Well, bearing in mind what the359 said about new ships in the com chatter in TMP E, I've gone and listened to it over and over again. I can hear the "Long Range Shuttle Lakia" part. And now I can hear what I guess is "NCC-1715," but I can't hear the "Cruiser Merrimac" part of that message. And also, I think I can hear a reference to a starship Lincoln, as well.
So can we get an audion expert on this and see if he/her can come up with an audio clip that we can hear more clearly?
-MMoM
Posted by AndrewR (Member # 44) on :
TMP the Smiley edition!?! LOL! Posted by PopMaze (Member # 302) on :
Mim, you might want to put a space between the colon and the D.
Posted by Malnurtured Snay (Member # 411) on :
Or just click "Disable Smiles" at the bottom of the page.
Posted by Spike (Member # 322) on :
long range shuttle Lakia ... U.S.S. Merrimac NCC-1715.. what's after that? Did I hear 'robot'? It ends with "recieved and understood".
Posted by The359 (Member # 37) on :
nyah nyah, told ya Posted by Guardian 2000 (Member # 743) on :
I decided to try fiddling with the .mp3, to see if I could remove the music and get at the words a bit better. I had but a little luck . . . the music changes a fair bit over the short duration of the thing, and, with the program I'm using, if I remove too much of the music, I start losing the voice.
What I hear is "Epsilon IX, Epsilon IX, this is long-range shuttle XXXXXXX (sounds like Lincoln, but it could be Lakia pronounced "LAY-kya") . . . . be advised (please advise?), USS Merrimac, NCC-1715, that we are in range. (Gobbledygook . . . more Gobbledygook.) (Male Voice): "Received your transmission"
I'll keep fiddling. See if this helps, or if anyone can do more with it:
(Edited because the board keeps sticking stupid crap in the midst of the URL)
[ May 19, 2002, 11:40: Message edited by: Guardian 2000 ]
Posted by Peregrinus (Member # 504) on :
This is what I've been able to reconstruct...
One transmission goes: "Epsilon Nine, Epsilon Nine -- This is long-range shuttle Laika..."
And a couple moments later, another exchange begins: "Be advised -- U.S.S. Merrimac(k), NCC-1715 -- Have started landing mission [ ... ] [power? or hour?], due to problems that will be explained upon our arrival." "Received and understood."
--Jonah
Posted by Alpha Centauri (Member # 338) on :
It's really Laika, not Lakia or Lincoln. Only, Laika is pronounced as "Lay-ka". Laika makes sense anyway, as shuttles are always called after scientists and explorers. Even though Laika is a dog... it was the first living organism in space (Sputnik-2, wasn't it?).
Posted by Peregrinus (Member # 504) on :
Yep.
--Jonah
Posted by TSN (Member # 31) on :
Not that I know anything about Russian pronunciation, but wouldn't Laika be LYE-kuh?
Posted by UM. (Member # 239) on :
Neeh-et.
Posted by nx001a (Member # 291) on :
Is the U.S.S. Merrimac a constitution class ship?
Posted by Harry (Member # 265) on :
It's name and registry are from FJ's Star Fleet Technical Manual's list of Constitutions, so basically, yes. But if you want to stay strictly canon, it could be any class.
[ May 20, 2002, 03:36: Message edited by: Harry ]
Posted by Alpha Centauri (Member # 338) on :
According to FJ's Star Fleet Technical Manual, the Merrimac(k) is Bonhomme Richard class. That's a Constitution variant.
AFAIK, the Russian pronunciation for Laika should be pronounced "LYE-KAH".
Posted by The Mighty Monkey of Mim (Member # 646) on :
Wow. This is a blast from the past...
Umm...just for the sake of argument, AC, the FJ manual says nothing about the Bonhomme Richard-class being a Connie variant. It was the later stuff that postulated that.
-MMoM
[ May 20, 2002, 15:40: Message edited by: The Mighty Monkey of Mim ]
Posted by nx001a (Member # 291) on :
wouldn't the number 1715 fit in with other constitution class ships in that time?
