.
quote:
Originally posted by CaptainMike:
However, RawCadet will be a senior member long before i was
Hey, I'm member number twenty-eight and I'm not a senior member yet.
I just sit online all day writing about stuff, and i was a senior member within a month
As far post counts go, remember this: it's not the number of posts that one makes, it's the quality of the posts that one makes. I'm member 29, and it took me two years to break a thousand posts. Of course, I was absent from the forum for about 18 months of that.
[ October 26, 2001: Message edited by: Siegfried ]
quote:
I know, but rather than editting his posts, he posts three times in a row and talks to himself. I just sit online all day writing about stuff, and i was a senior member within a month
Well, it doesn't really matter whether you are a new member, member, or senior member anymore, does it? The whole point of becoming a senior member was so that you could change your status line. Now, someone else has to do it for you. AFAIAC, whether you become a senior member in a few months or a few years is pretty moot now.
Also I do not know how many posts it takes to reach the august rank of "Senior Member;" I do not post merely to inflate my total number of posts.
[ October 26, 2001: Message edited by: Raw Cadet ]
I wouldn't lose any sleep over it.
Although there wasn't much arguing in it.
Back on topic, is the shot of where the "ship" appeared in ST III and disappeared in ST IV in the same location?
And then TSN got all mad and said I thought it was a ship because "I have half a brain." Then Mr. Christopher got pissed because he was a senior member and I wasn't at the time, so he had more experience.
Sol System remarked, "What's with all this EFH bashing?", which had to do with TNO a lesser version of Flare.
Funny you remebered that, Ace.
[ October 26, 2001: Message edited by: Veers ]
Anyways, one of the threads I observed with bemused interest was the one I asked about here. I found it curious that some posters were absolutely certain that the object was a ship without conformation from one who truly knows. I started this thread because I was wondering if a consensus was ever reached.
Under no circumstances did I intend to restart the debate. Maybe I did not observe enough; have I created a monster I can no longer control?
Anyway, here�s my very own scan of the ship (yup, I believe it�s a ship :
Unknown ships at The Guardian of Forever
Oops, I just gave away the adress to my homepage�s brand new domain 
HEHE!Just remember these four simple stages about talking to yourself and try not to get to number 4, which I'm not sure whether I've reached or not.
Stages of going mad;
1. Talking to yourself.
2. Answering.
3. Having an argument with yourself.
4. Losing.
As for Senior Member status - 250 posts. That really should be written down somewhere, I'm getting tired of sounding as though I'm talking to myself!
-You talking to me?
No.
-Oh . . . right . . . sure?
YES!
next
The list of wars that have been fought in the past, some with minor, some with major casualty figures:
-U.S.S. Melbourne, Excelsior or Nebula?
-Defiant, length
-Bird of Prey, variants
-Wolf 359, wreckage identification
-NCC 1701, location of engineering
-U.S.S. Yamato, registry number
But this one takes the cake.
-Spacedock, and the Shady Thingamajigg
[ October 29, 2001: Message edited by: Mojo Jojo ]
And while this has been bloody in recent terms and Wolf359 went on and on and on (usually rather constructively) the 34 consecutive Defiant length wars are, when taken together, the bloodiest conflict we've ever had, bar none.
[ October 29, 2001: Message edited by: The_Tom ]
Oh, I didn't remember those. What was the concensus? Four different versions?
Star Trek III - 12-crew
Martok's Type
Big Galaxy-Class Size
... ?
I think that there is one small one with a crew of 12 and a huge whale-sized cargo area, and possibly a variant of the same size whithout the whale-sized cargo area, enabling it to operate with a larger crew.
And then there is one that is scaled up, but not more that 50 meters that support a crew of 50-100 and look larger a la TNG.. there is no canonical evidence that there is a 'supersized' BOP that supports a crew of 1500.
[ October 29, 2001: Message edited by: CaptainMike ]
[ October 29, 2001: Message edited by: Ryan McReynolds ]
As for the ST:III object, looks like a ship to me. It's free-floating, separate from the infrastructure, so I think it's gotta be. Good work Proteus.
For things on Mojo's list:
-USS Melbourne at Wolf 359 has to be Excelsior, as on screen you can clearly identify 'USS Melbourne' on an Excelsior Class starship.
