Flare Sci-Fi Forums: Oh crap... ($$$)

This is topic Oh crap... ($$$) in forum Starships & Technology at Flare Sci-Fi Forums.

To visit this topic, use this URL:
https://flare.solareclipse.net/ultimatebb.php/topic/6/608.html

Posted by The359 (Member # 37) on :

Today I have recieved an interesting e-mail from the Okudas, infamous for the Star Trek Encyclopedia. But, before I show you the mail, let me show you why I sent the original e-mail

Some idiot roaming around the Star Trek Continuum yesterday claimed that she had talked to Okuda, and that Okuda had said that the newest Defiant's registry was actually NX-74205-A. So, just to prove this person wrong, I e-mail Okuda, and asked him which registry is correct, NCC-75633 or NX-74205-A.

So, now I recieved an e-mail back. Here is exactly what he said...

quote:
Thanks for the note.� If I recall, we discussed a variety of options for the
new Defiant's registry number at the preproduction meeting.� The option that
was chosen was for the new Defiant to have the same number as the original
ship.� This was done because our visual effects department planned to use a
number of stock shots of the original Defiant in the battle scenes of the
last episode.� They did not want to have a new number on the new ship,
because then it would not match the stock footage, and they knew that fans
would notice the discrepency.
-Mike

Well, this has completly upset the balance. The new Defiant is actually NX-74205-A! UGH!

------------------
"The things hollow--it goes on forever--and--oh my God!--it's full of stars!" -David Bowman's last transmission back to Earth, 2001: A Space Odyssey

Posted by Elim Garak (Member # 14) on :

Yes, the Defiant is as important to the fleet as the Enterprise was for the forty years it was in service. Yes, good reason. *rolls eyes*

I'm going with NCC-75633. I don't care what Okuda says.

Posted by Trip Tucker (Member # 297) on :

Me too. You can change the name, but changing the registry number screws the whole thing up.
And if they're so worried about fans noticing discrepancies, how come they always used stock footage of battles during the Dominion War? I mean, a ship can only be blown up once.

Posted by Trip Tucker (Member # 297) on :

Wait a minute.....Mike Okuda said THE SAME NUMBER as the previous Defiant, which means NX-74205, NOT NX-74205-A. I remember the episode now, the Defiant flew in close to the screen and it still had the original registry number, even though it was a totally different ship than the original. The Enterprise letter prefix remains upheld!

Posted by Elim Garak (Member # 14) on :

I still don't like it.

Posted by Vacuum robot lady from Spaceballs (Member # 239) on :

Yeah, he said that they were keeping the original number to reuse stock shots.

The Stock Shots Do Not Say 74205-A.

Therefore, the current registry number on the current Defiant is NX-74205, as evidenced on screen.

------------------
I bet when Neanderthal kids would make a snowman, someone would
always end up saying "Don't forget the big heavy eyebrows." Then they would all get embarrassed because they remembered they had the big hunky eyebrows too, and then they would get mad and eat the snowman.

-Jack Handey

Posted by The359 (Member # 37) on :

I think Okuda meant it was supposed to be NX-74205-A, since most people who saw the stock footage (and weren't thinking when they did) assumed the registry was NX-74205-A, since they rarely freeze-frame episodes in order to see registries

Either way, I still want to stay with NCC-75633. Anyone care to e-mail Sternbach or something and see what they say about this?

------------------
"The things hollow--it goes on forever--and--oh my God!--it's full of stars!" -David Bowman's last transmission back to Earth, 2001: A Space Odyssey

[This message has been edited by The359 (edited February 01, 2000).]

Posted by Vacuum robot lady from Spaceballs (Member # 239) on :

I don't think Sternbach had anything to do with it.

I think Stipes is who'd you wanna call on. Or Okuda again. He does change his mind quite often.

-Jack Handey

Posted by Elim Garak (Member # 14) on :

Sternbach does Voyager...

Posted by TSN (Member # 31) on :

What the...? They didn't want to change the registry because we would notice the discrepancy? Why eliminate one discrepancy, when it's going to cause another?! His logic in this situation was rather flawed, eh?

Anyway, here's the best explanation I can come up with... When the hull was painted, someone had already told the painters that the ship was going to be renamed Defiant. They told them to go ahead and put the old registry back on, too, just to make the DS9 crew feel good (I mean, that was the only reason for changing the name, too...). They probably figured the thing was likely to get blown up during the invasion of Cardassia, anyway. Since it didn't, I would guess they would have put the real registry back on after things calmed down.