Posted by Timo (Member # 245) on :
Well, who really knows about TOS registry schemes?
But FJ does make a clear connection between the Merrimac(k)/BH Richard class and the Constitution class. The former is listed as an approved production batch of "class I starships - heavy cruisers Mk IX", and we know from the book that the first batch of those was the Constitution class. Furthermore, the second batch features USS Defiance, a ship that probably was meant to be USS Defiant from "Tholian Web", thereby establishing that at least two of those batches (the Constitution and BH Richard batches) looked like Kirk's ship.
Not complete proof, of course. Perhaps the Defiance was not the Defiant at all? There goes our proof that all the batches would look like the vessel pictured on the adjoining page. It could be that only the first batch looks like that, for each given ship category. The second batch of heavy cruisers (the BH Richard class) could have had four nacelles or something...
Timo Saloniemi
Posted by Harry (Member # 265) on :
The way I read it is that there are several "Class 1" starships. Class One probably means that it uses the familiar Connie parts, and Class One ships are likely the most powerful and expensive ships of the fleet.
The Class 1 Heavy Cruiser has three variants:
Mk-IX: beginning with Constitution NCC-1700 and ending with Potempkin (isn't it Potemkin?) NCC-1711. This is what FJ calls the Constitution Class. Perhaps this is supposed to be the first pilot version?
Mk-IXa: from Bonhomme Richard NCC-1712 to Essex NCC-1727. This is possibly the series version of the model.
Mk-IXb: from Achernar NCC-1732 to Tutakai NCC-1799 and from Tikopai NCC-1800 to Wezen NCC-1842. Both the BHR class and the Tikopai class are Mk-IXb, strangely enough.
I have know idea what FJ was trying to say with this. Nowhere does he explain or motivate what he does, and what the difference is between the Mk-IX and the a and b variants.
Posted by Timo (Member # 245) on :
I suspect that FJ worked from a real-world premise. He assumed that ships in the future would still be produced in batches, with incremental improvements. So all the ships listed would be basically the same, just with different placement or model of guns or something.
The real world was FJ's realm. He was *not* trying to match the names with existing variants of the actual Trek models - he wasn't a devout Trek fan himself, didn't own a VCR, and probably didn't even know of the differences between the pilot and series ships.
Timo Saloniemi
Posted by nx001a (Member # 291) on :
I never realsied there was so many variations of the constitution class. I was aware of the bohomme richard variant but not the others. What are the difference then apart from the name?
Posted by Timo (Member # 245) on :
Well, the basic idea behind the variants is that FJ first gave us a selection of names, and other fans then matched the various photographic models and unrealized concept drawings of the Constitutions with those names. When they ran out of FJ names, they invented more.
"Constitution" is the subclass that supposedly started it all. Those were built twenty years before Kirk's time by current timeline (older fans usually assumed 40 years), and supposedly looked like the ship in the pilot episode "The Cage". That ship had a taller bridge dome, spikes protruding from the nacelle front ends, and a grillework at the nacelle aft ends instead of the later grey dome. According to many pseudohistories of the class, these ships had laser and particle beam armament instead of phasers (although the new show "Enterprise" makes this unlikely).
"Bonhomme Richard" is the subclass that was shown in TOS. The bridge dome is lower in profile, the spikes are gone, and there are minor modifications to other surface detail. These ships supposedly had phasers and photon torpedoes fitted. Kirk's ship was supposedly modified from a "Constitution" into a "Bonhomme Richard" between the pilot episodes and the regular series.
"Achernar" is the subclass shown in FJ's somewhat inaccurate drawings. Such a ship was never seen onscreen, although FJ's drawings were shown on some computer screens in the early movies. The primary and secondary hull and the nacelles are all shaped slightly differently from the real thing, and this model also has visible phaser turrets on the saucer. The actual models before the movies had no such turrets.
