Post A Reply my profile | directory login | search | faq | forum home

» Flare Sci-Fi Forums » Star Trek » Starships & Technology » The Constitution Class dilemma- an Idea. » Post A Reply

Post A Reply Login Name: Password: Message: HTML is enabled. UBB Code™ is enabled. [QUOTE]Originally posted by Peregrinus: [QB] The only starting points that can be drawn from Jeffries' scheme and what we were given in TOS (and the early movies) are the following names and registries: NCC-1700 [i]Constitution[/i] NCC-1701 [i]Enterprise[/i] NCC-1703 [unknown] NCC-1709 [unknown] NCC-1715 [i]Merrimac[/i] NCC-1718 [unknown] NCC-1764 [i]Defiant[/i] [unknown] [i]Excalibur[/i] [unknown] [i]Exeter[/i] [unknown] [i]Hood[/i] [unknown] [i]Lexington[/i] [unknown] [i]Potemkin[/i] Franz Joseph laid out everything from 1700 to 1799 in his Star Fleet Technical Manual, but there are errors and inconsistencies that require some massaging of the data, and the complete elimination of his "[i]Achernar[/i]" subclass. As several of his ships from this book were explicitly used in dialogue in Star Trek: The Motion Picture, I prefer to use this as the primary non-canon source. FASA built off of Greg Jein's T-Negative list, as does Mike Okuda in the current official Paramount list, and thus their registries are all over the place and can therefore be discarded. However, they do a wonderful job of laying out the construction and refit order, and the names can be applied in chronological order to fill in the gaps in the FJ [i]Constitution[/i] list. This still leaves a gap of fourteen ships to get up to the [i]Defiant[/i]'s registry number, but presents a much richer picture of the class than any other single source I've encountered. So, presented for your approval, the work-in-progress... --Jonah [/QB][/QUOTE]

Instant Graemlins Instant UBB Code™                                   What is UBB Code™?

Options Disable Graemlins in this post.

 

© 1999-2024 Charles Capps

Powered by UBB.classic™ 6.7.3