posted
The Mighty Monkey of Mim is right, provided that the ship in the Museum is technically still in service. Maybe its engines are sometimes powered for flights through the solar system, as Masao suggested it for the Kongo on the SF Museum website.
I like the idea that the Republic is the one from TOS, and I firmly believe that the Enterprise-A is in the museum too (albeit not operational). Puls, there might be several mothballed Constitutions... (BoBW!)
The alleged Intrpid/Conny kitbash is almost definitely the Voyager prototype, and this ship has nothing in common with the Connie.
posted
The USS Exeter could be the museum ship, since it was abadoned and her entire crew killed. Therefore, Starfleet figured they didn't have enough command officers and crew to restaff the Exeter, they could just put it in the museum.
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
posted
Your point? If a ship's in a museum, it obviously is no longer in service. I mean, the Battleship USS North Carolina is a museum, but there is a Submarine USS North Carolina in service...
-------------------- "Lotta people go through life doing things badly. Racing's important to men who do it well. When you're racing, it's life. Anything that happens before or after is just waiting."
-Steve McQueen as Michael Delaney, LeMans
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
posted
I don't think that they would bring a ship back if it had been abandoned and its crew killed. This will no doubt contadict the "Ahwahnee in 'Redemtion'" fact, but I don't know if that is the one from BoBW. I think its more reasonable to think its a new ship, but the regisrty is the same, so I would like the idea of Starfleet repairing old ships from Wolf 359.
quote:Originally posted by The Mighty Monkey of Mim: Except that there's already been an Ambassador-class Exeter in TNG and DS9...
VOY Non Sequitur, DS9 You Are Cordially Invited, and DS9 In The Pale Moonlight
[ August 19, 2001: Message edited by: Spike ]
-------------------- "Never give up. And never, under any circumstances, no matter what - never face the facts." - Ruth Gordon
Registered: Mar 2000
| IP: Logged
You're digging up all the mistakes we try to quietly sweep under the carpet, Monkey...
Besides, going strictly CANON, the Endeavour was never at Wolf 359. Janeway never mentioned that Captain Amisov had even encountered the Borg.
-------------------- "Lotta people go through life doing things badly. Racing's important to men who do it well. When you're racing, it's life. Anything that happens before or after is just waiting."
quote:You're digging up all the mistakes we try to quietly sweep under the carpet, Monkey...
They're not mistakes and they don't belong under there.
You have forgotten two important facts about me, The359. One, that I do not believe that registry numbers are sequential. Two, that I trust what's in the Encyclopedia.
-------------------- The flaws we find most objectionable in others are often those we recognize in ourselves.
posted
What do registry numbers have to do with the Endeavour? Also, if you trust what's in the Encyclopedia, then the USS Raman is NCC-599....whatever that wrong registry was. The Encyclopedia merely assumed, like it has done before. Remember, we;ve known other ships to encounter the Borg at places BESIDES Wolf 359. The Tombaugh. The Excalibur. There is no reason to assume that the Endeavour was at Wolf 359.
Also, going back to the "Voyager kitbash", just because we suddenly get a ship that looks like it in the DS9TM means in NO WAY that it is marked USS Voyager NCC-73602 or anything like that. In fact, there is no reason to believe it was even shown on screen...
-------------------- "Lotta people go through life doing things badly. Racing's important to men who do it well. When you're racing, it's life. Anything that happens before or after is just waiting."
quote:Originally posted by The Mighty Monkey of Mim: Before some folks get into an uproar, I'll tell you what ASSUMPTIONS I am making so that they can save their breath telling me that I'm proceeding on false grounds.
I'm going to comment on your assumptions. Just because I can
quote:
1. Picard's line in "Relics" (TNG) means that there is one Connie in the Fleet Museum that retains it's original (TOS-style) configuration.
Agreed.
quote: 2. The Republic mentioned in "Valiant" (DS9) is the same ship as from "Court Martial" (TOS) and TUC, the Constitution-class NCC-1371.
There's no on screen evidence that the TOS Republic is a Constitution. There's no on screen evidence that the ship mentioned in DS9 is the same as the ship mentioned in TOS.
quote: 3. All the Constitution-class ships in TUC are refitted types. Specifically the Eagle, Kongo, Endeavour, Republic, and Potemkin.
