Even though I hate reading fan pages where every single ship has a B suffix, because those people really dont have any clue how the system works, but i think i makes sense there could be a few more variants that occured along the way.
quote:
I don't think Nagilum made a mistake
And I don't think that the Enterprise-D's computer system made a mistake.
That's just my opinion on the matter.
There. Who can argue w/ that? It's completely canon, doesn't ignore anything canonical, and isn't logically impossible. Quod erat demonstrandum.
Wait for it.
We've been watching subtely different universes each time and have never realized it.
::sits back and relishes the greatest insight since Hubble's expanding universe::
[ September 06, 2001: Message edited by: Stingray ]
wow i feel better now
quote:
Originally posted by TSN:
Quod erat demonstrandum.
Erm . . . say what? 
As for the registry: NCC-1305-E sounds fine, but maybe they put the 7**** registry number in to make it look like Starfleet was a bit bigger than people originally thought and that having another ship with a letter in the reg was a bit too simple, unoriginal and similar to NCC-1701-D?
Nobody has said that that only has to apply to the Enterprise, and Riker's line of dialogue proves it doesnt.
I'm not sure how to determine the superiority of a registry number.. it never struck me as sissy before.. although ive always wondered about NCC-3801 or NCC-2097.. man whats up with them?!
I agree the Nash is a retarded little piece of modelmaking. Space travelers need to learn right side up! (OK that was sarcasm, but i mean what i said about the Nash)
[ September 06, 2001: Message edited by: Veers ]
Maybe one of them had a big gun on the front. Or got destroyed in the Tzenkethi war.. or the Tarn conflicts or the Talarian war or the first Cardassian war.. or the Kzin incursions.. or was assaulted by the Chakuun.. its a big galaxy
Apparently, the saucer model for Contagion had already been built and filmed by the time Okuda or anyone found out about the "Where Silence has Least" mistake.
"but then the status quo would continue, with lots of good novels coming out and lots of bad tv shows being made contradicting what i have reconciled."
I'd love to read the novels in your parallel universe someday.
"The only ship with the letter numbering system is the Enterprise."
Canonically untrue. It's about as valid as saying "The E-D had twenty-five captain's chairs on the bridge at the same time in every episode.".
Timo Saloniemi
There's also the Relativity with a "-G".
And for the Dauntless? The Voyager crew are idiots. We've had more than enough proof of that over 7 years.
quote:
Originally posted by Veers:
We can't consider anything about the Yamato's regisrty until we get another source. We've got two registries, one that makes more sense, but we can't say anything is canon.
We do have another source. Given that Star Trek is fictional, it is helpful to consult with those who create said fiction. While it is not canon that the Yamato has a 71807 registry rather than 1305-E, we know that the ship was supposed to have that 71807 registry and it was only accident that gives us 1305-E. Therefore, we know that it is the 71807 registry which is correct, even though they are both canon. Canon is useful when it comes to most things... but this isn't a hard science, it is fiction and it has a real-world context. When contradictions creep in there's nothing wrong with finding out what the right answer is from somebody who would be there, like Mike Okuda.
Let me use another familiar, if non-tech, example. There are a total of four canon dates for the Eugenics Wars. "Space Seed" (TOS) gives the date of 1993-96 as well as an inferred date of 2067. Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan gives an inferred date of 2085. Finally, "Dr. Bashir, I Presume?" (DS9) gives an inferred date of 2173. All of these dates are equally canon... but in all of the cases, the producers meant for the wars to be in 1996. The writers of "Space Seed" were assuming that Star Trek was set around 2200, as were the writers of Wrath of Khan. Ron Moore admitted that for "Dr. Bashir" he was just quoting Khan in Wrath of Khan without accounting for the century that had passed. In other words, despite having four canon dates, we know that three are mistakes... so there is no logical reason to debate over which is correct.
However, debates are seldom logical. If one wishes to pretend, for the sake of arguement, that they live in the thirtieth century and Star Trek is an accurate historical record, then there is ample room for debate. But the only logical reason one would have for doing so would be if one wanted, for instance, the Yamato to be 1305-E and therefore had to have an excuse to ignore the intentions of the producers. Otherwise, what is the imperative to only use canon, when there are other authoritative resources available?
