Okay, all. Here's the latest version of my starship list, current up through ENT "Silent Enemy". When I asked for tearing and shredding the LAST time, I really didn't get much. Maybe that just means I've got a pretty accurate list. Or, maybe it means you guys are getting too lazy to nitpick. Either way, here you are:
Couple things, though. First, I don't want to hear any gripes about the Valiant. Secondly, I for some reason assigned the registry of the unknown Galaxy from the DS9 Calendar to the U.S.S. Magellan, I guess just because it was the only other Galaxy with no known number. It's probably a mistake, and I'll be changing it. Thirdly, please no speeches about the Trinculo or the Valkyrie.
Otherwise, it's open season.
-MMoM Posted by TSN (Member # 31) on :
The ENT doesn't have an "SS" prefix, or an unknown one. It doesn't have one at all, from what we've seen.
And shouldn't it be listed under the pre-Federation ships? It doesn't belong to the Federation Starfleet. And, if "Starfleet" refers to anything at all my that name, you have no reason to assume there aren't other ships on the list that belong to one Starfleet or another.
Posted by The Mighty Monkey of Mim (Member # 646) on :
IIRC, the related copyright registered by Paramount was "S.S. Enterprise". I think people can back me on this one, because I raised this particular question some months ago in order to clarify. I'll do some digging into the old threads and see if I can find the discussion.
And I think it's pretty obvious that the "Starfleet" we're seeing on ENT is merely the same organization we've always known, but in it's earliest stages of existence.
-MMoM Posted by The_Tom (Member # 38) on :
Nope, Berman stated in one of the earlier interviews that it was just Enterprise, no SS.
Posted by CaptainMike (Member # 709) on :
Apples and Oranges. nah, new government means new military services.. the Starfleet of Earth may have been absorbed by the creation of the Federation Starfleet, but the registries should start over since its a different affiliation.
Posted by Guardian 2000 (Member # 743) on :
Forgive me in advance, MMoM, if I nitpick too much, but here are my observations in alphabetical order:
USS Ahwahnee . . . where do we have a registry number for the ship in "Redemption"? I saw no Cheyennes in Picard's fleet, and cannot fathom how a lower registry number could come from a replacement starship.
USS Alka-Selsior . . . ugh. I would say that we should really not let in-jokes count for anything, but, on the other hand, this would serve to make the point that the ships lost at Wolf 359 were not left there. Obviously, they were salvaged, or left to rot at Qualor II.
USS Carolina, NCC-160 . . . where does the registry come from, and the class? That would put a Daedalus in operation some 70 years after the class was retired, and short of some sort of replication of the Bozeman experience, I don't see how that could be possible.
USS Centaur . . . though it used many Excelsior components, it was not an Excelsior any more than Reliant was a Constitution Class ship.
USS Concorde . . . where is it mentioned or referred to in "All Good Things"?
USS Constellation, NCC-1974 . . . would it not be prudent to assume that the Constellation from DS9 was not NCC-1974? Taking the example of the retired Hathaway (NCC-2593), I'd assume that the far older class-ship would have been retired. The only definitely known operational Constellation Class Starship was the Victory, which with a registry in the 9000 range, would put her as being far younger than the class ship, not much older than the Ambassador.
USS Dauntless . . . why is she included, since she was an alien construct? Granted, that was a kickass alien construct, and I'd love to see that design actually used down the road, but still . . .
USS Drake, Andromeda Class . . . what's an Andromeda?
USS Gettysburg, NCC-3890 . . . did we see her in DS9, or was she only mentioned? If only mentioned, I'd assume, as with the Constellation, that the old ship had been retired.
USS Hathaway . . . when/how was she mentioned/seen in "Redemption"?
USS Intrepid, NCC-38907 . . . what was Geordi doing trying to beat out a far older starship in engine efficiency experiments? I assumed the Intrepid mentioned was another Galaxy Class.
USS Magellan, Constellation Class . . . where does this come from in the episode?
USS Melbourne . . . since we actually see her clearly in Emissary as an Excelsior, would this not then be the "reality" of the thing?
USS Merrimack . . . the correct spelling is "Merrimac".
USS Spector . . . should that be "Spectre"?
USS Valiant, NCC-20000 . . . an Oberth Class Valiant? No way, dude. That is so wrong! "Let us bravely go study some big space fart or other gaseous anomaly!" :-)
USS Voyager . . . Intrepid/Constitution variant . . . methinks we could safely ignore this one, or say it was some alien name like "Vovager" or something. I'm very much against starships of the same name serving simultaneously, especially when the registry would indicate that they were built around the same time.
USS Yorktown, NCC-1717 . . . why the assumption that this is not the same ship as in "Flashback"[VGR]?
Unnamed NCC-4000 . . . where does this registry come from? It's way out of time-synch.
Well, that's about it for now.
Guardian 2000
Posted by TSN (Member # 31) on :
"USS Ahwahnee . . . where do we have a registry number for the ship in 'Redemption'?"
Tachyon detection grid Okudagram. It's featured in the Encyclopedia-2.
"USS Carolina, NCC-160 . . . where does the registry come from, and the class?"
Encyclopedia-2.
"USS Concorde . . . where is it mentioned or referred to in 'All Good Things'?"
It was sent to the Romulan Neutral Zone during the "present".
"USS Drake, Andromeda Class . . . what's an Andromeda?"
The class of the USS Drake (and the USS Prokofiev, for that matter), according to the Encyclopedia-2.
"USS Hathaway . . . when/how was she mentioned/seen in 'Redemption'?"
Most likely an assumption that the model was not relabelled between "Peak Performance" and "Redemption".
"USS Magellan, Constellation Class . . . where does this come from in the episode?"
I don't think it is. But it's in the Encylcopedia-2.
"USS Valiant, NCC-20000 . . . an Oberth Class Valiant? No way, dude. That is so wrong!"
Perhaps. But, if that's how the model was labelled, what are you going to do about it?
"USS Yorktown, NCC-1717 . . . why the assumption that this is not the same ship as in 'Flashback'[VGR]?"
I really do suggest getting yourself a copy of the Encyclopedia-2 (actually, the 2.5 would be more useful now, I guess). Although, in this instance, I admit that its assumption seems to have no real basis.
