1. Various ships are mentioneed in TOS. 2. A TOS-era ship is mentioned in a TNG ep as being Daedalus-class. 3. A hypothetical and non-canon model is designed for a book that came out 20 years ago and whose reliability - it damn near pre-dates DS9, let alone eveything else since - is now open to question. 4. The idea grows that the verious TOS ships were likely to be of this class. 5. A version of this model is then used as a desk decoration in Sisko's office.
And that's it, really. Now, I don't like the design much. It may jave been based on original drafts by Matt Jefferies, but there's a reason why it was never used - it looks so awfully clunky.
According to the Memory Alpha article on this ship, Doug Drexler did push for it to be a starting point for what became the NX design. Maybe that might have worked out and he'd have made something special from it. But I suspect if he had, then history would remember us all calling it the Pasteurprise rather then the Akiraprise!
And the final nail in the coffin was any appearance of the class in Star Trek: Enterprise. Granted there areb plenty of reasons for that - the determination to stand alone as much as possible from the canon, at least in the 1st 3 seasons; Time; Money; Perhaps they were reluctant to show such an old-fashioned design and didn't want to "reboot" the design?
They would be the two Valiants, the Carolina, the Archon, and the Horizon. First Valiant was in the 2060's, the second in 2217, the Carolina was an active starship but for some weird reason was listed as a Daedalus class in the Encyclopedia. That leaves the Archon and Horizon as two pre-TOS ships from a century before TOS (and yet the implication in ENT seemed to be that the Mayweather family's freighter ECS Horizon was actually the ship that went to Iotia based on the Chicago Mobs book in Travis's cabin).
quote:2. A TOS-era ship is mentioned in a TNG ep as being Daedalus-class.
That would be the Essex NCC-173.
quote:3. A hypothetical and non-canon model is designed for a book that came out 20 years ago and whose reliability - it damn near pre-dates DS9, let alone eveything else since - is now open to question.
That would be the U.S.S. Horizon NCC-176.
quote:4. The idea grows that the verious TOS ships were likely to be of this class.
That was the idea, yes.
quote:5. A version of this model is then used as a desk decoration in Sisko's office.
AFAIK, it's the exact same model made for the Chronology; even the name is the same.
quote:And that's it, really. Now, I don't like the design much. It may have been based on original drafts by Matt Jefferies, but there's a reason why it was never used - it looks so awfully clunky.
I like the design for what it really was: A possible design for the TOS Enterprise, drawn by Matt Jeffries. It would work fine as a contemporary to the NCC-1701, but as a ship from a century earlier (taking into account Spock's lines in "Balance of Terror" about space vessels from that era being "primitive")...not so much. The design doesn't look any more "primitive" than the Enterprise. (but see below)
quote:According to the Memory Alpha article on this ship, Doug Drexler did push for it to be a starting point for what became the NX design. Maybe that might have worked out and he'd have made something special from it. But I suspect if he had, then history would remember us all calling it the Pasteurprise rather then the Akiraprise!
Really, the ship should have looked nothing like that at all. It should have looked more like something Earthforce had on Babylon 5.(but see below)
quote:And the final nail in the coffin was any appearance of the class in Star Trek: Enterprise. Granted there are plenty of reasons for that - the determination to stand alone as much as possible from the canon, at least in the 1st 3 seasons; Time; Money; Perhaps they were reluctant to show such an old-fashioned design and didn't want to "reboot" the design?
Well, technically since ENT takes place before the formation of the Federation, that the Daedalus class would have come afterwards (based on the fact that the Essex in TNG was a Daedalus class Federation Starfleet vessel.)
But the "Akiraprise" clusterfuck (and its reinforcement in the new Abrams films) gives a distinct lineage style for 22nd century Starfleet ships which that desktop model really doesn't fit in to. Honestly, if someone took the basic mapping of the NX-01 and created a ship design that didn't look like an Akira ripoff, I'd be fine with it being the "new" Daedalus class. But not to make it just a ball and tin can with nacelles either. That was a boring '60's design.
