shakedown cruise. The Yorktown was in TVH. So either the crew survived or they didn't. With the timing and other TOS stories, they should have survived so it would be weird to take that ship from its crew and rename it Enterprise. It would be even weirder if the crew had died and the renamed the ship. And I keep coming back to Scotty's dialog which indicate it was a new ship and not the Yorktown. He wouldn't make a comment like that about a ship that had been out on duty when it was drained by the probe.
Yorktown came from Roddenberry (not one to be terribly beholden to continuity on a film he did not work on). That was the first name he picked during TOS development before he changed the name to Enterprise. I think that is what is behind his comment, because it does not fit with TVH or TFF.
Well, it's not mere implying: what he actually says is that "this new ship was put together by monkeys"... But make of that what you will. Often enough, "new" implies "old", as in "there used to be an older version" - but also as in "Admiral, this is an almost totally new Enterprise".
Umm, to be sure, there's no "transwarp" in TVH. Those displays say "warp"; it's only Shane Johnson who has them saying "transwarp" for the purposes of his booklet. (Check the screencaps for the length of the word in question, off focus but still rather easily measured.)
Timo Saloniemi
I have not had the opportunity to check with the film. I had understood he took those directly from the display graphics.
Yeah, it was a bit of a surprise to discover that the graphics had indeed been altered. I first heard of it in the nineties, from a fan who had had access to the set. This would be the relevant TrekCore image:
http://movies.trekcore.com/gallery/albums/tvhhd/tvhhd2277.jpg
To the left of Spock, the upper ship graphic, the side view, is the graphic SJ reproduces on the upper half of p.122 of his Guide. If the blurred-beyond-belief white text below the white line at the bottom read "transwarp subsys 525", it would extend halfway to the column of white and blue lines of nonsense numbers above the white line. It's shorter, though, barely extending to one-quarter that column.
I guess there might be better screencaps available somewhere, but alas, few set photos. Then again, SJ himself has a photo on p.115 showing the markedly shorter line on that on-stage graphic!
Timo Saloniemi
http://movies.trekcore.com/gallery/albums/tvhhd/tvhhd2277.jpg
To the left of Spock, the upper ship graphic, the side view, is the graphic SJ reproduces on the upper half of p.122 of his Guide. If the blurred-beyond-belief white text below the white line at the bottom read "transwarp subsys 525", it would extend halfway to the column of white and blue lines of nonsense numbers above the white line. It's shorter, though, barely extending to one-quarter that column.
I guess there might be better screencaps available somewhere, but alas, few set photos. Then again, SJ himself has a photo on p.115 showing the markedly shorter line on that on-stage graphic!
Timo Saloniemi
Do you have a source for this? The first carrier was the Langley and was converted from the collier Jupiter. The second and third were laid down as the battlecruisers Lexington and Saratoga and, because of the naval treaties of the 1920s, were completed as CV 2 and CV 3, respectively. The first from-the-keel-up carrier was the Ranger CV 4. Ranger was followed by the Yorktown class.
--------------------
Edit to add. This is about the Lexington class battlecruisers (CC) briefly being Constitution class during the proposal phase of the battlecruiser program. By the time that the ships were officially given names that was no longer the case. CC 5 ended up being laid down as the Constitution.
Last edited:
Yes. I found that in Jane's. And according to that, they names were changed AFTER the ships were laid down. Though it is possible they were behind the times. Langley was not a real carrier. It was a test conversion. Lexington was the first real carrier. Its design origins have influenced carriers ever since. The Frigate USS Constitution had an official name change from 1917 to 1925 because of this.
Jane's seems to be incomplete or in error. According to DANFS, the name change occurred around December of 1917. At least that's when the original Lexington (CC-4) was renamed Ranger.
Oh, and just to pedantically annoying, even though they were Lexington-class, the Saratoga was laid down before the Lexington, launched before the Lexington and commissioned before the Lexington, so technically, she was the first true aircraft carrier.
DANFS entry on Saratoga.
Nice point. I hadn't checked the dates. Though I did notice that they skipped cruiser #2, Constellation.
A folder of the screen graphics from STIV went to auction years ago and one of the Trek fansites won it. Then they never did anything with it. No scans, no pictures, nothing.
Do you know which site it was?
Startrekreference.com. Details in this old thread.