Posted by Veers (Member # 661) on :
Someone give Guardian 2000 an encyclopedia. Posted by Dukhat (Member # 341) on :
Or have him actually read some of the other posts here. Guardian2k, almost all of your questions can be answered in either the Encyclopedia, the show, the movies, or right here at Flare. And needless to say, Mighty Monkey of Mim's information is pretty much correct.
However, I agree with you on one stance: I also don't believe that the Constellation which visited DS9 was the original class ship. Nor do I think that the Excelsior mentioned in TNG was the class ship. I think both ships were newer. I have my reasons.
Posted by Guardian 2000 (Member # 743) on :
quote:Originally posted by TSN:
"USS Carolina, NCC-160 . . . where does the registry come from, and the class?"
Encyclopedia-2.
That is in direct contradiction to the statement on TNG that such a ship hasn't been in service for 172 years.
quote:
"USS Magellan, Constellation Class . . . where does this come from in the episode?"
I don't think it is. But it's in the Encylcopedia-2.
So, in other words, they just sorta made it up. I'd accept the notion that there was an inactive/mothballed starship of that class and registry, but, as I find the notion of multiple starships of the same name operating simultaneously disturbing, and since there was a Galaxy Class Magellan apparently in operation during that time (presumption based on registry), I'd be led to discount this ship.
quote:
"USS Valiant, NCC-20000 . . . an Oberth Class Valiant? No way, dude. That is so wrong!"
Perhaps. But, if that's how the model was labelled, what are you going to do about it?
Bitching, followed shortly thereafter by moaning, culminating in choosing to ignore it. :-)
quote:
"USS Yorktown, NCC-1717 . . . why the assumption that this is not the same ship as in 'Flashback'[VGR]?"
I really do suggest getting yourself a copy of the Encyclopedia-2 (actually, the 2.5 would be more useful now, I guess). Although, in this instance, I admit that its assumption seems to have no real basis.
Well, ever since the DS9 Technical Manual, I've been rather slow to go grab the latest Trek reference for sale. But, I'll bite the bullet.
However, I'm of the opinion that where something in the E-2 is contradictory or contrary to the facts from the show, or even the reasonable suppositions therefrom, it can be ignored. This rule was established after I read the DS9 Tech Manual . . . ugh.
G2k
Posted by Guardian 2000 (Member # 743) on :
quote:Originally posted by Dukhat: Or have him actually read some of the other posts here. Guardian2k, almost all of your questions can be answered in either the Encyclopedia, the show, the movies, or right here at Flare.
There comes a point at which one expects too much of a newcomer. Though I've been reading the posts for a couple of months, and have perused posts going back even further, I never saw anything which suggested I had to go back and read every single post ever written. Sorry I missed that caveat.
As for the show and movies, there are things not noticed, even by someone watching closely, unless someone else has noticed it. I've been on both sides of that. Further, disagreement can exist on just what some seldom-noticed thing is. I was asking for the "where" in the episode, and for the "why" behind it.
Further, neither Deep Space Nine nor Voyager were available in this area after the fourth season of the former, and the second of the latter, roughly. Some of my questions, therefore, are based on a TNG-centric view of the Trek cosmos of the 24th Century, and things which are clearly weird from that viewpoint will come under scrutiny. However, as obviated in the responses, some of the things I asked about were strictly from the Encyclopedia-2, nowhere to be found in the episode of DS9 or Voyager.
quote:However, I agree with you on one stance: I also don't believe that the Constellation which visited DS9 was the original class ship. Nor do I think that the Excelsior mentioned in TNG was the class ship. I think both ships were newer. I have my reasons.
. . . and those reasons would be . . . ?
G2k
Posted by The Red Admiral (Member # 602) on :
An intersting compilation, and nice work Monkey. Some things though:
-Merrimack, with a 'K', is correct Guardian.
-The Concord of the Freedom Class is correct also, though I have it spelt without the 'e' on the end.
-I agree with Guardian on that I don't believe there was a Cheyenne Class Ahwahnee in 'Redemption'.
-USS Drake, Andromeda Class correct.
-The Hathaway in Redemption is an old argument. It was the Valkyrie, but the Hathaway model from 'Peak Performance' was used in the episode.
-USS Magellan, Constellation Class, no problem there.
-USS Spector, Akira Class, correct also.
-I agree with Guardian on the Centaur, it was definitely not an Excelsior Class
-Connie Yorktown correct, the Flashback ship mentioned was another unknown ship.
-Monkey, where'd you get the name 'USS Bonchune' from Message in a Bottle? Is there a reference I've missed?
-What canon info is there on a 'Hermes Class'?
-Can we have more info on the Steamrunner class 'USS Hiroshima'.
-USS Madison from ST: First Contact. I was under the impression this was called the USS Manson.
-USS Nash, where's this written/mentioned?
-USS Saladin. Where in STII is this mentioned? I've missed this reference.
Posted by CaptainMike (Member # 709) on :
get rid of those S.S. prefixes. Vulcans would NOT use them..
Posted by Veers (Member # 661) on :
Ahhhhhhh....this is how Flare should be. Good ol' Encyclopedia-era ship discussions! Now, where shall we begin? Answering Red Admiral's questions:
quote: Monkey, where'd you get the name 'USS Bonchune' from Message in a Bottle? Is there a reference I've missed?
I believe the name was written on the Nebula class ship in the episode. It's confirmed. It's the name of a modeler, I believe.
quote: What canon info is there on a 'Hermes Class'?
I'm not sure how to explain that, although I know the Hermes was seen on a computer display in ST II. This, along with the Saladin, which might be Hermes class.
quote: Can we have more info on the Steamrunner class 'USS Hiroshima'.
This ship was seen in the back of Encyclopedia 2, in the ship chart section. The Steamrunner was labeled 'USS Hiroshima,' but it was not listed anywhere else in the book. In fact, in Encyc 2.5, the Steamrunner back there was renamed 'USS Appalachia.'
quote: USS Madison from ST: First Contact. I was under the impression this was called the USS Manson.
It's hard to tell whether it's "Manson" or "Madison," but I like "Manson."
quote: USS Nash, where's this written/mentioned?
It's supposedly the Sysdney-class ship that is seen at DS9 a lot. I think it's written on the model, with the ridiculous registry NCC-2010-B. There's something on Bernd's site about it.
Posted by Dukhat (Member # 341) on :
Guardian: I never said that you had to read every post ever written. I just said that you'd be able to find your answers here. And as far as the little things in movies & shows being noticed, again Flare is the best place to find out about them. Much of the information on my shiplist wouldn't have been there if I hadn't found the info from another forumite.