If the Yamoto's supposedly correct 5-digit registry had been spoken in dialogue, we could accept that more easily as the correct registry. However, since the case for the registry dispute comes down to:
a) Spoken dialogue
b) Registry on model which needs to be freeze-framed to see; the producers' intentions
It seems to me, intentions are nice, but the spoken dialogue outweights that. If there was another instance of the spoken dialogue contradicting Riker's spoken dialogue, we could use the producer's intent to give the battle to the new spoken dialogue.
In any event, I believe that Riker's dialogue should out-weigh the producers' intent. I'm sorry, this just seems painfully obvious to me.
More evidence to support Riker's dialogue. Worf said he was "familiar" with the Yamato's layout. Due to other evidence from the producers', we know that even the same class of starship can have varying deck-plan layouts. This seems to suggest that Worf's previous assignment may have been the Yamato ... and he didn't raise a complaint until he and Riker beamed aboard. If the NCC-1305-E registry was wrong, Worf would've said, "hey! That's not the Yamato!"
[ September 08, 2001: Message edited by: MeGotBeer ]
quote:
a) Spoken dialogueb) Registry on model which needs to be freeze-framed to see; the producers' intentions
c) http://www.8ung.at/fitz/ships/canon/pics/yamato.jpg
d) http://www.8ung.at/fitz/graphics/pics/display_yamato.jpg
Problem solved.
(not the fun way of course, but solved nonetheless)
quote:
And what if 1305-E was on a computer monitor, and 7XXXX was mentioned in "Where Silence as Lease?" What would that debate be like?
In that situation, as in this one, spoken dialogue would win the day.
quote:
And what if 1305-E was on a computer monitor, and 7XXXX was mentioned in "Where Silence as Lease?" What would that debate be like?
I don't think, that it is important where the registry comes from (dialogue or computer monitor). Important is IMO that Okuda says that the 1305-E made its way into the episode by mistake.
Sorry. Tough luck. NCC-1305-E is the registry.
You know, seeing as how NCC-71807 was ONSCREEN and is therefore CANON, it doesn't matter what Riker said and therefore the registry is NCC-71807.
There is no ranking for levels of canonicity. It's up to the viewer to pick which one they believe. Of course, since Okuda said it was never meant to be NCC-1305-E, then I believe everyone should follow suit and quit bitching.
[ September 08, 2001: Message edited by: The359 ]
quote:
Originally posted by MeGotBeer:
It seems to me, intentions are nice, but the spoken dialogue outweights that.
That is a completely arbitrary decision. So is taking visual evidence over spoken evidence. Either way, you're just choosing, subjectively, to accept one kind of evidence over the other. Do you have a pressing reason to assume that spoken dialog is more valid?
A case can certainly be made that visual evidence outweighs spoken evidence. People make mistakes, and occasionally aren't called on them. People make jokes, use sarcasm, and otherwise distort the truth. Someone around here likes the idea that Riker has a well-known affinity for a Yamato 1305 and wby inventing the 1305-E registry as indicating his feelings that the original Yamato was slighted by not getting suffixed descendants. People's spoken word has all sorts of variables attached... our eyes do not.
Note, I am not suggesting that visual evidence should take priority over spoken evidence. I am, however, suggesting that choosing one or the other is arbitrary and therefore influenced by subjective opinion.
This is why producer intentions are more than simply "nice." Star Trek doesn't exist in any form save the creation of the aforementioned producers; that is, we have no obligation to remain within the context of it's fictional universe because we are aware of the reality behind it. The 1305-E registry was a mistake, and that is objectively undeniable. For the purpose of the Star Trek universe, the producers are omnipotent. Expressing their intent is a matter of divine revelation. 
So, by all means, use 1305-E registry for whatever registry cataloging purpose you have for it. Use it to justify suffixes on ships of your own creation if you wish. But don't assert that the 1305-E registry is, objectively, more accurate than 71807, because it is not.
Its nice, but it doesn't hold water all that well.
Do you think each time a ship got a new captain, they'd haul out the workers and workbees to rewrite the registry? How many ships in Starfleet would this be a possibility for? And we've never seen any evidence that this was the case for the Enterprise. It seems like the captain would have to at least request (even if it was only a formality) to have the registry changed to the prefix style. Wouldn't Starfleet engineers put the 7xxxxx number on there by default? Captain Picard doesn't strike me as the type of person who would give a damn about his ship's registry. He never gave a damn about it being the flagship or a Galaxy, really.
quote:
Originally posted by The_Tom:
And the Pullitzer for most intelligent post about the most stupid subject matter goes to.... Ryan McReynolds!