We don't have any way of knowing that. The Eagle was shown on a chart but the othsrs could be pre-refit.
quote:
4. Usually (though not ALWAYS) if we see one ship that carries a name, and then we see a later ship with the same name, it means that the older vessel has been lost/ destroyed.
Isn't it enough to say that the previous ship has been removed from service?
Even if museum ships are still technically in commission in Starfleet (another assumption) there's no reason why that should prevent another ship having the same name - in 1917 the USS Constitution was renamed Old Constitution so that a new battle cuiser could be called Constitution. The battle cruiser programme was later cancelled the the original name restored.
quote: 5. The ship in the fleet museum is not one that we’ve never heard of. (This makes sense since there were established to be only 12 Connies originally, probably with the rest being introduced in two or three subsequent batches, the latter of which would all be refit-types.)
There was 'a dozen like her in the fleet' in TOS season one. That says nothing about how many were lost prior to TOS season one, nor about how many were built after TOS season one.
quote: Now that we've gotten that out of the way, here it goes.
Valiant was lost 50 years prior to TOS. So either the Constitution class is much older than commonly held (and in fact is slightly older than 'The Making of Star Trek' and fan speculation had it) or the Valiant is not a Constitution.
For some of the above there's no on screen evidence that they are Constitutions. Merely long standing speculation by fans (and production staff).
quote:
There's also these two ships from the DS9 episode "Sacrifice of Angels," which are Excelsior/Constitution-class and Intrepid/Constitution-class starship Variants, respectively: U.S.S. Curry, NCC-45617 U.S.S. Voyager, NCC-73602
Why bother mentioning these? If any ship that uses Constitution components is relevant then why not list all the Mirandas and Sydneys?
quote:
We can further eliminate the Valiant, Defiant, Constellation, Intrepid, and Farragut, as these ships were destroyed in TOS.
No evidence that the Farragut was destroyed, merely speculation. More likely that the Exeter was abandoned (how would they decomtaminate her?) or that one or more of the 'Ultimate Computer' ships were scrapped following their mauling by M-5.
-------------------- "My theories appal you, my heresies outrage you, I never answer letters and you don't like my tie." - The Doctor
OnToMars
Now on to the making of films!
Member # 621
posted
If you were in charge of Starfleet Ops, would you scrap a starship that was just damaged? No, you send her to Spacedock, mourn the crew, and go on with your life. Like Wally Schirra once said (in reference to the Apollo 1 fire): "You don't wear the black armband forever." Bottom line is its the largest, most powerful ship in existence at the time, and I wouldn't scrap it because it's crew was gone in either case of the Exeter or M5 one.
-------------------- If God didn't want us to fly, he wouldn't have given us Bernoulli's Principle.
Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
quote:Originally posted by Stingray: If you were in charge of Starfleet Ops, would you scrap a starship that was just damaged?
Depends how badly damaged the ship is. If the spaceframe has been compromised to such an extent that any attempt to go above warp 2.6 shakes her apart then it may be cheaper to scrap her and build a new one.
In the case of the Exeter the ship is completely intact. But is contaminated with a disease, the only cure for which is to spend time on the planet. How do you use that ship again? Maybe pumping all the air out and/or exposing the ship to radiation will kill the disease. Maybe it won't.
Nothing is repairable for ever.
-------------------- "My theories appal you, my heresies outrage you, I never answer letters and you don't like my tie." - The Doctor
posted
The Encyclopedia never states that the Endeavour was, in fact, the sole survivor of Wolf 359. It says, quote "The Endeavour appears to be the sole survivor of Wolf 359, although this was not explicitly established in any episode." Then it says, "It therefore seems likely that the Endeavour (and Asamov) were also at Wolf 359 in 2367." That is the equivalent of saying there is a possibility it was at Wolf 359, and it MAY be the surviving vessel. Not, "it definitely is."
posted
Wasn't there a moment in Voyager where Janeway was going over certain Captain's logs which involved Borg encounters? Picard was one, and I'm sure Amazov was the other. I think the episode was 'Scorpion'. I could be wrong with this though....
-------------------- "To the Enterprise and the Stargazer. Old girlfriends we'll never meet again." - Scotty
Printer-friendly view of this topic