But, alas, you are correct. I wasn't aware that you didn't have the reference sources which most of us have had for years, so I'm sorry if my response was a little abrupt. And as far as my reasoning goes for the Constellation and Excelsior, it's pretty much what you stated. These class ships are almost a century old. I understand that there's no canon facts with starship lifespans, but common sense dictates that these two ships are no longer in service. Technological upgrades, retirements, wars, age, speed of production for new ships, etc. all are factors. Geordi stated that the Excelsior class ships had older warp cores or something, and the fect of the Hathaway's retirement, are other factors.
Posted by Dukhat (Member # 341) on :
MMoM: I noticed that you have the U.S.S. Challenger NCC-2032 listed as a Challenger class ship. Since the Challenger class Buran model was made from Galaxy class parts, it's highly doubtful that this is the class ship.
Posted by Veers (Member # 661) on :
Did you know the USS Cairo was in "Preemptive Strike?" Look in the ship list in the encyclopedia (page 471). I looked back on the episode and, although it was not mentioned by name, there is an Excelsior-class ship that delivers Admiral Nechayev to the Enterprise. This must be the Cairo. (This is not in the main text and I have not seen this mentioned on any website)
Posted by Guardian 2000 (Member # 743) on :
[QUOTE]Originally posted by The Red Admiral: An intersting compilation, and nice work Monkey. Some things though:
-Merrimack, with a 'K', is correct Guardian.[QUOTE]
I doubt that. The Monitor and the Merrimac were, based on the registries, probably built simultaneously. The history that the ship names draw from involves a ship called the Merrimac . . . no 'K'. Even if the ship were labelled Merrimack, it would be an error, and one that I'd prefer to see ignored in favor of the correct spelling.
[QUOTE]-I agree with Guardian on that I don't believe there was a Cheyenne Class Ahwahnee in 'Redemption'.[QUOTE]
Actually, I questioned the Ahwahnee, but in retrospect they could have simply brought an older, never-completed spaceframe out of storage and replaced the ship with it.
[QUOTE]-Connie Yorktown correct, the Flashback ship mentioned was another unknown ship.[QUOTE]
Why?
[QUOTE]-Monkey, where'd you get the name 'USS Bonchune' from Message in a Bottle? Is there a reference I've missed?[QUOTE]
Actually, I was able to download the episode, and as I recall (I don't have it on this computer) the name is referenced verbally. The Dutch subtitles told me how to spell it, or else I would have been lost.
Posted by CaptainMike (Member # 709) on :
The constitution-class Yorktown was in ST:IV it was disabled by the probe.. according to Okuda, the Yorktown, or a new Yorktown that was replacing that, was renamed Enterprise-A at the end of that movie. either way, the original Yorktown was no longer in service by ST:VI, when Flashback was set. Its a second Yorktown, class-unknown, registry-unknown.
Most Starfleet type sources say Merrimac, but i think Merrimack has some historical validity somewhere along the lines. Kind of like Endeavor/Endeavour.
Posted by Veers (Member # 661) on :
Again, people ignored my post which revealed important ship information previously unpublished...
Posted by TSN (Member # 31) on :
"'USS Carolina, NCC-160 . . . where does the registry come from, and the class?'
"Encyclopedia-2.
"That is in direct contradiction to the statement on TNG that such a ship hasn't been in service for 172 years."
Yes, I know that. I don't accept the class, either. I was just telling you where he got the info.
"'USS Magellan, Constellation Class . . . where does this come from in the episode?'
"I don't think it is. But it's in the Encylcopedia-2.
"So, in other words, they just sorta made it up."
Well, as it's a fictional show, of course it was made up. But it most likely wasn't invented solely for the Encyclopedia. It was probably on an obscure Okudagram somewhere at some point. That's where Okuda got most of the Encyclopedia registries that appear to have come from nowhere.
"The Concord of the Freedom Class is correct also, though I have it spelt without the 'e' on the end."
"Concord" is a city. "Concorde" is a jet. I'd say it was more likely named after the city. ("Concord" is also a grape, but that probably isn't important.)
"What canon info is there on a 'Hermes Class'?
"I'm not sure how to explain that, although I know the Hermes was seen on a computer display in ST II. This, along with the Saladin, which might be Hermes class."
The Hermes, Saladin, and Ptolemy classes are from Franz Joseph's book. The diagrams from the book appeared on a background display in ST2. They were literally just copies of the pages from the book. However, because the pages were rectangular, and the display was round, the actual names were never on screen. So, the designs are technically canon, but the names aren't.
"The Monitor and the Merrimac were, based on the registries, probably built simultaneously. The history that the ship names draw from involves a ship called the Merrimac . . . no 'K'."
Not true. To be historically correct, the name is not spelled "Merrimac" or "Merrimack". It's spelled "Virginia".
"Actually, I was able to download the episode, and as I recall (I don't have it on this computer) the name [USS Bonchune] is referenced verbally. The Dutch subtitles told me how to spell it, or else I would have been lost."
Somehow, I doubt that. Especially since, as mentioned, Bonchune is one of Mojo's cronies at Foundation. I doubt the writers of the episode knew that the CGI guys were going to stick his name on the hull. Besides, if it had been mentioned in dialogue, we all would have known about it years ago, rather than having to wait until Mojo told us (or however we found out).
[ January 21, 2002: Message edited by: TSN ]
Posted by Dat (Member # 302) on :
In reference to the Merrimac(k) issue, the ship is supposed to be named after CSS Virgina in relation to USS Monitor. But there was a USS Merrimac(k) in pre-Civil War times (which became the Virginia). There was also a USS Merrimac(k) in service for the Union navy during the Civil War as well. Both ships have had both spellings listed in documents in reference to the ships. They were named after the town of whom I believe the residents also are in disagreement over how to spell the name, and so the town name has also been spelled both ways. I don't know how the name was spelled in the script, but Merrimack just looks better.
Posted by The Mighty Monkey of Mim (Member # 646) on :
I'll respond to Guardian2000's points first:
quote:Originally posted by Guardian 2000: USS Ahwahnee . . . where do we have a registry number for the ship in "Redemption"? I saw no Cheyennes in Picard's fleet, and cannot fathom how a lower registry number could come from a replacement starship.