I'm honored.
Suppose (for some reason), we have an episode where the crew (whoever they are), time travel to 2364. They meet the Yamoto. What registry do you think it will have? Hmm?
You know, seeing as how NCC-1305-E was SPOKEN DIALOGUE and is therefore CANON, it doesn't matter what the log said and therefore the registry is NCC-1305-E.
Look, I'm sorry, but I'm sticking with spoken dialogue over an obscure reference on a monitor. I'm sorry if this line of reasoning has some people acting like they've got a baseball bat up their arse.
] here's is my useless imput.From the Starfleet Medical Classified case files:
I can't remeber the exact lines Riker said, but perhaps the Whole-Crew-Turns-Real-Stupid syndrome was at work. There have been many documented cases of this, we have seen that the USS Voyager are chronically affected. This syndrome is caused due to the stresses on the brain when travelling at Warp Velocities, when the person is subject to certain emotional stresses among other things, the brain reverts to a 'Stupid' state. In this state the person(s) says/does incredibly silly things, ranging from saying wrong reg. numbers (and visualizing the wrong ones) to eating Neelix's so-called food.
Have fun
PS dont forget to throw rotten fruit!
I don't understand fully the circumstances that lead Cmdr. Riker to assumed that the ship was the USS Yamato.
quote:
You know, seeing as how NCC-1305-E was SPOKEN DIALOGUE and is therefore
CANON, it doesn't matter what the log said and therefore the registry is
NCC-1305-E.
Just because the dialoge is spoken doesn't mean it's right. In "The Royale" the surface temperature of the planet is given as -291 degrees, 18 degrees colder than absolute zero, the coldest possible temperature.
Or, if you like, there's the fact that Kirk seemed to be confused as to which century he was in by a factor of some 600 years (re: "Space Seed" and "The Squire Of Gothos"). Those are both spoken references, and they both contradict the accepted 23rd Century setting of TOS. If we can ignore those, I don't see how you can argue we have to accept the 1305-E registry, especially since it's generally accepted that the registry was a flat-out mistake.
It still works out as being negative Kelvins though. Absolute zero is -273.15 degrees C. So the temperature of the planet is -17.85 Kelvins.
So the planet is almost 18 degrees colder than the point where all molecular motion/energy ceases. Impressive.
Will Riker says "NCC-1305-E." Being that the Yamato is the Enterprise's sister ship, it makes sense he would be more familiar with the Yamato then just any average Starfleet ship.
Data, Picard, LaForge, Troi and Crusher do not correct Riker. While "The whole crew goes stupid" might apply to just about everybody, I can't really see it affecting Data, and at that point in the series, he was very likely to have spoken up with, "You are wrong, Commander Riker, the Yamato's real registry is 7xxxx."
There is evidence that Worf served on the Yamato (he was familiar with the ship's layout, and info from the producers and shows seems to indicate that ships of the same class can have different layouts) and he didn't raise any objections. Okay, maybe he was affected by the "crew goes stupid" theory of Liam's, but that still doesn't explain Data being quiet (I don't think he'd learned "tact" by the 2nd season).
This is my chain of logic for assuming that the Yamato's correct registry is NCC-1305-E. I understand that it may have gotten in the episode by mistake, but the fact remains that it got in the episode, and therefore can't easily be dismissed as "oh, we didn't mean to do that." I mean, if it was that easy, we could write Voyager out of Star Trek canon.
Now, okay, Okuda says its a mistake. But who gets final say? Okuda? Or the writer of the episode who wrote in "NCC-1305-E"? Why does one behind the scene guru's word outweigh another? Apparently, NCC-1305-E got through repeated drafts of the script, including probably the producers' read, the director's read, the actor's read, whomever else's read ... look, Okuda probably had a chance to read the script and just "missed" where it said NCC-1305-E. The fact is, only Okuda says its a mistake, and everyone else who read the script didn't say so. So what you want everyone to expect is that Michael Okuda has the final say in what is or is not canon ... sorry, folks, I like Mike a lot, met him a few years ago, but I don't see why his word over others should be "God speaking."
I don't understand why my position on this "issue" has people so up in arms, but I strongly suggest some of you folks chill out, remember that it's a TV show, and pull that big baseball bat out of your collective asses.