-Defiant length debate: still in the air
-Wolf 359 wreckage identification: Let's reignite that one! Must have missed that debate, or it was before I joined up at Flare. As a friend and site affiliate of Bernd's I go with a lot of his theories and assertions on this subject.
-USS Yamato reg: I Remember this one. I still insist it has to be NCC 1305-E. That's what Riker said, even though I don't like it much.
There was of course one very heated argument not on Mojo's list, The Akiraprise war....
*tip-toes away quietly*
Also, the spacedock interior model was, I think, dissasembled or even destroyed after STIII and had to be rebuilt from scratch for STIV. Is any similar object visible in STIV?
What ignorant fools thought the Defiant was Valiant class? It was the first ship off it's class, for god's sake...
Oh, wait, this was before the Age of Enlightment about ST ships...
quote:
-USS Melbourne at Wolf 359 has to be Excelsior, as on screen you can clearly identify 'USS Melbourne' on an Excelsior Class starship...
Ahem
Not that I'd ever be caught dead bringing a floundering thread still further off it's intended topic, but...
All the canonical evidence supports that there were TWO U.S.S. Melbournes NCC-62043 at the battle of Wolf 359. One Nebula and one Excelsior. The Nebula appeared in BOTH 359 eps, (BoBW and Emissary) and was further displayed complete with a named-and-numbered plaque in TNG "Future Imperfect."
There's just no way around it. You can ignore neither the Excelsior nor the Nebbie. They are what they are: two vessels of different classes bearing the same name and registry number, and appearing concurrently in the same scenario. Wild, bizzare, illogical, and as difficult to explain as that is, that's what happened.
Get over it.
-MMoM
P.S.-
And the "thingy" in the spacedock is a ship!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
[ October 30, 2001: Message edited by: The Mighty Monkey of Mim ]
Im more than willing to accept helpful pieces of backstory that can be gleaned from what was there when the filmed it (like the USS Liberator shuttle) but if its contradictory, you take the one that you could see, because the version thats more obvious is what you should have seen, and if its something that you have buy a book with behind the scenes pictures to see, obviously its not part of the finished product.
[ October 30, 2001: Message edited by: CaptainMike ]
.
You're right it is a paradoxical situation, but can we tell for sure that when Shelby identifies the gnarled and wrecked Melbourne in BoBW it is a Nebula class wreck... or an Excelsior?
For me I conclude that there was definitly an Excelsior Class USS Melbourne present at Wolf 359, and there was also a Nebula but whose name and registry are uncertain as they didn't appear clearly on screen, even if the actual studio model said Melbourne.
Veers, I accept the 1305-E thing. It was scripted and is hard to ignore. I haven't checked Contagion in a while, so is the amended NCC 71807 reg visibale on the Yamato saucer? If it isn't I'll stick with 1305-E. Also in the TNG Tech Manual (with many of the facts therein considered canon) it states that the Enterprise was one of few Federation ships that were honoured with a lettering sequence, ie Enterprise-A, B, C and so on. This suggests the possibility that there may be other ships in the fleet that have this feature.
its on the part of the saucer thats burning i believe..
besides why are we trying so hard to look for the registry..
Riker said it in 'Where silence Has Lease'
What reason is there why the U.S.S. Yamato could not simply have had it's registry changed from NCC-1305-E, to NCC-71807?
I think canonically (what with the U.S.S Nash NCC-2010-B and U.S.S. Dauntless NX-01-A) we have seen that the letter suffix cannot always be literally interpreted to mean that a ship is one of a series with that number.
So I don't see any reason why they can't BOTH be right.
There really isn't much reason to assume that a ship's registry couldn't be changed. Why it would be changed, though, would be a matter of debate. I think someone here once hypothesized that each Starfleet vessel gets its own unique registry number, but the decision to use a suffix in tribute to a previous ship of the same name is at the discretion of the commanding officer or Starfleet Command.
Sorry, I don't have much else to add to this debate.
And as I was trying to demonstrate, the fact that the Yamato had a reg of 1305-E doesn't necessarily mean that there were five others before it.
-MMoM
quote:
You don't think that if it was an unusual or 'wrong' registry number that they would have noticed?
