Where did the Enterprise NCC-1701A come from?

[BillJ]

Even if Piller said that, I'd still dismiss it. He wasn't involved in either the production of The Voyage Home or The Final Frontier.

Remember though, that Piller didn't have to be directly involved in either production for it to be a canonical dating-reference -- as a writer/executive producer on a filmic Star Trek production shot on the Paramount soundstages, if something like that makes it into an episode, it's automatically considered binding, as far as the continuity is concerned (similar to how onscreen dialogue in the VOY episode "Q2" canonically locked in the dating of Kirk's 5YM as lasting from 2265-70).

The Okudas then used Piller's reference as the dating-placement of the movie in all published versions of The Official Star Trek Chronology (Piller was evidently pretty fond of referencing Star Trek V at that time, going by other nods like Wesley Crusher's great-grandfather being "a horse-thief" on Nimbus III, etc.).

Which is exactly the problem with "canon" across different series with different creators. You have people who didn't work on a production trying to interpret the intentions of people who did.

Did anyone ask Harve Bennett?

There is no way the intention between films was for a year of adventures. Why would they even reference the "Let's see what she's got" line if the intention wasn't for one following right on the heels of the other?

 

[Leto_II]

Harve Bennett actually felt that at least six months elapsed between the Enterprise -A's launch on its shakedown cruise at the end of TVH, and its return to Spacedock prior to the opening of TFF; it was TNG's "Evolution" which extended this timespan out further to approximately a year, give or take.

Also, Kirk saying "Let's see what she's got" at the end of one movie was by no means some kind of explicit guarantee or promise on the filmmakers' part that that the very next movie would instantly pick up right from where the last one left off -- they would've certainly reserved the creative right for themselves to write the next adventure how they saw fit, and there are plenty of of other ST movies with chronological gaps between them of multiple years.

Indeed, ST II, III, and IV are really now the exceptions to the rule, as all subsequent movies have at least one year minimum between them (to say nothing of the 12-year gap separating TMP and TWOK); they're more the statistical outliers at this point than the trend.

 

[Maurice]

Harve Bennett actually felt that at least six months elapsed between the Enterprise -A's launch on its shakedown cruise at the end of TVH, and its return to Spacedock prior to the opening of TFF...

Source please.

 

[Leto_II]

I was basically going by what ST author Christopher L. Bennett mentioned here:

http://www.trekbbs.com/showthread.php?t=100471

 

[KhanSolo]

I just think it's weird how starfleet would give it's best captain and crew an old conie without properly acknowledging major mechanical and electrical issues first. It's a good thing Scotty is a miracle worker

 

[C.E. Evans]

I just think it's weird how starfleet would give it's best captain and crew an old conie without properly acknowledging major mechanical and electrical issues first. It's a good thing Scotty is a miracle worker

"'Let's see what she's got' said the Captain. And then we found out, didn't we?"
--Montgomery Scott

I think during a shakedown cruise--be it of a brand-new starship or a newly refitted old starship--the crew learns what systems work well and what systems need more work on. Things that may look perfectly fine in simulations and tests while in dock might have glitches once out in the field. Under normal circumstances, the Enterprise-A probably would never have been deployed to Nimbus III until after the last of the bugs have been worked out.

 

[Dude111]

If the 1701-A was newly built with all the problems ["...the Enterprise is a disaster."], then I guess TFF was weakly copying with lesser problems the major warp drive problem of TMP.

It would have been nice if they re-created the exact same model (Im sure Jim would have been quiet happy)

 

[gottacook]

It would have been nice if they re-created the exact same model (Im sure Jim would have been quiet happy)

Well, maybe it was the equivalent of what they call a "restomod" in the classic car trade - that is, an old car that looks restored or very well preserved on the outside, but is modernized under the skin (new drivetrain, up-to-date safety systems, modern tires and electrics, etc.).

As for the chronology nonsense: It was made up to sell books, i.e., the Star Trek Chronology. For instance, with respect to the supposed time lapse between TMP and TWoK, it's equally legitimate to suggest (as I did on some thread a year or two ago) that the ship we see in TWoK is not the refit Enterprise from TMP, but simply a better rendering of the TV ship. If you accept that TWoK was not in any way intended as TMP's sequel (despite using a minute or two of TMP's special effects footage), then the events of TMP can be construed to have been overwritten by those of TWoK (Kirk starts both movies at a desk job, etc.). Hence, there is no time lapse between TMP and TWoK, and the 15 years stated in TWoK to have elapsed since they last saw Khan (during year 1 of the 5-year TV mission) is precisely correct.

 

[CoveTom]

I just think it's weird how starfleet would give it's best captain and crew an old conie without properly acknowledging major mechanical and electrical issues first. It's a good thing Scotty is a miracle worker

I'm not so sure the folks at Starfleet ever considered them to be the best captain and crew. More likely, I think, is that they had attained something of a legendary status in the public eye because of high profile events like the V'Ger incident and the whale probe, and Starfleet felt it best to maintain good PR by giving them a new Enterprise.

 

[FormerLurker]

^This. All the 1701-A is meant to be is good PR. Whether it's a good ship for Kirk an company isn't Starfleet's concern.