[ September 09, 2001: Message edited by: MeGotBeer ]
I guess it'll depend on how the registry is shown. Essentially, I would only choose to contradict Riker's dialogue if the registry was spoken as NCC-7xxxx ... I don't think an obscure reference on an Okudagram should outweigh dialogue, no.
If the NCC-7xxxx was spoken as the correct registry, then I would assume that the NCC-1305-E was changed for some reason.
quote:
Originally posted by MeGotBeer:
I guess it'll depend on how the registry is shown. Essentially, I would only choose to contradict Riker's dialogue if the registry was spoken as NCC-7xxxx ... I don't think an obscure reference on an Okudagram should outweigh dialogue, no.
Ah, but I think nobody here is saying that an Okudagram outweighs dialogue. Certainly, all that I have said is that they are both canon, and both equally valid. There is no rational reason for dialogue to be any more canon than anything else.
And as others have pointed out, if you accept dialogue as accurate no matter what, it opens the door to all sorts of things. Canonically, the original series is set in 2200, the 2260s, and 2700 simultaneously. Why do you (or I) only choose one? Because canon is not absolute, and only one can be correct. You don't choose one based on it being more canon than something else. They're all spoken in dialogue. You choose one because the current producers intend for the original series to be in the 2260s, and classify the other canon eras as mistakes. You don't accept obscure in-jokes as accurate because the producers don't intend them to be accurate. But, for reasons unknown, when it comes to the Yamato's registry, all of that goes out the window.
quote:
If the NCC-7xxxx was spoken as the correct registry, then I would assume that the NCC-1305-E was changed for some reason.
And, I take it, you assume that the Celsius scale was changed for some reason, right? And the length of a year fluctuated wildly for some reason, correct? If you don't, then you're applying your standard hypocritically. All of those "facts" are just as canon as the Yamato's registry.
That's why I grant that the producers are fallible humans. They screwed up the Yamato's registry, they screwed up the Celsius scale, and they screwed up the dates. Star Trek is riddled with mistakes, and they can't all be correct, so the only logical arbiter of what it correct are the very people who made the mistakes.
[ September 09, 2001: Message edited by: Ryan McReynolds ]
The Yamato's registry is not contradicted by dialogue. It is contradicted by an Okudagram. And Okuda. As far as I can tell, only Okuda. Not the writer, not the director of the episode, not the cast. So who makes Okuda "God" of canon?
YES!
quote:
So who makes Okuda "God" of canon?
Um, we do, via consensus. Since when is this news?
The Yamoto's registry isn't contradicted by dialogue. It's contradicted by someone who knows Star Trek's universe saying "That's not right".
He could have been JOKING and no one thought it was funny.
Also, just because YOU believe one registry doesn't make it anymore canon then the other. Like I said, you are far from being in charge of what is canon. You want to believe it's NCC-1305-E, then fine, believe, but don't throw a hissy fit when no one wants to follow your lead. We think it's NCC-71807, so leave it at that.
quote:
MeGotBeer, do you also believe in a USS Lollipop, since Riker said such ship exists?
Since, as is obvious to anyone who has ever seen The Arsenal of Freedom, Riker created a ship out of thin air in a deceit to see if he was actually speaking with his friend Paul Rice, no, I don't believe such a ship exists.
quote:
He could have been JOKING and no one thought it was funny
Are we speaking re: Lolipop or Yamato? Givin that they were lost in such an unknown area, and their reactions to another ship, no, it's quite clear to everyone Riker wasn't joking. And if he was, why didn't Worf, Data, or Picard contradict him?
quote:
Also, just because YOU believe one registry doesn't make it anymore canon then the other. Like I said, you are far from being in charge of what is canon.
Ah, but you are? I don't claim to be in charge of canon, I just make a better case for why NCC-1305-E is canon then you do.
quote:
You want to believe it's NCC-1305-E, then fine, believe, but don't throw a hissy fit when no one wants to follow your lead.
I do believe its NCC-1305-E. You're the one throwing the hissy fit. Actually, since I seem to be the only person sticking up for the 1305-E theory, you're a coward, joining in an attack on a lone speaker. Nyah-nyah-nyah. And if you honestly believed in "not throwing hissy fits", you wouldn't have made the above post.
quote:
We think it's NCC-71807, so leave it at that.
Difference is, of course, that you're wrong, and I'm right.
quote:
If the NCC-7xxxx was spoken as the correct registry, then I would assume that the NCC-1305-E was changed for some reason.