-------------------- "A film made in 2008 isn't going to look like a TV series from 1966 if it wants to make any money. As long as the characters act the same way, and the spirit of the story remains the same then it's "real" Star Trek. Everything else is window dressing." -StCoop
Registered: Jun 2000
| IP: Logged
posted
The Essex from "Power Play" (TNG) was not a TOS-era ship. It disappeared "over two centuries" prior to the episode, commonly accepted to take place in 2368. That would be at least a century earlier than TOS. Moreover, it was specified that there had been no Daedalus-class vessels in service for 172 years, putting the last one's decommissioning circa 2196, and making any notion of the Carolina from "Friday's Child" (TOS) being one highly dubious.
The Archon from "Return Of The Archons" (TOS) and the Horizon from "A Piece Of The Action" (TOS) were both dated to "a hundred years" before their respective episodes, so circa middle to late 2160s. As this was roughly contemporary to the Essex, the Okudas speculated that they were of the same class, and Greg Jein built a model to represent all three in the Chronology and Encyclopedia, which was thereafter used as set dressing on DS9.
[ June 30, 2014, 10:51 AM: Message edited by: The Mighty Monkey of Mim ]
-------------------- The flaws we find most objectionable in others are often those we recognize in ourselves.
Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
It's clear that the NX-01 practically dictates that the Daedalus would look different from the Chronology model. But then so did the 1701-C on the TNG observation lounge wall sculpture. Canon marches on.
ENT left a couple hints that Mayweather's Horizon was going to be the one that visited Sigma Iota, but that makes no sense. How would a warp 2 freighter make it 100 ly beyond Federation borders where no starship would visit for another hundred years?
-------------------- “Those people who think they know everything are a great annoyance to those of us who do.” — Isaac Asimov Star Trek Minutiae | Memory Alpha
Registered: Nov 2000
| IP: Logged
posted
Besides, the book used as set dressing in "Horizon" (ENT) was not the same one from "A Piece Of The Action" (TOS), which was said to be the original book left by the Horizon. Although of similar subject matter, the two were differently titled and of different dimensions. Were there any other "hints" beyond this? I certainly don't remember it being called to any attention in the episode.
-------------------- The flaws we find most objectionable in others are often those we recognize in ourselves.
Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
quote:Originally posted by MinutiaeMan: It's clear that the NX-01 practically dictates that the Daedalus would look different from the Chronology model. But then so did the 1701-C on the TNG observation lounge wall sculpture. Canon marches on.
An excellent point. Star Trek is full of retcons, which is normal for a show that has lasted as long as this one has.
quote:ENT left a couple hints that Mayweather's Horizon was going to be the one that visited Sigma Iota, but that makes no sense. How would a warp 2 freighter make it 100 ly beyond Federation borders where no starship would visit for another hundred years?
My theory is that the Horizon was mustered into the new Federation and was upgraded with newer engines. I'll have to watch the episode again, but I could have sworn that Travis's brother even mentioned a future engine upgrade.
quote:Originally posted by The Mighty Monkey of Mim: Besides, the book used as set dressing in "Horizon" (ENT) was not the same one from "A Piece Of The Action" (TOS), which was said to be the original book left by the Horizon. Although of similar subject matter, the two were differently titled and of different dimensions. Were there any other "hints" beyond this? I certainly don't remember it being called to any attention in the episode.
No other hints that I can recall, but think about it like this: Do you have a certain subject matter that interests you, say, like Abraham Lincoln? Do you only have one book about Abe? Or do you have several books about him? For all we know there were all kinds of books about Chicago mobs on that ship, and one of them just happened to be the book that was left on the planet.
-------------------- "A film made in 2008 isn't going to look like a TV series from 1966 if it wants to make any money. As long as the characters act the same way, and the spirit of the story remains the same then it's "real" Star Trek. Everything else is window dressing." -StCoop
Registered: Jun 2000
| IP: Logged
quote:Originally posted by Dukhat: No other hints that I can recall, but think about it like this: Do you have a certain subject matter that interests you, say, like Abraham Lincoln? Do you only have one book about Abe? Or do you have several books about him? For all we know there were all kinds of books about Chicago mobs on that ship, and one of them just happened to be the book that was left on the planet.
Completely valid, but I just wanted to make it clear that while the book was undoubtedly an in-joke referring to "A Piece Of The Action," there's certainly no more reason to think the E.C.S. Horizon was the ship referred to in that episode than there is to think the model in Sisko's office was. There is no direct onscreen contradiction nor confirmation in either case, is all I'm saying.