------------------
Col. Maybourne: "Teal'c... It's good to see you well."
Teal'c: "In my culture, I would be well within my rights to dismember you."
-Stargate SG-1: "Touchstone"

Posted by Aethelwer (Member # 36) on :

I personally think they put on the old registry to annoy the Dominion. "Hey, didn't we destroy that ship?"

------------------
Frank's Home Page
John Linnell: "This song is called...it's called..."
Audience: "Louisiana! Montana!"
John Linnell: Don't tell me what it's called..."

Posted by Brown_supahero (Member # 83) on :

Screw NX-74205-A, doesn't it have to be an NCC pefix,
cause it's not a prototype.

Anyways it is gonna be Sao Paulo in my books

Posted by Aban Rune (Member # 226) on :

The DS9 Tech Man explains why the first ship kept its NX registry (the Trek reason and the real reason). As for the new Defiant, it should keep the name, but according to every Naval tradition I've ever heard, the registry should remain that of the Sao Paulo.

------------------
"A gathering of Angels appeared above my head. They sang to me this song of hope, and this is what they said..." -Styx

Aban's Illustration www.thespeakeasy.com/alanfore

Posted by Montgomery (Member # 23) on :

*Zachary Smith speak*
BAH!

Okuda is a gifted and talented artist who has made great contributions to Trek canon.

But on this he is clearly talking codswallop!

Nobody gets a letter except the big E!

(I've already concluded Riker was a gimp for giving the yamato one! )

------------------
"You don't need eyes to see; you need VISION"
- Faithless / Reverence

Posted by Bernd (Member # 6) on :

It sounds very much as if Okuda suggests to keep the very same number. Actually, if it were "...-A" it would be visible and be still another inconsistency in the inconsistency. Anyway, giving the ship a used number is the worst possible choice for continuity.

------------------
"A few more calculations"

Posted by First of Two (Member # 16) on :

I agree. There is nothing in that letter which leads me to conclude that the new Defiant's registry includes an 'A.'

The 'same' registry means that neither the numbers would change NOR would any suffix be added.

I don't know about the NX-NCC, as I don't really remember if they ever changed it on the original.

------------------
Calvin: "No efficiency, no accountability... I tell you, Hobbes, it's a lousy way to run a Universe." -- Bill Watterson

Posted by TSN (Member # 31) on :

I think we can safely assume that "NX-74205" is merely what was painted on the hull, and has no bearing on the ship's "actual" registry. (Of course, in my personal registry theory, the ship could be called "NCC-74205-A" if Sisko so desired. But, since that isn't what was painted on the hull, "NX-74205" probably means absolutely nothing.)

As for only the E's getting suffixed... Does anyone else realize how utterly nonsensical that would be? I mean, what happens when another ship name gets two or three really good captains? "Sorry, we'd love to honor your ship's name, but only the Enterprise gets suffixed. You can have a coffee mug, though..." Or what happens if they put a total buffoon in command of an Enterprise (*cough*Harriman*cough*), and it doesn't noticeably deserve the suffix? Can they not take it away, because it's an E? It's just totally illogical.

------------------
Col. Maybourne: "Teal'c... It's good to see you well."
Teal'c: "In my culture, I would be well within my rights to dismember you."
-Stargate SG-1: "Touchstone"

Posted by Timo (Member # 245) on :

Umm.. How is the recycling of registry numbers going to "honor" anybody? It's like naming one's child 3-A in honor of that great early US President, President 3! Or 22-F, in honor of that great basketball player 22 from Chicago Bulls.

Old ships get honored when their names are given to new ships. Old ships get insulted when their registries are given to new ships. It's a lucky thing that it's mainly (or only) the Enterprises who have to suffer from this humiliation.

Timo Saloniemi

Posted by Aethelwer (Member # 36) on :

I'd agree, actually...I think people place too much significance in the registries.

------------------
Frank's Home Page
John Linnell: "This song is called...it's called..."
Audience: "Louisiana! Montana!"
John Linnell: Don't tell me what it's called..."

Posted by TSN (Member # 31) on :

Well, I never said that the reuse of registries made sense to begin with. But we know for a fact that Starfleet does it. To assume that they would do it for only one name of ship doesn't make any sense. Especially since it requires one to explain away the Yamato and Relativity.

------------------
Col. Maybourne: "Teal'c... It's good to see you well."
Teal'c: "In my culture, I would be well within my rights to dismember you."
-Stargate SG-1: "Touchstone"

Posted by Elim Garak (Member # 14) on :

I personally don't assume they do it for only the Enterprise, but it's not as if the Defiant/S�o Paulo is as deserving as the Enterprise, anyway, in my opinion...