Well, it's happened before. Picard & Co. didn't blink at the Yamato's erroneous registry.
Can you tell me the registry of the first aircraft carrier? Could the average Navy captain or lieutenent?
Not unless he was a history buff.
"I think canonically (what with the U.S.S Nash NCC-2010-B and U.S.S. Dauntless NX-01-A) we have seen that the letter suffix cannot always be literally interpreted to mean that a ship is one of a series with that number."
That's not an argument, anymore than saying "I think canonically (What with the USS Defiant NCC-74205) we have seen that the numbers cannot literally mean that there are monkeys on the ship."
And I still prefer my "Riker is an idiot, Picard didn't care, and everyone else was too polite to correct him" theory. Unless Riker is the smartest person in the universe.
quote:
"Riker is an idiot
Well, except for Liam's beliefs, Riker is a pretty smart guy -- I mean, how many people applied for the XO post on the Enterprise? And only Riker got it. He's always been at least tactically intelligent -- I think "Peak Performance" mentioned how he used a planet's atmosphere to cloak his ship during a hostile engagement?
And don't start on the Dauntless. One, it wasn't real, and two, we've had several explanations for the registry already, such as:
The registry system only applies to Federation Starfleet vessels.
The crew were idiots.
Something happens to the Enterprise NX-01.
BTW, OnToMars I do know offhand that the first aircraft carrier was the U.S.S. Langley, CV-1.
Psy: Don't be a frigging stand-up comedian. 
-MMoM
Hey, Shik, did you ever post that big galaxy map you said you had?
Actually, I'd forgotten Jeff had this unrequieted love for Riker (hey, if he'd do it with an androgonous race, you've got half a chance Jeff).
But let's look at the men on the Enterprise.
Picard
Geordi
Worf
Riker
Data
Wesley
Now, which of those people are obviously more intelligent than Will?
Picard
Geordi
Data
Wesley
Which of those people have managed a promotion in the past 11 years?
Geordi
Worf
Wesley
So, to summerise, Riker is more intelligent than Troi. Whoop. And dee doo as well.
a) Offered a choice between two promotions prior to TNG: one to command of his own ship, the Drake, the other to XO of Enterprise. He picked XO on the Enterprise.
b) Offered a promotion to Captain of the Aries during TNG's 2nd season. Turned it down to remain on Enterprise.
c) Promoted to Captain in BOBW, and offered command of Melbourne. Turned it down (good decision), and resumed role as XO of Enterprise.
I am surprised that the 1305-E registry of "Yamato," wherein it would signify that she is the sixth ship to bear the name, is not more popular, given some fans view of Starfleet. Since some seem to think that Starfleet is little more than a twentieth century navy operating in space, one might believe certain fans would already be working on the six-part crossover book series about ships named after a large and powerful twentieth century battleship:
Part 1--The first "Yamato" (what Starfleet built once "Enterprise" proved so whimpy)
Part 2--The Dreadnaught "Yamato" (sister to the "Entente)
Part 3--The Excelsior Class "Yamato" (commanded by that Indian captain in "Star Trek IV," who lost the "Yorktown")
Part 4--The Ambassador Class "Yamato" ("persuaded" the Klingons to become allies)
Part 5--The Prometheus Class "Yamato" (spied on the Romulans during their quiet period, and confirmed the 5xxxx registry number since it came before . . . )
Part 6--The Galaxy Class "Yamato" (we all know Captain Donald Varley would come alive on paper)
Personally, when the producers screw up, but there was an effort to make it right originally (Mike Okuda tried to correct the Yamato's registry number the first time), I am willing to give them a second chance. Thus, I accept the 7xxxx number.
He allowed "Enterprise" to be taken over by two Birds of Prey commanded by a few Ferengi.
"Enterprise (D)" was destroyed under his command by one old Bird of Prey.
He resorted to a hokey gimmick ("The Riker Maneuver") instead of letting the Son'a ships have it (or is the most advanced, powerful starship in the fleet no match for the Son'a?).
Ladies man, yes. Tactician? No.
Nevertheless, he'd have to be really dumb to read "NCC-1305-E" off of a hull that said "NCC-71807".
BTW, of course we've seen an NCC-2010 before: the Jenolan. Otherwise, why would there be any problem w/ the Nash?