For those who believe that starship classes are not chronological (class ship followed by sister ships, i.e. Constitution), this is another proof.
For those who believe that starship classes are chronological (reverse of above, i.e. Excelsior), this is evidence that the Galaxy Class has had two Galaxies (NX-xxxxx, NCC-70637) and that the TNGTM is incorrect about the prototype.
I am adding two ships to my list-the unknown USS Galaxy and this ship, NCC-70564. I guess this gives away my position. So far, from my perspective, there are 8 known ships of the Galaxy Class. They are: (1) USS Challenger NCC-71099; (2) USS Enterprise NCC-1701-D; (3) USS Galaxy; (4) USS Galaxy NCC-70637; (5) USS Trinculo NCC-71867; (6) USS Venture NCC-71854; (7) USS Yamato NCC-71807; and (8) USS xxxxx xxxx NCC-70564.
------------------
takeoffs are optional; landings are mandatory
[This message has been edited by targetemployee (edited July 15, 2000).]
Shik
Starship database: completed; History of Starfleet: done; website: probably never
Member # 343
posted
Sorry to burst your bubble, but it "proves" nothing. Until conclusive evidence is shown stating that the ships & images depicted in the calendar are considered as part of the pantheon, nothing ANYONE says is anything more than pure speculation. Of course, human nature is human nature & everyone will do as they damned well please ANyway.
And where do you get the "two USS Galaxys" theory??
------------------ "Do you know how much YOU'RE worth??.....2.5 million Woolongs. THAT'S your bounty. I SAID you were small fry..." --Spike Spiegel
posted
OK, either its the scan, or how crap does the CGI nacelles look on that thing... look at the Bussard Collectors... the grills... glow people GLOW!
------------------ "Neil says hi by the way" - Tear In Your Hand, Tori Amos
posted
If the publication is approved by Paramount, then the material contained within that is official unless stated otherwise. Paramount has stated that the novels are not official; rather, they are the work of hired writers who use the existing universe as known to create stories. I consider the calenders to be official and, therefore, the material in the calenders to be relevant to the discussions of this forum. Others feel differently. Canonical is defined. Official is defined as being that which is not official. From these two rules, I define for myself what is official, what is pertinent to my understanding of the franchise, and what are my core beliefs about the nature of starships. Notice the word "my" or "myself".
Shik I do not state a theory. I state an observation and create a hypothesis which has not been tested nor confirmed. (Theory is an hypothesis that has been tested by rigorous examination with the results being evaluated by peers. If confirmed, the hypothesis is a theory. If not, the hypothesis is a hypothesis or is rejected. Since the nature of Star Trek is fluidic and the relevant facts as stated in the canonical evidence is scarce, there can never be a true testing of anyone's hypothesis.) The basis for the two Galaxies is stated in the earlier response.
Shik
Starship database: completed; History of Starfleet: done; website: probably never
Member # 343
posted
Bah. Now you're just arguing semantics.
But I'll give you this: I'm proud that you didn't lump in a Galaxy-class USS Magellan. If I have to hear about the assumed retirement of the Constellation-class one more time....
------------------ "Do you know how much YOU'RE worth??.....2.5 million Woolongs. THAT'S your bounty. I SAID you were small fry..." --Spike Spiegel
posted
There's also the Galaxy Class USS Oddyssey from the DS9 episode "The Jem Haddar". I'm hopping that Foundation Imaging was trying to make the USS Galaxy but had the wrong registry number. But then again, I doubt that they asked Okuda, Stearnbach, or at least Berman on the USS Galaxy's registry.
------------------ The world is not enough, but it is such a perfect place to start my love And if you're strong enough, together we can take the world apart my love
posted
I thought the USS Galaxy was briefly seen in the DS9 episode "tears of the prophets"? The one which was badly hurt at the ventral by one of the cardassian weapons platforms! For the name of unknown Galaxy-Class...well, i don't know, is there any ship name consistend of two words "unclassed" that we know of? A shame that the Name of this Galaxy-Class is not readable! BTW we shouldn't take the calenders to seriously: the Nebula-class in the "Ship of the Line"-Calender is total nightmare for our classification efforts: The Saucer states NCC 60205...USS Honshu, while the sensor pod and the warp-pylons state NCC 70915 USS Bogue! Oh my, I think someone at Foundation Image has gone completly mad...or is watching and trying to confuse us. Does anyone of you have contact to Gary Hutzel? He created that image!
------------------ This is how i prefer the borg... in pieces!!! -- Janeway in Dark Frontier
posted
Regarding the Magellan, in SoA, Sisko says, "The Magellan and the Venture are supposed to be protecting our starboard flank! They're in too tight!" Then we see two Galaxies very close together, on the port side of the fleet. It seems to me that the fleet actions here were deliberately meant to correspond to the dialog.
------------------ Frank's Home Page "Frank is absolutely right." - Laz Rojas
[This message has been edited by The Shadow (edited July 16, 2000).]
posted
If we are driven to the desperate situation that we have to accept the calendars as canon, then this oddball ship could be yet another "structural test article" finished into a starship during the war years. A sister to USS Galaxy that never actually had engines installed, or a saucer built, until either the Borg strikes or the threat of the Dominion prompted Starfleet to build more ships out of all available components.
I'd love to have USS Magellan be yet another Galaxy in the DS9 episodes - and why not in "Starship Mine" as well? Her being Constellation class is just an Okuda invention that could be changed for a later Encyclopedia if needed. The Cortez as well, I guess, to go with the theme.
Printer-friendly view of this topic