And what if dialog states that 71807 was the number chosen all along since the ordering of the ship, to the construction, to the launching, to commissioning, and finally destruction. And the 1305 never crossed anyone's mind and the 1305 belonged to some other name in the past and there has never been -A, -B, -C, -D, and -E.
I personally believe that Riker is mistaken somehow and the crew know this. They've just gotten tired of trying to correct Riker so many times, they feel it's useless and just leave him be to his own stupidity. Maybe Riker once had a dream about the Yamato and 1305-E was her number in that dream and he confused it for actuality. Or perhaps he's been reading a lot of mission reports on other ships and just confused name and number with Yamato and a real 1305-E that does exist. There are many explanations for what seem like mistakes that were made throughout Trek.
Why can't you all just admit that they made a mistake and have made a bad job of covering it up? Jeez!
Anyways, is there proof that Worf served aboard the Yamato or did he just memorise the internal layout from the library files?
Riker, although Liam makes him out to be an idiot, obviously has to be a very intelligent guy to be XO of the Federation starship.
Picard, a good friend of Capt. Varley, doesn't object to the NCC-1305-E registry.
Worf, who seems to be familiar with the Yamato, possibly an ex-crew member, doesn't object to the registry.
Data doesn't object to the registry. I mean, this is Data we're talking about.
The evidence against the NCC-1305-E:
The visual of the Captain's Log. Michael Okuda's statement.
Within the self-contained "world" of Star Trek, however, the evidence leans towards the NCC-1305-E registry as opposed to the NCC-7xxxx.
quote:
Originally posted by MeGotBeer:
The Yamato's registry is not contradicted by dialogue. It is contradicted by an Okudagram.
That's right, and you still haven't explained why dialogue takes priority over Okudagrams. They are both canon, and that is why we must turn to other sources. Not because Okuda is the god of canon, not because we don't want the registry to be NCC-1305-E, and not because we want to be difficult. What makes dialogue more canon than anything else? Unless you can explain this train of thought, the rest of us continue to make the logical assumption that they are equally valid... and I think by now I've established that if they are equally valid, then another source must be consulted.
Do you have a reason for accepting dialogue over anything else? I've already shown the arguement that visual evidence could be more relevant than spoken words because of the inherrent fallibility of people -- solely for explanatory purposes, I might add -- but I have yet to see any justification for the opposite. It seems as though you prefer dialogue for no reason other than wanting to. If that is the case, you can't possibly be surprised that other people don't follow your standard...
As for the E's, I suspect, by "default", they put on the suffixed registry. Perhaps SF won't even allow a captain of an E not to use the suffix. But my theory is that, on any other ship, the captain can go either way if they want to, and if SF allows it at the time.
quote:
Originally posted by MeGotBeer:
Within the self-contained "world" of Star Trek, however, the evidence leans towards the NCC-1305-E registry as opposed to the NCC-7xxxx.
And within the self-contained "world" of Star Trek, the evidence leans towards the Celsius scale being different from ours. And time flowing at a different rate. And four wars involving Khan spanning centuries.
On the one hand, this is evidence that dialogue is often wrong. On the other hand, this could be evidence that Star Trek is best treated as fiction. One possibility that you haven't considered is that Riker never actually said 1305-E, in a revised fictional universe. The term often used is "retconning," the act of changing something after the fact and pretending the error never existed.
Since we have no frame of reference to Star Trek other than as a fictional creation, there is nothing inherrently wrong with editing that creation, even if the editor is one's own mind. I'm sure most people would prefer to mentally edit the lines regarding the Eugenics Wars than assume that everyone who's ever mentioned them is a moron. Likewise, Riker is probably a fine officer, and "actually" said NCC-71807... but the thirtieth-century historian watching the visual logs wrote it down wrong when researching for that episode of the popular holodrama.
Because of the fictional context, there are literally an infinite number of ways to solve problems of contradiction. And before one accuses me of using retconning to justify any change in the fictional universe I might point our that there is a vast difference between a creator correcting one's own mistake and changing things that were never contradictory to begin with.
Just rpoviding another long-winded alternative solution to the problem. I don't even know which solution I like best; it is canon that Riker said 1305-E, just as canon as the ship's actual registry being 71807. I'm willing to grant the possibility of Riker being (a) wrong or (b) joking/mocking/making a statement... but I'm leaning towards pretending he really said 71807 and it got garbled in the transmission.