The name "Tikopai" from FJ's book was assigned to a concept drawing for an abortive second Trek live-action TV show. This show later was dropped in favor of the first movie. This ship had most features identical to the actual movie version, but her saucer looked more like the TOS design (with a rounded bridge and lower dome). She did have visible phaser turrets, though.
The name "Constitution II" was given to another 2nd show/1st movie predesign, with slightly different nacelles but otherwise Tikopai-like features.
The name "Endeavor" was assigned to a rare predesign that had TOS-like features but really weird nacelles and slightly canted pylons.
Finally, the names "Enterprise" and "Enterprise II" were given to the classes seen in the first and fourth movies, respectively. Of course, the same exact model was used in both movies, so the supposed differences are internal...
As if this hadn't been enough, fans also created many other classes that were based on Constitution components. You can find most of the above ships at www.shipschematics.org.
Timo Saloniemi
Posted by Harry (Member # 265) on :
Horrible. Just simply horrible. I'll just call them all Constitution class. The Phase II and other TMP predesigns are not canon .
The only versions we have are the pilot ship (was there a difference from the "The Cage" one and the WNMHGB one?), the series ship, the TMP-refit, perhaps the new-built 'refits' and finally that TNG desktop model with shuttlebays/cargobays/whatever on the sides and flipped nacelles.
Posted by Alpha Centauri (Member # 338) on :
quote:Umm...just for the sake of argument, AC, the FJ manual says nothing about the Bonhomme Richard-class being a Connie variant. It was the later stuff that postulated that.
Owww... There I go again, confusing BHR with the Archernar. I have no copy of the SFTM myself, so I couldn't check it.
The difference between the Cage-Enterprise and the WNMHGB-Enterprise is that there's a different (smaller) bridge dome in WNMHGB. Also, in "The Cage", the nacelle ends are flat, whereas in WNMHGB, the familiar 'balls' in the endcaps appear. If I remembered it all correctly.
[ May 21, 2002, 09:52: Message edited by: Alpha Centauri ]
Posted by Peregrinus (Member # 504) on :
Well, it gets a little murkier than the current simplistic Okudaic view of TOS/TFS...
The original model for "The Cage" had simple raised rectangular panels on the aft endcaps of the nacelles. These were replaced in "Where No Man..." by the often-seen 'grillework' endcaps. So if we want to get really persnicketty, we can claim three distinct pre-TMP Constitution versions or subclasses.
I take a different view. Granted, it's not the most popular around here, but from what I've been able to glean over the years, it's the one that makes the most sense and fits all available facts and behind-the-scenes info. See what you think...
The Constitution class entered service around 2243 or so. The ASDB operates with the Class I Starships/Explorers on a twenty-year review-and-refit schedule, with incremental upgrades during each service layover in starbase. So over each starship's service life, they will receive upgrades to equipment and systems on a widely-varying range of schedules. So, for the Constitution class, after their first twenty years of operation, I figure none of the ships exactly resembled any of the others, due to the rate of technological progress, and different mission requirements over the years.
By 2270, I like to think the Endeavour refit was proposed, but scrapped on the drawing board due to the introduction of the LN-60 nacelles the Constitution (II) (to use Ships of the Star Fleet terminology) was seen to employ. Indeed, I like to say that picture was the Constitution in 2270.
About that time, the developments associated with the Constellation and Decatur/Belknap classes impelled Starfleet to incorporate them into the Constitution class, also, as the Excelsior was taking longer to be realized than originally expected.
So the Enterprise was the first ship refit, and became the new benchmark for other newbuilds and Constitution refits. At the risk of inflaming the Okuda adherents in here, I stick with Andy's assertion that the refit Enterprise was the lead ship of a new class. However, with the c.2285 changeover in the registry system and starship classification scheme, all the subclasses were streamlined to simply carry the name of the original class progenitor. So by the time we saw Scotty looking at the blueprints in TUC, it was back to just Constitution class.
