Flare Sci-Fi Forums: SWDAO - Dauntless: first Starfleet ship?

This is topic SWDAO - Dauntless: first Starfleet ship? in forum Starships & Technology at Flare Sci-Fi Forums.

To visit this topic, use this URL:
https://flare.solareclipse.net/ultimatebb.php/topic/6/277.html

Posted by Bernd (Member # 6) on :

The fake Federation ship from VOY: "Hope and Fear" had the registry NX-01-A, the number "01" being completely out of range and the letter "A" pointing to an Enterprise-like registry scheme. Tuvok, however, did not seem to be very astonished, let alone suspicious reading the illogical registry. A possible explanation could be that the USS Dauntless NCC- or NX-01 was the first Starfleet ship around 2161, and the new prototype was named and numbered in honor of this commonly known historical vessel. The old Dauntless must not have been a class ship in this case, so only NCC-01 is possible, for class names can't be reused.

------------------
"No, thanks. I've had enough. One more cup and I'll jump to warp." (Janeway, asked if she would like some coffee in "Once upon a Time")
www.uni-siegen.de/~ihe/bs/startrek/

Posted by Identity Crisis (Member # 67) on :

Wasn't the fake Dauntless actually NCC-01A rather than NCC-01-A? If it was then that's not even the same scheme as the Enterprises.

And why would Starfleet label it's first ship NCC-01 instead of NCC-1 (FWIW the WWII USN aircraft carrier USS Enterprise was CV-6) or NCC-001 or NCC-0001? Do you think that Starfleet was expecting to have more than ten ships but fewer than a hundred?

The fake Dauntless registry can be ignored.

------------------
-->Identity Crisis<--

Posted by Trinculo on :

The builder of the pseudo USS Dauntless NX-01-A had a tremendous range of Federation information. I believe this to be possible-the first Federation ship is the USS Dauntless NCC-1. She is not of the Daedalus Class.

Posted by bear (Member # 124) on :

I like my explanation better, the ship yard first produce the U.S.S. Daedalus, but something happen to it to just before her christening, so the first ship of the federation was the U.S.S. Dauntless, symbolizing the effort on the part of Earth to continue on after what happen to the Daedalus. The registry of the Dauntless could also be explained as being the first ship, yet not the first of Federation.

U.S.S. Daedalus NX-1 or NCC-1
U.S.S. Dauntless NX-01 or NCC-01
------------------
hello world

[This message was edited by bear on June 17, 1999.]

Posted by Bernd (Member # 6) on :

There's actually no reason why the first Starfleet ship has to be a class ship. I can't imagine that Starfleet was a fleet without ships when it was founded in 2161. Construction of new ships would have taken some years, so it is obviously Starfleet took over several ships from member planets, probably predominantly from the UESPA. The Daedalus could have been destroyed by then (Romulan War) or the new Starfleet registries did not have the same order as the previous UESPA numbers. So they probably just picked a ship SS Dauntless S-178-12 (not necessarily Daedalus class) and made it USS Dauntless NCC-01 (I would have preferred NCC-001 or NCC-0001, though).

Posted by Identity Crisis (Member # 67) on :

Or much more likely...

NCC-1 to NCC-150 were all old ships from the Earth, Vulcan, Andorian, etc., fleets that were converted to Starfleet service and the first Starfleet built ship came a few years later (and may or may not have been the USS Daedalus).

------------------
-->Identity Crisis<--

Posted by Bernd (Member # 6) on :

Probably I was the decisive few seconds faster

Posted by The359 (Member # 37) on :

I agree with the possibility of Daedalus's actually being pre-Federation, because why would the Daedalus last only 30-35 years until her retirement in 2196 or whatever that year was? It seems too short. Maybe if the Daedalus's were commissioned, say 2140 or something, then that would give them a good 50 years of service. It is quite possible that the USS Dauntless was Daedalus class, because Starfleet just lined up all the ships they had, and smacked registry numbers on them, and Dauntless either by chance or on purpose was put first. It also explains why she was NCC-01 and not NCC-1, because they had more then 10, but less then 100 ships they were suddenly commissioning, so they added the '0' in front

------------------
"The one, the only, THE 359!"

Posted by Trinculo on :

I agree that the Daedalus Class predates the Federation. I use the range 50 to 100 years for a class.

So,
the Soyuz Class could have been commissioned between 2188 and 2238.
the Daedalus Class could have been commissioned between 2096 and 2146.

As for the Antares Class, I don't believe the USS Antares is the class ship of the Antares Class. Charlies Evans said the ship is "old" in 2266. "Old" can mean a ship has been operating at least 30 or 40 years before a set date, in this case 2266. (2266 minus 30 or 40 years is 2236 or 2226). The USS Hermes, an Antares Class ship, is operating in 2368. If I use my range, the first Antares Class ship could have been operating as early as 2308 or 2268. I see the first Antares being destroyed and a later Antares being the class ship (ex. Constellation Class).

Posted by Hobbes (Member # 138) on :

Didn't we say that a registry with a letter in it couldn't have a NX prefix? Instead of NX-74205-A it would have to be NCC-74205-A.
But I could understand if the original Dauntless was a famous vessel and Starfleet wanted to make a class in her honor and use the original registry. Of course Starfleet didn't make the Dauntless-A, an alien did and it was probably a mistake on his part.

Hobbes
9906.17

TheFSD.com

------------------
Got Trek?

Posted by Hobbes (Member # 138) on :

I agree with Trin on the Antares. The USS Antares from "Charlie X" was NCC-501. The Hermes is NCC-10376, which is also an old ship. But from 501 to 10376? I don't think Starfleet would use a class for that long.