USS Alka-Selsior . . . ugh. I would say that we should really not let in-jokes count for anything, but, on the other hand, this would serve to make the point that the ships lost at Wolf 359 were not left there. Obviously, they were salvaged, or left to rot at Qualor II.
USS Carolina, NCC-160 . . . where does the registry come from, and the class? That would put a Daedalus in operation some 70 years after the class was retired, and short of some sort of replication of the Bozeman experience, I don't see how that could be possible.
USS Centaur . . . though it used many Excelsior components, it was not an Excelsior any more than Reliant was a Constitution Class ship.
USS Concorde . . . where is it mentioned or referred to in "All Good Things"?
USS Constellation, NCC-1974 . . . would it not be prudent to assume that the Constellation from DS9 was not NCC-1974? Taking the example of the retired Hathaway (NCC-2593), I'd assume that the far older class-ship would have been retired. The only definitely known operational Constellation Class Starship was the Victory, which with a registry in the 9000 range, would put her as being far younger than the class ship, not much older than the Ambassador.
USS Dauntless . . . why is she included, since she was an alien construct? Granted, that was a kickass alien construct, and I'd love to see that design actually used down the road, but still . . .
USS Drake, Andromeda Class . . . what's an Andromeda?
USS Gettysburg, NCC-3890 . . . did we see her in DS9, or was she only mentioned? If only mentioned, I'd assume, as with the Constellation, that the old ship had been retired.
USS Hathaway . . . when/how was she mentioned/seen in "Redemption"?
USS Intrepid, NCC-38907 . . . what was Geordi doing trying to beat out a far older starship in engine efficiency experiments? I assumed the Intrepid mentioned was another Galaxy Class.
USS Magellan, Constellation Class . . . where does this come from in the episode?
USS Melbourne . . . since we actually see her clearly in Emissary as an Excelsior, would this not then be the "reality" of the thing?
USS Merrimack . . . the correct spelling is "Merrimac".
USS Spector . . . should that be "Spectre"?
USS Valiant, NCC-20000 . . . an Oberth Class Valiant? No way, dude. That is so wrong! "Let us bravely go study some big space fart or other gaseous anomaly!" :-)
USS Voyager . . . Intrepid/Constitution variant . . . methinks we could safely ignore this one, or say it was some alien name like "Vovager" or something. I'm very much against starships of the same name serving simultaneously, especially when the registry would indicate that they were built around the same time.
USS Yorktown, NCC-1717 . . . why the assumption that this is not the same ship as in "Flashback"[VGR]?
Unnamed NCC-4000 . . . where does this registry come from? It's way out of time-synch.
Guardian 2000
1. The second Ahwahnee's reg is from an okudagaram from the episode showing the deployment of the tachyon detection grid.
2. Yes this is just an in-joke, but I threw it in anyway. Take it with a grain of salt.
3. The registry comes from the Encyclopedia, and while it does seem a bit of a stretch, people have rationalized explanations for how the Carolina could be a Daedalus. Anyways, it was just a hoax by the Klingons, so I don't think we have to worry about it too much.
4. The Centaur is officially an Excelsior-class starship variant, as per the DS9 Technical Manual.
5. As TSN said, the Concord was ordered to the Neutral Zone by Admiral Nakamura along with 15 other ships to investigate a Romulan military buildup.
6. No, I don't think there's any reason to think that the Constellation is not the original. Primarily, for the same reason why there's no reason the Excelsior from "Interface" can't be the same as from STIII. These ships last a long time. They may be overhauled many-times-over, and undergo countless systems upgrades throughout their service, but there's really no reason why the ship itself can't easily last up to a hundred years and possibly beyond. (This very subject is discussed in the TNG Technical Manual. The Galaxy-class was designed to last for that long.) If the Constellation was a fairly new vessel (still carrying an NX- number and undergoing certification tests) in 2293 (at the time of TUC), I think it's perfectly plausible that it is still seeing duty in the early 2370's.
7. The Dauntless is included simply because I of my conjecture that such a ship would in fact have to exist in order to have fooled the VGR crew so easily. It's probably not too solid, but I'd like to keep it there just for now.
8. The second Drake's information is in the Encyclopedia, originally from an okudagram.
9. See number 6. Same goes here.
10. A screencap of the "Redemption" ship done by The Red Admiral showed it to be labeled with the Hathaway's registry number. This of course refutes the commonly-held notion that the ship in that episode was the U.S.S. Valkyrie.
11. No, the second Intrepid has always been an Excelsior no matter where you look. (Encyclopedia, web site, and probably from an okudagram originally.)
12. The Magellan's info is presented in the Encyclopedia, and it presumably came from an okudagram in the episode.
13. The "reality" of it is that there were two ships bearing the name and number of the Melbourne. The Excelsior was seen in "Emissary" (DS9), and the Nebula was seen in BOTH "Best of Both Worlds" (TNG) and "Emissary". I refuse to simply ignore the existence of one or the other. I think there's plenty of rationalizations that could be made, likely having to do with the scrambling of as many vessels as possible for the battle (including scrap-jobs, etc.) or something along a similar line. In any case, the fact is that there were two Melbournes.
14. Actually, the correct spelling is MERRIMACK. The first edition of the Encyclopedia spelled it wrong. The error is corrected in the later editions. Easy to get mixed up, though. There were two Union vessels in service during the Civil War, the Merrimack and the Merrimac. The former was the ship that was sunk in the Elizabeth River, and then whose hulk was salvaged by the Confederates and converted into the ironclad Virginia. Since this is the ship that the Nebula was named for, the 'k' spelling is correct. I believe the okudagrams bear that out.
15. Nope, Spector. From the Fact Files.
16. The Oberth from Generations was labeled with that name and registry. Sorry if you don't like it.
17. This is an admitted conjecture. I don't think we've yet received a definite confirmation as to whether this model was in fact used in the battle sequences of DS9 "A Time to Stand", but most of us seem to be pretty confident that it was.
18. Err...because it was converted to the U.S.S. Enterprise NCC-1701-A at the end of STIV?!
19. NCC-4000 comes from a display on the Enterprise bridge in STIII. The display was a slide of a page from the Franz Joseph Technical Manual, depicting the tug U.S.S. Ptolemy NCC-3801 pulling a cargo module labeled with the registry. (The Technical Manual itself would imply that the "transport containers" got their own registry numbers, but as far as canon goes, that registry could easily be that of another ship to which the module was attached, a la shuttlecraft.)
There you are.