If there is conflicting dialogue, it's one thing to make rational decisions regarding which is correct, and which is not. In this case, however, there's not conflicting dialogue ... there's just Riker's statement. Many times dialogue can be brushed off as "they're getting confused", but again, this doesn't work for Riker's statement (namely because: Picard, Worf, and Data, all seem to think he's correct).
Look, I'm just saying why I think NCC-1305-E is correct. I'm not into the "Revised" idea where we re-edit episodes. It'd be nice ... (get rid of Voyager and Wesley Crusher...) but it's not something we can do.
quote:
I'm not into the "Revised" idea where we re-edit episodes. It'd be nice ... (get rid of Voyager and
Wesley Crusher...) but it's not something we can do.
Actually, it is possible and has been done in the past. In "The Battle" written dialog was that the Stargazer was Constitution class and was filmed with Wesley, Geordi, and Data saying that. Later, it was redubbed with them saying Constellation class. We can easily have Frakes put on the season 1 uniform and saying his line over from "Where Silence has Lease" substituting 71807 for 1305-E. The background can be CGI if it needs to be recreated.
But it was redubbed before the episode was aired. That's a really big difference. If NCC-1305-E had been redubbed BEFORE it aired, we wouldn't be having this discussion. And Frakes is WAAAAY to fat to fit in the Season 2 uniform.
What does the V'Ger cloud REALLY look like?
What were the exact sequence of events of the E-nil entering the cloud?
Do you go with the original canon or the producers' intentions?
"Data doesn't object to the registry. I mean, this is Data we're talking about. "
And, to overuse the counter argument, Data didn't object to a planet have a temperature 19 degrees below absolute zero.
And, in the "Riker's an idiot and everyone's too scared to correct him", in this very same episode, Riker calls O'Brien a lieutenant. Obviously, Riker was high on some kind of crazy space smack when this episode was made, and he was talking all kinds of mad stuff.
The computer screen is canon
Canon vs. Canon
This isn't Canon Level 1 vs. Canon Level 5.
This is just Canon vs. Canon
Now, which one should be believed? Well, obviously OKUDA and everyone else at Paramount has said that the 1305-E is a mistake. 71807 is the official registry to them. Obviously this makes the 71807 the more believeable canon registry then the 1305-E, regardless of the way it was shown (computer school, dialogue, ship models, etc...)
But once that step in the road to enlightenment is taken, then it becomes an issue of simply believing in what floats one's boat. I believe it's more "likely" that the registry was 1305-E and that a random computer error took place in "Contagion" - the sheer *number* or arguments for that seems crushing. I also believe that the Celsius scale has not been altered, and that Geordi LaForge (that kidder!) was just making one of his strange jokes there in "The Royale" (unfortunately with Data nowhere near him to correct the "error").
I do not try to impose any sort of systematic logic on my beliefs here, since I'm not engaged in a process of hunting down Trek "bugs". Instead, I'm engaged in a process of trying to understand Trek "features", even when they are contradictory, and I have to take a different approach on each "feature" to make it fit. When a line of dialogue has to be dismissed, I try to invent a reason to dismiss it (but with Riker and 1305-E, I can't). When a line of text or a special effect or a move made by an actor or his stuntman has to be dismissed, I try to invent a reason for that, too (and dismissing the "Contagion" registry seems easy enough - contrary to some arguments, we're NOT going to see the Yamato again, except perhaps in a calendar page or something).
Of course, it would be more systematic and logical to just hunt down the "bugs", and dismiss them on the merit of them not being "features". But I don't believe in the existence of "bugs" in the Trek universe - it's perfect and self-consistent, even if the TV show describing that universe is not. 
Timo Saloniemi
(Just a question that needs to be answered since we're on the subjetc of canonity)
Of the other ship classes, very few are actually canonical in the sense that they would have been mentioned in dialogue or seen clearly on a computer display. At least Constitution, Excelsior, Constellation, Sydney, Ambassador, Nebula, Galaxy, New Orleans, Intrepid, Prometheus and Defiant classes have been mentioned, but for example Miranda hasn't, AFAIK. Has Oberth been?