(Although, for what it's worth, the Horizon in "Piece" was described as being "from the same outfit" as the Enterprise, which may not be totally un-fudge-able given that only the Federation was explicitly mentioned in context, but might logically be taken to indicate that she was a Starfleet vessel.)
-------------------- The flaws we find most objectionable in others are often those we recognize in ourselves.
Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
posted
Also, I would imagine that any of the books that we saw in the actual episode were unlikely to be "the" original book, but rather reprints. Oxmyx's copy seemed excessively ornate for something that the Horizon would be likely to leave behind.
I've seen a few re-imaginings of Jein's Daedalus design, and I think it still has promise. In a universe where the NX-01 exists, I imagine it "actually" looks more like the NX-01 in terms of hull plating, coloring, and so on. Bernd's article has a pretty good fan design, IMO.
-------------------- “Those people who think they know everything are a great annoyance to those of us who do.” — Isaac Asimov Star Trek Minutiae | Memory Alpha
Registered: Nov 2000
| IP: Logged
quote:Originally posted by MinutiaeMan: Also, I would imagine that any of the books that we saw in the actual episode were unlikely to be "the" original book, but rather reprints. Oxmyx's copy seemed excessively ornate for something that the Horizon would be likely to leave behind.
I think in the episode it was indeed indicated to be the original article. The exchange went like this as our heroes examined the book...
SPOCK: Gangsters. KIRK: Chicago. Mobs. Published in 1992. Where'd you get this? OXMYX: Hey, wait a minute! That's the Book! KIRK: I know it's a book... OXMYX: [emphatically] The Book! They left it, the other ship, the Horizon. SPOCK: This is the contamination, Captain. Astonishing. An entire culture based on this. MCCOY: You said they were imitative, and the book— OXMYX: I don't want any more cracks about the Book! KIRK: Did they leave any other books? OXMYX: Yeah, sure. Some textbooks on how to make radio sets and stuff like that, but...
It is of course not inarguable that the emphatic use of the definite article could merely signify the cultural importance of this particular text above the others, but to me the implication seemed clear that this was in fact the actual book left behind rather than an Iotian copy. Ornate as it was, the prop was also weathered as if to imply age.
Regarding the Jein model, it was naturally designed to look more primitive than the TOS Enterprise in terms of its details. But in terms of discussing the overall "lineage" of designs, let's also remember that we encountered a Starfleet ship from TNG's future—the Pasteur from "All Good Things..."—that utilized a quite similar layout. Given that, and perhaps some rethinking of the details as proposed above, I don't see why the Daedalus shouldn't fit as a post-NX design. If designs based around saucers and those based around spheres can coexist in the 24th and 23rd* centuries, why not in the 22nd?
*I'm thinking of the Medusan ship added for the "remastered" version of "Is There No Truth In Beauty?" (TOS).
[ July 01, 2014, 02:15 AM: Message edited by: The Mighty Monkey of Mim ]
-------------------- The flaws we find most objectionable in others are often those we recognize in ourselves.
Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
quote:Originally posted by The Mighty Monkey of Mim: (Although, for what it's worth, the Horizon in "Piece" was described as being "from the same outfit" as the Enterprise, which may not be totally un-fudge-able given that only the Federation was explicitly mentioned in context, but might logically be taken to indicate that she was a Starfleet vessel.)
There's also an interesting line in "APOTA" where Kirk tells Oxmyx that the Enterprise won't "land," since his landing party will come by the transporter. It's possible that this infers that the Horizon actually landed on the planet and that there was no transporter (or at least normal use of it) 100 years before. So if the Horizon did indeed have landing capability, then that could possibly invalidate the sphere and tin-can design which looks to be only a spaceborne vessel like the Enterprise.
quote:It is of course not inarguable that the emphatic use of the definite article could merely signify the cultural importance of this particular text above the others, but to me the implication seemed clear that this was in fact the actual book left behind rather than an Iotian copy. Ornate as it was, the prop was also weathered as if to imply age.