Now, to other questions:
1. The Bonchune. This was the Nebula-class ship that persued the U.S.S. Prometheus in "Mesage in a Bottle" (VGR). The name was confirmed by Mojo.
3. The Hiroshima. The only place this ship has ever appeared is in the second edition of the Encyclopedia. I include it for the sake of completeness.
4. The Nash. This was the Sydney-class ship that appeared here and there throughout DS9, always for some strange reason flying *upside-down*. The registry is a stumper, it's the Jenolan's number with a 'B' added to it. Certainly, a wierd little ship. Here's a pic of the model: http://home.arcor.de/spike730/starfleet_ships/canon/pics/nash.jpg
5. Class ships in TUC. For the purposes of my list, (and I've recently written Okuda asking for confirmation, though I have received no reply yet) I am assuming that the Springfield, Challenger, Whorfin, and Korolev from the displays/charts in TUC were intended to be the class prototypes of the respective TNG-era ship classes of the same names. Personally, I just feel that it's too much of a coincidence to think these names were all presented to us and were not intended as a nod to TNG, especially with all the other such homages hidden within the film.
6. Madison or Manson? Well, the CC said Madison so...
I guess that's about it. -MMoM
[ January 21, 2002: Message edited by: The Mighty Monkey of Mim ]
Posted by The Mighty Monkey of Mim (Member # 646) on :
quote:Originally posted by Veers: Again, people ignored my post which revealed important ship information previously unpublished...
Don't feel left out, Marshall. I'll add your info when I get a chance.
-MMoM Posted by Dukhat (Member # 341) on :
Well, the Whorfin wasn't a TNG era ship, so no problem there. I don't have a problem with the Korolev either, if only because there's no design for it ( the 5XXXX registry # for the Goddard notwithstanding). But the Springfield and Challenger being the class ships of the TNG era fleet? Aren't you just stretching credibility a bit? These TUC ships were in service in 2293, and were presumably first built even earlier. So you're saying that ships from the Galaxy class family were in service in Kirk's time?
Posted by The Red Admiral (Member # 602) on :
Yeh I'm firmly with Dukhat on the Springfield, Challenger, Whorfin, and Korolev issue. These are definitely TNG era ships, or at least early-to-mid 24th century ships. On many occasions we see ships who have same-named predecessors, this is just another example. These were not Kirk era originals.
Plus, some of these ships have existing models, and they suggest they are of the Galaxy Class family (Springfield and Challenger).
Monkey: yeh I was aware of the Saladin/Ptolemy ships and so forth, just not that they were shown on screen/okudagram in an episode/movie. Thanks for the info on this.
Also I knew of the Sydney Class ship called Nash, just not the actual proof that it was. I know of the ship seen upside down in DS9, but I hadn't seen that model pic before, which surprised me a lot. Cheers
Posted by Veers (Member # 661) on :
MMoM: Thank you for looking at my information. Hopefully, other sites will add that info to their lists. And it's good to see that I'm officially a Marshall again, after being demoted sooooo long ago!
Can Mojo answer any questions regarding the ships in "A Time to Stand?" Maybe we could get a few things cleared up.
Posted by The Mighty Monkey of Mim (Member # 646) on :
I figured you'd suffered enough, and deserved to be reinstated.
The "A Time to Stand" ships were all physical models, IIRC, so Foundation Imaging wouldn't have been involved with them, and Mojo probably wouldn't know anything. Okuda, on the other hand, might. If we can ever get him to spill his guts about it...
-MMoM Posted by TSN (Member # 31) on :
"...I say there's no reason for crying "The first five letters of that word are cut off! It can't be canon!".
But that's not the case. The names don't appear on the displays at all, partially or in any other form. They are completely missing, w/o even the smallest piece visible.
Posted by The Mighty Monkey of Mim (Member # 646) on :
At least PART of the lettering is there. You're absolutely right that some of it is cut off, though. I'm not disputing that. BUT IT DOESN'T MAKE ANY DIFFERENCE. We *know* what was there, and it's just being waaaaaaaaaaay too anal to say it "doesn't count."
IMHO, of course. To each his own... -MMoM
[ January 21, 2002: Message edited by: The Mighty Monkey of Mim ]
Posted by Dax (Member # 191) on :
I think it makes the most sense that the USS Intrepid from "Force of Nature" is actually the Intrepid-class prototype. The episode takes place only 9 months before our beloved USS Voyager is launched. Surely the class ship would've been out and about for a while.
I'm inclined to think that the Yorktown from "Flashback" is the original Connie. I just don't like the idea that the Ent-A was originally the Yorktown. It's simply uncalled for.
Posted by Masao (Member # 232) on :
Even though the correct spelling is with the "K," Starfleet, 500 years after the fact, might have easily misspelled the name with a "c"!
Posted by Guardian 2000 (Member # 743) on :
quote:Originally posted by The Mighty Monkey of Mim: 3. The registry comes from the Encyclopedia, and while it does seem a bit of a stretch, people have rationalized explanations for how the Carolina could be a Daedalus. Anyways, it was just a hoax by the Klingons, so I don't think we have to worry about it too much.
Yeah, it was just a hoax, but it makes Scotty seem stupid. Further, given that nowhere in the episode is a registry suggested, or even intimated off of any of the blinkies on the bridge (where in the name of hell did they get 160?), I think this registry and class description can be discounted as being contrary to canon fact (i.e. Data's "172 years" comment . . . the registry of 160 could stand, possibly, but so long as it was understood as being unsupported by canon episode fact).
quote:4. The Centaur is officially an Excelsior-class starship variant, as per the DS9 Technical Manual.
Um, no. There is an Excelsior Class variant shown on page 156, but I see nothing to suggest that it is the Centaur. It lacks numerous Centaur features, most notably the Centaur's many nutsacks hanging under the saucer. I also see nothing to suggest the oversized Miranda Class torpedo launcher thingy . . . as far as can be seen from the pic in the DS9TM, the Excelsior Class variant referred to is just a saucer, pylons, and nacelles.
quote:6. No, I don't think there's any reason to think that the Constellation is not the original. Primarily, for the same reason why there's no reason the Excelsior from "Interface" can't be the same as from STIII. These ships last a long time. They may be overhauled many-times-over, and undergo countless systems upgrades throughout their service, but there's really no reason why the ship itself can't easily last up to a hundred years and possibly beyond. (This very subject is discussed in the TNG Technical Manual. The Galaxy-class was designed to last for that long.) If the Constellation was a fairly new vessel (still carrying an NX- number and undergoing certification tests) in 2293 (at the time of TUC), I think it's perfectly plausible that it is still seeing duty in the early 2370's.