Hobbes
9906.17

------------------
Got Trek?

Posted by Aethelwer (Member # 36) on :

Of course, the Oberths go from the 600s to the 59000s.

------------------
http://frankg.dgne.com/
"Speak softly, drive a Sherman tank." - TMBG

Posted by Black Knight (Member # 134) on :

Couldn't it be that with a new propulsion system that Starfleet would want to honor it by giving it the NX-01-A Registry just to make it feel special?

------------------
"If I get lost, I'll just follow the ship infront of us."-Ensign Nog

Posted by TSN (Member # 31) on :

I think that both the '0' and the 'A' w/o a hyphen suggest that the Dauntless wasn't named for a previous ship, but was supposed to have a new registry scheme. Otherwise, I would expect it to be NX-1-A, not NX-01A.

Also, you talk about ships lasting 100 years. Even the Galaxy is only expected to last 100 years. Two centuries prior to that, there's no way they were building ships that would last that long. I think a 25- to 30-year service life is quite likely for the Daedalus.

------------------
"If you hear only one song this year, there's something terribly wrong with you."
-They Might Be Giants, "Critic Intro"

[This message was edited by TSN on June 17, 1999.]

Posted by The359 (Member # 37) on :

I don't know where you are getting NX-01A from, it was clearly marked as NX-01-A

------------------
"The one, the only, THE 359!"

Posted by Aethelwer (Member # 36) on :

Dauntless MSD

------------------
http://frankg.dgne.com/
"Speak softly, drive a Sherman tank." - TMBG

Posted by Sol System (Member # 30) on :

I emailed Okuda about this a few forums back, and his reply was that, from his point of view, the registry of the Dauntless had no corolation to any real Starfleet ship.

I tend to agree with that sentiment.

------------------
"According to myth, the earth was created in six days. Now watch out! Here comes Genesis. We'll do it for you in six minutes."
--
Dr. Leonard H. McCoy

Posted by The359 (Member # 37) on :

I know there are some pictures of the 3D model of the Dauntless which show the registry on the hull, and I think I remember the hull saying NX-01-A. In fact, the pictures are in the Star Trek: Action Book (which I believe was just updated with Insurrection stuff). It also has a copy of the MSD for you to look at.

------------------
"The one, the only, THE 359!"

Posted by The First One (Member # 35) on :

I reckon the registry used was meant to imply the whole new nature of the ship's propulsion. I doubt, if the Dauntless was a real ship, that they could then re-fit it with a normal warp drive as they did the Excelsior when the transwarp experiments failed.

So the Dauntless was a one-off, unless it worked - or that was what they were meant to think. After all, maybe Starfleet's method of assigning registries is so impenetrable, the alien couldn't figure it out and therefore had to cheat to avoid making a mistake. And you think the crew were just going to turn around and reject this opportunity because the registry didn't seem right?

Posted by Hobbes (Member # 138) on :

USS Dauntless NX-01-A Dauntless-class

This pic from Pedro's site shows that the CGI modeled is labeled NX-01-A, why the MSD says NX-01A is unknown. I guess Mike Okuda made a mistake when making it.

The original registry of the USS Defiant was NXP-2365WP/T. NX-01-A could of been some sort of temporary registry testing slipstream. But who cares? The ship was created by an alien trying to get revenge on Voyager, it isn't related to Starfleet. The only thing it even has in common is just that it was built to resemble a Federation vessel.

Hobbes
9906.18

------------------
Got Trek?

[This message was edited by Hobbes on June 18, 1999.]

Posted by Hobbes (Member # 138) on :

The First One:
"After all, maybe Starfleet's method of assigning registries is so impenetrable, the alien couldn't figure it out and therefore had to cheat to avoid making a mistake."

Hell, we can't even figure it really. All we have are best guesses. Although the chronological order theory works, it still isn't proven that's how Starfleet makes them.

Hobbes
9906.18

------------------
Got Trek?

Posted by The First One (Member # 35) on :

*sigh* OK, guys, new rule: whenever you feel like taking this stuff just a LITTLE bit less seriously - i.e. like making a joke out of it all, horror of horrors - be sure to put in a (�) sign to indicate it's a joke, so that some humourless so-and-so doesn't immediately come along and correct you.

This has been happening a lot of late. Hobbes, what do you think I was saying? Exactly what you just said.

Can everyone just UNCLENCH just a little? 8)

Posted by Cargile (Member # 45) on :

The name Dauntless has military written all over it. I doubt a budding Starfleet based on peace and exploration would call their first ship that. It's like renaming Pioneer 10, Destroyer 10. Makes little sense in that regard.

------------------
"There are always bigger tits."

Qui-Gon Jinn in Mos Espa's sleaziest adult nightclub.

Posted by TSN (Member # 31) on :

Um... Okay, so it's NX-01-A. But I still think the '0' is too funky for it to be a normal registry.

------------------
"If you hear only one song this year, there's something terribly wrong with you."
-They Might Be Giants, "Critic Intro"

Posted by The First One (Member # 35) on :

Cargile Johnson is right! I mean, Dauntless? Then again, Valiant isn't exactly fitting either as a ship of exploration. . .

Posted by Montgomery (Member # 23) on :

Ne ne ne ne ne

I don't think there's enough evidence for Dauntless as the first starship name. Although it is a nice candidate.

------------------
"I fart in your general direction. Your mother was a hamster, and your father smelt of elderberries!"

- Monty Python & The Holy Grail

Posted by Black Knight (Member # 134) on :

Michael Okuda didn't make that diagram. It was Wendy Drapanas. IIRC

------------------
"If I get lost, I'll just follow the ship infront of us."-Ensign Nog