Timo Saloniemi
Personally, I lean to the 71807 side of the argument for two reasons:
1) It's more consistent with the prevailing numbering scheme (i.e. 5-digit registries for modern ships). AFAIK, the only other Galaxy-class ship (except for the E-D) that we saw clear enough to get a good glimpse of the registry was the Odyssey, and hers was 71832.
2) The only other Trek writing credit the writer had was for STII. It is therefore reasonable to assume he was unfamiliar with the staff's ideas as to how ships were to be numbered (if, indeed, anyone had informed him).
Other than that, it's canon versus canon, and since both the visuals and dialogue have contained goofs over the years, we have to use other sources to determine which one should be accepted on a case by case basis. I think in this case, the evidence leans more towards 71807.
just kiddin'
Because what the art department does and thinks is more important than the writers? Star Trek is more about signange than characters? Bullshit...
Canon: Riker made a statement that, taken at face value, the Yamato's registry is 1305-E.
Canon: The recording of the log of the Captain of the Yamato displayed on Picard's screen that either the Yamato's computer or the Enterprise's computer thought of the Yamato as having a different registry.
Both of these leave too much room for interpretation to claim this as an inherant, inevitable contradictions. One or both could be wrong. Riker could be joking. There could be multiple registries. The virus could have already started affecting the Enterprise computers. Any number of explainations are possible.
Personally, I lean towards the idea that a ship can have two registry numbers. It explains Yamato, Defiant, and Prometheus quite nicely. Why not?
That's different for two reasons. One, the computer screen info occured before we heard her name out loud.
Two, no-one who works for Star Trek is disputing that Geordie's mother's name is really Silva.
"Because what the art department does and thinks is more important than the writers? Star Trek is more about signange than characters? Bullshit..."
When the art department is in charge of continuity, and this is a continuity issue, then yes, they are more important.
quote:
Originally posted by Woodside Kid:
My favorite from TOS: how can we have a whole ship crewed by Vulcans when Spock is supposed to be the first Vulcan in Starfleet (and therefore, presumably, the highest ranking)?
There is no canon evidence to support the idea that Spock was the first Vulcan in Starfleet, so that's not a problem.
quote:
Originally posted by Aban Rune:
None of the classes of the new ships from First Contact were ever identified on screen, even the Akira. But they have been so well documented by the creators, it's hard not to say that they are cannon. (sic.)
This belies the most common misconception: that canon means accurate. It is very easy to say that the names of Akira and friends aren't canon, because they aren't. Canon is defined as that which is contained in aired episodes and films. However, this in no way means that the class name Akira isn't correct... it simply isn't canon. To use another example, the idea that phaser stands for "phased energy rectification" isn't canon, but it can (and for all intents and purposes, is) still be true. The corrolary to this is that if, in Star Trek X, an Akira-class ship is called Invincible-class, it isn't at all a contradiction of canon, even if it is an accident. Canonically, the ship would be Invincible class.
Incidentally, this has allegedly happened before. Some of those involved with the visual effects for Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan named the Reliant's design the Avenger class. For that reason, nearly everyone called it the Avenger class for a solid decade, and then Okuda came up with Miranda for the TNG Tech Manual. The name Avenger, if fan lore is accurate, is just as reliable as Akira, but it isn't canon.
[ September 10, 2001: Message edited by: Ryan McReynolds ]
"Defiant, Excelsior, and Prometheus speak for themselves."
Oh, and tell that to the people who were still saying Valient-class even during DS9's seventh season.
When was Defiant-class first said anyway? I don't think it was said during Valient (I remember sitting there, begging for someone to say "Defiant-class", just to finally stop one of the most annoying arguments that's ever occured n Trek boards. I was also hoping they'd say how long the ship was, but I wasn't holding my breath for that).
Thinking about it, "Galaxy-class" was the first time the class of ship was ever said on screen. "Constitution-class" wasn't said out loud until "Relics", I think. And there were no class names given out in the first 6 movies.
[ September 10, 2001: Message edited by: Veers ]
I think the first time "Nebula-class" was said on-screen was in "The Wounded" by Marc Alaimo's Cardassian character. I can't remember for certain, though. It's been a while.
**Are we still doing DS9 spoilers? If so, there's coming up**
I think that "Defiant-class" was first spoken in the final arc of Deep Space Nine. I can't recall the exact episode, but it was the one where the crew waits for the arrival of the Sao Paulo. Ezri says something to the effect of, "I knew were getting a new ship, but I didn't know we were getting another Defiant-class ship."