Actually, given the registry of NCC-1974 plus the concept of some chronological basis for registries, the Constellation Class would have preceded Excelsior, NCC-2000. This is especially true if one assumes that there might be "development time" considerations involved. (In other words, even if NCC-2000 was a long time coming, there's no reason to assume that development of NCC-1974 would have been longer . . . it's just a four-nacelled, "overworked, underpowered" beast, after all.)
Further, though the Galaxy-Class spaceframe was specifically designed to last a hella-long time, assuming refits, there is nothing to suggest that earlier starships were capable of similar lifetimes. Indeed, Morrow's (albeit erroneous) line in Star Trek III about the Enterprise being 20 years old suggests that lifetimes of 100 years would have been outside the recommended design life of a starship of the TMP era.
Sure, you can do rebuilds, refits, et cetera, but there comes a point where you've gotta go in and replace the spaceframe, which means you've just torn the whole damned ship apart.
[QUOTE]11. No, the second Intrepid has always been an Excelsior no matter where you look. (Encyclopedia, web site, and probably from an okudagram originally.)[QUOTE]
By the use of the term "probably", I assume that the evidence is either from the Encyclopedia or the website. Thus, with the strictest view of canon, there's nothing to suggest that the Intrepid was an old fart Excelsior. Granted, there's nothing to suggest it's a Galaxy, but one would presuppose that it is a newer starship than a 3xxxx.
(UBB Code is tiresome . . . simple quotation marks follow.)
"13. The "reality" of it is that there were two ships bearing the name and number of the Melbourne. The Excelsior was seen in "Emissary" (DS9), and the Nebula was seen in BOTH "Best of Both Worlds" (TNG) and "Emissary". I refuse to simply ignore the existence of one or the other. I think there's plenty of rationalizations that could be made, likely having to do with the scrambling of as many vessels as possible for the battle (including scrap-jobs, etc.) or something along a similar line. In any case, the fact is that there were two Melbournes."
But with the same damned registry? No sense at all in that (Defiant notwithstanding). I'd ditch the Nebula.
"4. Actually, the correct spelling is MERRIMACK. The first edition of the Encyclopedia spelled it wrong. The error is corrected in the later editions. Easy to get mixed up, though. There were two Union vessels in service during the Civil War, the Merrimack and the Merrimac. The former was the ship that was sunk in the Elizabeth River, and then whose hulk was salvaged by the Confederates and converted into the ironclad Virginia. Since this is the ship that the Nebula was named for, the 'k' spelling is correct. I believe the okudagrams bear that out."
Harper's Weekly, the New York Herald, and Quarterly Review subscribe to the Merrimac spelling. Also, every single lithograph from that era at http://www.history.navy.mil/photos/sh-usn/usnsh-m/merimak2.htm (the official U.S. Navy site) subscribes to the spelling Merrimac (except for the last, for which it is impossible to tell), and these were period pieces. Of course, the site itself argues for the Merrimack spelling, but offers no evidence to support this view. Similarly, most sites which suggest that the ship was named after the river Merrimack (as opposed to the valley known as Merrimac) make no evidenciary claims. I say, screw 'em.
"16. The Oberth from Generations was labeled with that name and registry. Sorry if you don't like it. "
Not your fault . . . it's just stupid. I noted, however, that there was no registry offerred for the Miranda from Generations. Wouldn't it be better to have a Miranda Valiant?
"17. This is an admitted conjecture. I don't think we've yet received a definite confirmation as to whether this model was in fact used in the battle sequences of DS9 "A Time to Stand", but most of us seem to be pretty confident that it was."
I can't imagine the logic of changing the registry but keeping the name, from the perspective of the model-builders, unless they were just lazy that day.
"18. Err...because it was converted to the U.S.S. Enterprise NCC-1701-A at the end of STIV?! "
Um, no. Star Trek V is contrary to that notion, showing an Enterprise which has been finished in something of a rush. Further, there is no evidence in Star Trek IV that any vessel has been renamed Enterprise, or, if so, what vessel that was. As far as renaming is concerned, it might as well be Shane Johnson's U.S.S. Ti-Ho, NCC-1798.
"19. NCC-4000 comes from a display on the Enterprise bridge in STIII."
The website lists it as being from Star Trek II.
Posted by Dat (Member # 302) on :
A Miranda Valiant makes better sense, but alas, they labeled the Oberth as Valiant and the Miranda as something else. Yes, the Miranda is labeled. We just don't know if it's a new label (meaning a a different ship than its last appearance) or an old one (meaning they never bothered changing it from its last appearance).
Posted by The Mighty Monkey of Mim (Member # 646) on :
quote:Originally posted by Guardian 2000: Um, no. There is an Excelsior Class variant shown on page 156, but I see nothing to suggest that it is the Centaur. It lacks numerous Centaur features, most notably the Centaur's many nutsacks hanging under the saucer. I also see nothing to suggest the oversized Miranda Class torpedo launcher thingy . . . as far as can be seen from the pic in the DS9TM, the Excelsior Class variant referred to is just a saucer, pylons, and nacelles.
Yes, the schematic in the book is incorrect, as are *all* the kitbash schematics in the book. (See the horrendously incorrect Curry schematic? And the Intrepid/Constitution, which supposedly represents the Voyager-prototype study model? IIRC, the Yeager-class pic is off a little, too. The only possible exception is the Connie-variant, which we so far have not been able to compare with a model or screenshot.) The pic is *obviously* supposed to represent the Centaur, and in fact the very same illustration appears in the Encyclopedia under the entry "Centaur, U.S.S."
quote:Harper's Weekly, the New York Herald, and Quarterly Review subscribe to the Merrimac spelling. Also, every single lithograph from that era at http://www.history.navy.mil/photos/sh-usn/usnsh-m/merimak2.htm (the official U.S. Navy site) subscribes to the spelling Merrimac (except for the last, for which it is impossible to tell), and these were period pieces. Of course, the site itself argues for the Merrimack spelling, but offers no evidence to support this view. Similarly, most sites which suggest that the ship was named after the river Merrimack (as opposed to the valley known as Merrimac) make no evidenciary claims. I say, screw 'em.