Remember, this book was essentially the Iotian's Bible. How many people have old, ornate-looking Bibles in their household? Lots. I have a set of encyclopedias in my house from 1954 that look older than that Chicago mobs book. So we can't automatically assume just because it looks old that it was the same book from the Horizon (although I agree that it was most likely the intention based on the dialogue). Just to play devil's advocate, I'd actually argue that the original book (printed in the 1990's) should have looked like a real book printed in the 1990's, and Oxmyx's copy was the 1950's gangster-style version reprinted on Iotia.
quote:But in terms of discussing the overall "lineage" of designs, let's also remember that we encountered a Starfleet ship from TNG's future—the Pasteur from "All Good Things..."—that utilized a quite similar layout.
Actually, based on the Pasteur's registry number, it was probably built pre-TNG, but just stayed in operation until the end of the century. But that's not important to the topic at hand
quote:Given that, and perhaps some rethinking of the details as proposed above, I don't see why the Daedalus shouldn't fit as a post-NX design. If designs based around saucers and those based around spheres can coexist in the 24th and 23rd* centuries, why not in the 22nd?
Sure. The Oberth and the Constitution classes look completely different even though they are contemporaries. But I don't think the issue is really that the ship design is a sphere and tin-can with two nacelles. It's more of the fact that such things like the hull plating, hatches, weapons, deflectors, warp grilles, bridge modules, and other aesthetic things are very different between the NX and the Daedalus.
-------------------- "A film made in 2008 isn't going to look like a TV series from 1966 if it wants to make any money. As long as the characters act the same way, and the spirit of the story remains the same then it's "real" Star Trek. Everything else is window dressing." -StCoop
Registered: Jun 2000
| IP: Logged
"Sure. The Oberth and the Constitution classes look completely different even though they are contemporaries. But I don't think the issue is really that the ship design is a sphere and tin-can with two nacelles. It's more of the fact that such things like the hull plating, hatches, weapons, deflectors, warp grilles, bridge modules, and other aesthetic things are very different between the NX and the Daedalus."
It's also possible that the desktop model from DS9 was based on a refit version of the class. Maybe, by the time it was retired, Starfleet had started moving from the ENT-style aesthetics to the TOS-style ones.
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
posted
In 2057 when mankind makes a true orbital spaceplane again after a bunch of simple Apollo-esque tin cans, perhaps the extremely advanced and complicated NX design will be seen in a new light (if anyone cares).
That is to say, I view the Daedalus as a simple, rugged design from a time when they needed plenty of ships fast, be it war or the early exploration era. The NX was an F-22 compared to the Daedalus A-10.
-------------------- . . . ceterum censeo Carthaginem esse delendam.
quote:Originally posted by Guardian 2000: That is to say, I view the Daedalus as a simple, rugged design from a time when they needed plenty of ships fast, be it war or the early exploration era. The NX was an F-22 compared to the Daedalus A-10.
That's how the Trek novel writers' view it too; that they were faster and cheaper to produce for the Romulan War instead of the NX class. My issue is just that I've never seen the "Daedalus" design as any sort of warship.
-------------------- "A film made in 2008 isn't going to look like a TV series from 1966 if it wants to make any money. As long as the characters act the same way, and the spirit of the story remains the same then it's "real" Star Trek. Everything else is window dressing." -StCoop
Registered: Jun 2000
| IP: Logged
Shik
Starship database: completed; History of Starfleet: done; website: probably never
Member # 343
posted
I've written Daedalus as having been the first fully Federation-designed class, with the idea that it founded the pure Starfleet design aesthetic which combined elements from all the member races—that's why it looked so "primitive" in comparison. It was also never intended to be as largely produced as it was, being in essence a technology testbed; I had 72 of them built between 2162 & 2170, with the majority (about 50) coming between 2162 & 2166, as it was the only ship being built at the time.
Registered: Jun 2000
| IP: Logged
posted
Aye, the spindly bits hardly scream "warship", though from an armoring perspective you can't do much better than a sphere volumetrically-speaking, assuming you've given up on presenting a minimal aspect. I suppose one could even say the Daedalus does better than the NX actually inasmuch as armor sloping… from above or below the NX is a heaping failbag in that regard. This is notable especially if the Romulan ships were so much more maneuverable and/or numerous that you'd never get your saucer pointed properly, so you just had to bank on shots glancing off the sphere or cylinders. The remote control Romulan ship seems to fit that thinking.
And, unlike NX nacelles, the Daedalus has no exposed glowy bits.
So, one could go either way.
-------------------- . . . ceterum censeo Carthaginem esse delendam.