As far as I recall, only one Starfleet ship class has been mentioned in the Trek movies. That ones comes to us from Generations where the Enterprise-D is referred to as "Galaxy-class." However, we've seen two other class names pretty obviously: Scotty's schematic in The Undiscovered Country says "Constitution-class" and the master situation display in First Contact and Insurrection say "Sovereign-class."
As for "Constitution-class" being mentioned in The Original Series, I can't honestly remember. I want to say that it was said at least once, but I can't remember the circumstances or the episode(s). ::shrug::
Actually, it was "The Naked Now" where Kirk's Enterprise was said to be Constitution-Class.
hmmmmm we didn't here the ORIGINAL enterprise class enterprise?? huh. Why didn't they just say the Constitution class Enterprise... hmm. Grr.
If we're gonna squeeze Archer's Enterprise class Enterprise into this, we cannot go altering the statements made by the TNG characters. We have to creatively interpret the criteria by which the heroes refused to recognize any pre-Kirk ships.
What grounds do they have for dismissing NX-01? Is it technological primitiveness? Not likely, since NX-01 seems a rather capable ship, more so than we'd have expected from the 2150s.
Is it the operational reach? Again a bit unlikely. While there certainly were a number of spacegoing Enterprises between the last seagoing ones and the NX-01, they apparently did not loiter deep into space - that much is confirmed in "Broken Bow" dialogue already. In this sense, NX-01 was the first truly starfaring Enterprise.
Is it the operating organization? Possibly. NX-01 seems to be a Starfleet vessel, but not UFP Starfleet.
Is it the official designation? Perhaps Kirk's ship was the first ship to be called "starship", while Archer's was a mere "spaceship". "Broken Bow" script shows that the word "starship" is used liberally by all characters, though.
Heck, the TNG heroes have to stop including the past Enterprises at SOME point to refer to the "original" ship, since they cannot plausibly refer to the very first seagoing ship of that name (nobody knows for sure what vessel this was), nor probably to the first spacegoing Enterprise (the STS orbiter, even if it flew into space in the Trek universe, could not count as a starship, surely). So they have to pick some semi-arbitrary point from which onwards the ships are considered "real" starships Enterprise. The birth of the Federation could be such a point.
Perhaps our heroes feel like Federation citizens instead of mere Earthlings? Perhaps a ship from a pre-UFP organization (albeit a human one) would feel as foreign to them as a pre-1776 British ship would feel to an American?
Timo Saloniemi
quote:
Erm. The TNG version of "Naked Now", I can't really remember which one
was which. It's a toss away line, "oh, the original Constitution-Class
Enterprise had a similar problem..."
Picard was reading a log entry off the screen. The line was "The Constitution-class starship Enterprise, Captain James T. Kirk, commanding."
Except he didn't, because they never said that. Oh well.
quote:
but for example Miranda hasn't, AFAIK. Has Oberth been?
Both were on dedication plaques.
And New Orleans was on a computer display.
New Orleans was also a *verbal* reference in "Conspiracy", while Miranda apparently never was spoken out loud.
Timo Saloniemi
So the Thomas Paine was on a diplomatic mission to Epsilon Aslanti II.
[ September 14, 2001: Message edited by: Spike ]
It's interesting to see that SB 134 couldn't get the Hood in working order, though, and SB 174 had to take over. A true hangar queen, that one...
Timo Saloniemi
quote:
Cool. I guess the differences between the two tables could be taken to mean that some ships moved from assignment to assignment between the "publishing dates", while others continued their longer-term assignments.
I think that only the third table was onscreen and the other two weren't.
Buzz
PS: I think i've posted on the wrong thread!!!!
[ September 17, 2001: Message edited by: Fedaykin Supastar ]
In any case, this movie showed a more active and positive Starfleet than any other movie or episode. Not only were there multiple ships involved, their officers actually had *dialogue* and performed *innovative action* and were coordinated through a *control center* where *competent people* were seen at *work*, under the leadership of powerful figures *other* than the captain of the Enterprise. None of them even tried to betray Kirk.
Timo Saloniemi
*does a little dance*
quote:
i think yours says Epsilon Ashanti too and you just mis-read it
Think so too, because it's a scann of the Starlog-Display.
the same place as Jenol*n..
Do you see?
And that Alderaan discussion doesnt answer my Aldaraan question
Oh, well done sir. You've proven my point wrong. How foolish I feel.