It has been well-established (Okuda states it in the Encyclopedia) that "this ship was named in honor of the vessel that became the noted iron-clad warship C.S.S. Virginia, that fought for the Confederacy in the American Civil War." The name of that ship was MERRIMACK. During the time period and the years since, it has been frequently mis-spelled, even at times in official Navy channels. However, the correct spelling is MERRIMACK. I don't know how many times I have to say this before it gets understood.
quote:I can't imagine the logic of changing the registry but keeping the name, from the perspective of the model-builders, unless they were just lazy that day.
Well, what happened (again, this is as yet unconfirmed, but is widely accepted) is this: When VGR was in it's early pre-production stages, Rick Sternbach built this study model as a prototype for what the new ship was going to look like. The registry is lower because at the time, the plan was for Voyager to be an older ship that had been commissioned made a name for itself during the Cardassian War. This idea (and the design) was later scrapped in favor of a newer vessel. But, the theory goes, this study-model was then used as one of the background ships in DS9 along with the kitbashes like the Curry, Centaur, and Yeager-class.
quote:Um, no. Star Trek V is contrary to that notion, showing an Enterprise which has been finished in something of a rush.
I can't believe how much I hear this. Why is STV contrary to that notion? The ship had was in bad shape because the Yorktown had just had its ass kicked by the Probe before limping (or being towed) back into dock.
quote:Further, there is no evidence in Star Trek IV that any vessel has been renamed Enterprise, or, if so, what vessel that was. As far as renaming is concerned, it might as well be Shane Johnson's U.S.S. Ti-Ho, NCC-1798.
So, they built an entirely new ship in the few days (perhaps even hours, though it is more likely days, since Gilian had time to find an assignment on a science vessel...) that comprised the last 10 minutes of the film? Damn, that's fast. Scotty would be amazed...
Having it be the Yorktown was Gene's suggestion and has since been backed by all official reference materials and has been recognized by TPTB. Johnson pulled the Ti-Ho from one of two places: thin air or his ass.
quote:"19. NCC-4000 comes from a display on the Enterprise bridge in STIII."
The website lists it as being from Star Trek II.
Sorry. I think the display actually appeared in both films along w/the other Tech Manual screens.
-MMoM Posted by The Mighty Monkey of Mim (Member # 646) on :
Looking back on that post, maybe I sounded a little snippety. Sorry.
-MMoM Posted by TSN (Member # 31) on :
"Johnson pulled the Ti-Ho from one of two places: thin air or his ass."
And where do you think Roddenberry pulled his info from?
Posted by Sol System (Member # 30) on :
So everything is canon? I liked that episode of TNG where Buffy played the musical mice.
Posted by The_Tom (Member # 38) on :
Which end does one blow into?
Posted by The Mighty Monkey of Mim (Member # 646) on :
quote:Originally posted by TSN: And where do you think Roddenberry pulled his info from?
A similar location, but he has the luxury of having his recognized by TPTB. Posted by Identity Crisis (Member # 67) on :
Ah, was the Enterprise-A renamed from something else debate.
There are many options, here are the ones I've seen in various published books: USS Yorktown, NCC-1717 USS Yorktown, NCC-something else USS Ti-Ho, NCC-1798 USS Atlantis, NCC-1786 USS Levant, NCC-1843
Just 'cos GR made an off the cuff suggestion of Yorktown doesn't make it so. And anyway, which Yorktown? The one crippled by the Probe in ST IV or a newly built replacement?
All far too much fun. Keep arguing. Posted by Woodside Kid (Member # 699) on :
quote: So, they built an entirely new ship in the few days (perhaps even hours, though it is more likely days, since Gilian had time to find an assignment on a science vessel...) that comprised the last 10 minutes of the film? Damn, that's fast. Scotty would be amazed...
No one says they built the thing from the keel up, MMoM; they just gave it a new name. What you're proposing is, in that same few days, they repaired a ship capable of towing a Constitution-class vessel at warp (remember, the probe had paralyzed all the Earth-orbiting starships), sent it out to wherever the Yorktown was, repaired the Spacedock facility in the meantime, towed Yorktown back to Earth, repaired her, possibly gave her a new bridge module (the one on the screen looks a lot darker than the E-A's at the end), gave her a new paint job AND reassigned her entire command crew.... And this is supposed to be simpler than renaming a ship already in Spacedock?
[ January 23, 2002: Message edited by: Woodside Kid ]
Posted by Dax (Member # 191) on :
Another thing, MMoM, we don't know how much time had passed between the return to Earth of Kirk's crew and their assignment to the Ent-A. The hearing where Kirk was demoted may have been a few days after there return, but they may not have got their new ship until months after that. Just because the events only take 10 minutes in the movie doesn't mean anything. Such is the beauty of scene cuts.
Posted by Identity Crisis (Member # 67) on :
quote:Originally posted by Dax: we don't know how much time had passed between the return to Earth of Kirk's crew and their assignment to the Ent-A. The hearing where Kirk was demoted may have been a few days after there return, but they may not have got their new ship until months after that. Just because the events only take 10 minutes in the movie doesn't mean anything.
Alas no. Kirk was still wearing his admiral's uniform in the scene in the shuttle going to the Ent-A. They'd changed the rank pin, but not the uniform, so it still had the extra gold piping. So really that scene must have taken place immediately after the hearing.
But the hearing was probably a few days, if not weeks, after their arrival - enough time to repaint a starship already in Space Dock, but possibly not enough time to retrieve the Yorktown from where she was disabled, cart out all the bodies of the dead crew, repair any damage caused by the loss of power, etc. Then again, we just don't know for sure.
Posted by USS Vanguard (Member # 130) on :
Pretty sure not mentioned yet but, where'd you get Deneva class for the Merchantman from? Also, why is it SS Merchantman, i thought Merchantman was the name of the type of ship, not the name of the ship itself?
Posted by The Mighty Monkey of Mim (Member # 646) on :
quote:Originally posted by USS Vanguard: Pretty sure not mentioned yet but, where'd you get Deneva class for the Merchantman from? Also, why is it SS Merchantman, i thought Merchantman was the name of the type of ship, not the name of the ship itself?
AFAIK, Merchantman was the name of the ship. And it was this model that was used for (among many other things) the Arcos in "Legacy" (TNG). Based on that (and the fact that the pilots of the ship in STIII appear quite human, and the ship has a human name) I have extrapolated/conjectured that the Merchantman was a Federation-registered vessel, and that it was Deneva-class.