I also strongly support Matt Jeffries intended TOS registry system, and (FJ screwups and later fandom dogma aside) purport that that system remained in place until the shift at NCC-2500 around 2285-2290 (at the latest). With that in mind, I include the Merrimac(k) (NCC-1715) from TMP and the John Muir (NCC-1732) from TUC in the ranks of the Constitutions, as well.
Make of that what you will. --Jonah
Posted by Dat (Member # 302) on :
There are four variants on the Connie class: 1. Tha Cage...similar to WNMHGB version, but has no grills on nacelle end. 2. The WNMHGB version...we've all seen this one 3. The regular series version...we've all seen this one 4. The movie version...We've all seen this one.
Posted by Sol System (Member # 30) on :
To be honest, I think inventing any refits besides the one between the first and second pilots is somewhat silly. The Enterprise routinely switched external features, most especially the ends of the nacelles, throughout the first season. Usually within the same show, as different stock footage was used for entering orbit, orbit, and leaving orbit scenes. This has made my personal effort to derive the chronology of the show somewhat more difficult, as I must confess I had never noticed the reuse of "grilled" footage before, and thus found my goal of ordering certain episodes based on the configuration of the ship unreachable.
Posted by Dukhat (Member # 341) on :
So where did the term "Constitution" class originate? Did it come from FJ, or GR, or Stephen Whitfield, or someone else?
And to beat a dead horse yet again, IMHO, I don't think that these miniscule changes should constitute an entirely new class of ship as far as the current canon of Star Trek is concerned, regardless of what FJ wrote (although I will state here & now that I still am a fan of FJ's works and own an original copy of his Manual). They should at most be considered variants, not new classes.
And before anyone says anything about that damn Soyuz class, let me again say that that was a special case, & shouldn't be considered part of this discussion.
Posted by The Mighty Monkey of Mim (Member # 646) on :
It was first used in a publication by Franz Joseph. The idea for the name came from Gene Roddenberry, and it was at his request that FJ used it. At least that's what I heard...
-MMoM Posted by The Defiant (Member # 818) on :
So many variants... and one solution. See below.
Ok, they're out there in the middle of nowhere (hey, that's where I live) and malfunctions keep happening, and Scotty keeps fixing them. Well, he needs for room (for his ever expanding gut...), and they add that grille, the the ball for him, by the redshirts themselves, using the Handyman's secret weapon... duct tape.
Just trying to add a little humor. But that's an idea... repairs. Huh.
[ May 21, 2002, 17:13: Message edited by: The Defiant ]
Posted by Sol System (Member # 30) on :
I don't think anyone has a problem with the modifications themselves. Ships get refit, after all, all the time. My specific problem is that the ship switched back and forth during an episode. But that's hardly a real problem. Beyond that, it's not whether the ship was actually modified, but what exactly those modifications constituted in the larger sense of things.
Posted by The Defiant (Member # 818) on :
Course it did... because of the heroic extensive use of duct tape to accomodate Scotty's gut & butt, it became standard ration during the Cardassian & Dominion Wars. See, it all makes sense now. See? See? You never see.
Posted by Dukhat (Member # 341) on :
Mostly because we can never understand what you are talking about.
Posted by MrNeutron (Member # 524) on :
quote:Originally posted by The Mighty Monkey of Mim: Well, bearing in mind what the359 said about new ships in the com chatter in TMP E, I've gone and listened to it over and over again. I can hear the "Long Range Shuttle Lakia" part. And now I can hear what I guess is "NCC-1715," but I can't hear the "Cruiser Merrimac" part of that message. And also, I think I can hear a reference to a starship Lincoln, as well.
According to past conversations I had with Andy Probert, he said he provided several versions of comm chatter text for the Epsilon 9 scene, and that in the shortest of the sets he did he put his own name in as a gag...and that's the one they used in the film. I emailed Andy over the weekend and asked if he still had a copy of the text he wrote for said comm chatter, and he said he'd let me know if he stumbled across it. If he does, I'll give you guys the full quote.
BTW, I listened to said chatter and agree it sounds like "Lincoln".
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
I have no copy of the SFTM myself, so I couldn't check it.