Posted by TSN (Member # 31) on :

Why would the Enterprise deserve it, either? It's a chunk of metal that flies around in space and keeps the people inside from being torn apart by the vacuum. A ship doesn't deserve anything. It's the crew that does. Are you saying that Sisko's crew is that much worse than Kirk's or Picard's?

------------------
Lisa: "A rose by any other name would smell as sweet."
Bart: "Not if you called them 'stench blossoms'..."
-The Simpsons

Posted by Dat (Member # 302) on :

I personally thought the Yorktown that Tuvok's father served on was NCC-1717-A, for lack of any other registry.

------------------
"To start, press any key. Where's the 'any' key?
-Homer Jay Simpson

Posted by Elim Garak (Member # 14) on :

Is it the crew that deserves the award of having the registry immortalised or the crew's accomplishments? The latter, IMO. For all I care, the crew of the Grissom could've been the best crew ever, but they didn't get around to much that we saw, did they...? The Defiant, compared to the Enterprise didn't get around to as much, that we saw or heard of.

I'm not saying anyone's crew is worse than someone else's. That's a rather odd twist on my words, IMO. I'm saying that the crews (April through Kirk) of the Enterprise seem to have had a greater impact on the course of Earth/the Federation's history and knowledge than the Defiant.

Posted by TSN (Member # 31) on :

Well, if not for the DS9 crew (also the crew of the Defiant), the Feds may not have won the Dominion War. I'd call that significant...

------------------
Lisa: "A rose by any other name would smell as sweet."
Bart: "Not if you called them 'stench blossoms'..."
-The Simpsons

Posted by nx001a (Member # 291) on :

The Defiant crew performed missions that was crucial for the federation and that was their ship was honoured with an -A. The excelsior would probably get one if another ship ws made.

------------------
"We set sail on this new sea because their is new knowledge to be gained and new rights to be won" John F Kennedy

members.aol.com/mfwan/index.htm

Posted by Elim Garak (Member # 14) on :

But the Dominion War wasn't won before the new Defiant got the old registry.

They may have done significant things, but few were as significant as what the TOS crew(s) did, IMO, with the exception of Sisko preventing the Dominion invasion in "SoA" (although, all things considered, that was simply because he was hand-picked by the Prophets). How many times did Kirk save the Federation or Earth?

All I'm saying is that I consider the TOS crews' impact on the Federation more significant than the second Defiant's crew.

Posted by Sol System (Member # 30) on :

On the other hand, Sisko started the Dominion War too. Maybe they just called it even.

------------------
"20th Century, go to sleep."
--
R.E.M.

Posted by Elim Garak (Member # 14) on :

Well, he started it under orders from Starfleet.

Posted by Sol System (Member # 30) on :

True. Though I'll wager I'm thinking of an even earlier event then you.

------------------
"20th Century, go to sleep."
--
R.E.M.

Posted by TSN (Member # 31) on :

How many times did Kirk save Earth/the UFP? Two?

------------------
Lisa: "A rose by any other name would smell as sweet."
Bart: "Not if you called them 'stench blossoms'..."
-The Simpsons

Posted by Sol System (Member # 30) on :

Depends on what we mean by saving it. The Enterprise definately saved the universe in "The Alternative Factor" and "The City on the Edge of Forever". In the former, they saved not just the Federation but the entire universe. The second, of course, was partially their fault. Well, at least McCoy's. Still, it should count.

Then we have several instances of the crew averting potentially disasterous wars with the Klingons, the Romulans, the Gorn...maybe the Tholians, though I don't remember the details of that one too well. We've got the deactivation of the Doomsday Machine, though the credit for that one probably goes to Commodore Decker for sentimental reasons. A few other large events that threatened individual Federation worlds or colonies.

All of that might explain why Starfleet adopts the Enterprise's symbol as its own. The preferential suffix treatment probably comes from the events of The Motion Picture and The Voyager Home.

Not to mention that the Enterprise might have been one of the only starships of the era to complete her five year mission largely intact. The first hugely popular success of Starfleet's "to boldly go" policy, perhaps.

------------------
"20th Century, go to sleep."
--
R.E.M.

Posted by Elim Garak (Member # 14) on :

Sol: I was thinking of both "Call to Arms" (the mine field) and "The Search" (violating Dominion territory again).

I don't think the instances the Deiant NX-74205 participated in are quite as significant as those Sol mentioned.

And besides that, the Enterprise and its crew and missions are a symbol of what the Federation stands for, while the Defiant is not, IMO. The Defiant may have been necessary, but it doesn't stand for the UFP as much as the Enterprise.

[This message has been edited by Elim Garak (edited February 08, 2000).]