Posted by Ryan McReynolds (Member # 28) on :
In the script for The Search for Spock, the ship is described simply as "a merchantman" (just as the Klingon ship is called "a bird of prey") suggesting that it is not a proper name of any type, and definately not the ship's name.
Posted by TSN (Member # 31) on :
And where did you get this information that the Arcos was the MM model? Last I heard, we still only knew the Arcos to be a dot that only lasted on the screen for a second.
Posted by Veers (Member # 661) on :
Isn't there a pic? I think there is an old thread somewhere...
Posted by Veers (Member # 661) on :
No, I just looked and I can't find a thread. But I thought someone had a pic. Anyone have "Legacy" on tape and can get a screencap?
[ January 23, 2002: Message edited by: Veers ]
Posted by The_Tom (Member # 38) on :
Well, a screencap would be about as useful as a polaroid of a 1 cm x 1cm piece of tin foil scrunched up and dropped on the floor.
Posted by The Mighty Monkey of Mim (Member # 646) on :
Like Veers, I remember the info from an old thread here. (Maybe even from before I actually joined. I used to come here and read stuff before ever registering to post.)
And the Encyclopedia and all other reference sources I've seen have given Merchantman as the proper name of the ship. I'm reluctant to give up that idea, but maybe I will based on the script.
-MMoM Posted by Masao (Member # 232) on :
Having a ship named "SS Merchantman" makes as much sense as having a ship named "USS Battleship" or "SS Liquified Natural Gas Tanker." I'd say the Encylopedia is wrong in this instance.
Don't mention "Dreadnought," though, as this was a ship's name BEFORE it became a ship type.
Posted by TSN (Member # 31) on :
There is a screenshot of the Arcos out there somewhere, and it looks pretty much exactly like what Tom just described.
Posted by Dukhat (Member # 341) on :
And here it is:
Mighty Monkey of Mim: If you can see a Merchantman model from this crappy screencap, then you either have the greatest eyesight known to man, or you're wrong. I haven't made up my mind yet. Posted by Veers (Member # 661) on :
Smaller than I remember, but at least there is a screecap. And, they would have had to put a model in to stand in for the ship, wouldn't they? What better to use they the versatile Merchantman model?
Posted by The_Tom (Member # 38) on :
How about a headless and limbless torso of an action figure, sprayed silver and stuffed with squibs? They wouldn't even have to composite the explosion.
Posted by The Mighty Monkey of Mim (Member # 646) on :
I konw you can't see shit from the 'cap, but I think somebody had backstage info that the model used was the Merchantman.
On another note, whoever it was who was wondering where the info for the Intrepid mentioned in TNG came from, Spike's site has this pic of the display I mentioned. I can't really tell if the fact it's Excelsior-class is listed on this particular graphic, but the registry is there, and it is certainly not befitting of the Intrepid-class prototype.
-MMoM Posted by Veers (Member # 661) on :
Some interesting info on that chart. Unreadable, but interesting. I can decipher "USS Intrepid", NCC-31897 (or whatever), "commisioned," and "Captain something-something." Posted by Dax (Member # 191) on :
Which episode is that screen cap from, MMoM? I hope it's not from "Force of Nature" because that would certainly screw with logic. As a side note, it would prove that the ship couldn't have been at Wolf 359 (a topic in one of the other tech threads).
Posted by The Mighty Monkey of Mim (Member # 646) on :
Spike's site doesn't specify, but he might be able to tell you.
-MMoM Posted by Mark Nguyen (Member # 469) on :
That's from "Sins of the Father". Worf is trying to validate his brother's claims about the attack on Khitomer, and while he's searching through the computer on the bridge this is the graphic that was displayed. This has nothing to do with "Force of Nature".
Mark
[ January 24, 2002, 21:28: Message edited by: Mark Nguyen ]
Posted by TSN (Member # 31) on :
Well, I think it says:
SEARCH PARAMETERS: FEDERATION STARSHIP CLOSEST TO KHITOMER AT THE TIME OF ROMULAN ATTACK OF SD 23?5?.7 USS INTREPID NCC 38907 COMMANDING OFFICER CAPTAIN DREW DECKER DISTANCE [something] AT FIRST SENSOR CONTACT: 42.7 LIGHT YEARS [something] INITIAL SENSOR SCAN INDICATED [something] PLANETARY [something] [something] [something] DESTRUCTION OF POPULATION CENTER AND ESTIMATE 70% CASUALTIES [something] ATTACKING SPACECRAFT PRESUMED TO BE ROMULAN WARBIRDS NO LONGER IN SECTOR
Almost all of the information pertains to the Khitomer attack, so this is probably from "Sins of the Father" or "Family". And it's a reference to 2346, so there's nothing to say whether the ship was still around at the time of the episode, or not. But I don't think the class is listed.
Posted by J (Member # 608) on :
quote:Originally posted by Veers: Some interesting info on that chart. Unreadable, but interesting. I can decipher "USS Intrepid", NCC-31897 (or whatever), "commisioned," and "Captain something-something."
If anyone thinks there is a possibility of that being the Intrepid NX should be shot for extreme stupidity. Beyond that the Excelsior Intrepid has an NCC too close, the timelines would over lap.
There is no evidence to indicate that the Intrepid is not a post 359 ship--- infact all the evidence says it is Posted by Sol System (Member # 30) on :
"Angel One" was a first season episode, wasn't it? Or was it second? Either way, we should have a better source for screencaps in a few months. Not that I imagine you'll be able to see much of the ship, even from a DVD.
Posted by Spike (Member # 322) on :
The captain's name is Drew Deighan (writer of Sins of the Father).
Posted by Veers (Member # 661) on :
J--why'd you quote me? I don't think that Intrepid is Intrepid-class. Maybe in "Forces of Nature"...
Posted by Dax (Member # 191) on :
The screen cap Intrepid is obviously the Excelsior-class one. As such, I'm relieved the cap isn't from "Force of Nature" as that episodes Intrepid is surely the prototype.
Posted by J (Member # 608) on :
---humm... let's see here, there was a reason at the time I wrote that for quoting you. I think it was to indicate that I was replying to that portion of the discussion, not directly to you. It was a few pages back. Sorry if I gave the impression that I thought you thought that Intrepid was the NX.
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Frown]](frown.gif)
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
