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

» Flare Sci-Fi Forums » Star Trek » Starships & Technology » Starship classification » Post A Reply

Post A Reply Login Name: Password: Message: HTML is enabled. UBB Code™ is enabled. [QUOTE]Originally posted by Timo: [QB] Has there ever in Trek history been an actual contradiction in the official and semi-official designation of some starship? What I mean is, has any ship ever been called "cruiser" in dialogue and "explorer" in an Okuda or Sternbach text, or "scout" in one episode and "surveyor" in another? While there are oddities, like a tiny Constellation and a huge Ambassador both being explicitly called "cruisers" in episodes, there don't seem to be actual contradictions. Thus, I see little need for multiple parallel designation systems. If we can get a single designation system, even a crooked one with frigates larger than cruisers and with tiny and gigantic explorers, I think it will still be inherently superior to multiple parallel systems (even if those systems are well thought out like Frank's). The only contradictions I can think of at the moment would be the Enterprise-nil being both "heavy cruiser" (computer screens) and "battlecruiser" "(Klingon dialogue) in ST3, and the Grissom being interpretable as "scout class" but Oberths being called "science" and "supply" vessels in TNG. But those aren't very severe problems - Klingons can have a differing opinion, and the Grissom thing is vague. Timo Saloniemi [/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