Were there any new build Connie refits, like the new build Mirandas? If not, why not? Also was one present at Wolf 359 as indicated by that drifting secondary hull?
Posted by Aban Rune (Member # 226) on :
According to some sources, The Enterprise A was a new build.
I have no problem believeing there were some refit Connies in service well after the TOS events in Generations.
With the Mirandas, keep in mind, we really have no idea how old that design is. It's entirely possible that some of the earlier Mirandas were originally built with parts that looked more like the TOS Enterprise and were then refit with the new engines and what not around the same time as the Connies.
Posted by The Red Admiral (Member # 602) on :
That is a cool and interesting idea isn't it, that the Miranda Class we know is a refit, like the Ent-A, and that the original Miranda was more akin to the original Constitution...
I think I may have to build a speculative model of that first Miranda.
Posted by Aban Rune (Member # 226) on :
I've seen one somewhere...but I have no idea where it was.
Posted by The359 (Member # 37) on :
There is a Constitution class USS Endeavour NCC-1895, and with that registry she looks to have been built after the 2270 refit period. It was part of a fleet status list in Star Trek VI.
Posted by The Mighty Monkey of Mim (Member # 646) on :
quote:Originally posted by Aban Rune: According to some sources, The Enterprise A was a new build.
And according to others, it was the renamed U.S.S. Yorktown.
quote:I have no problem believeing there were some refit Connies in service well after the TOS events in Generations.
Neither do I. In fact, the evidence points to it.
quote:With the Mirandas, keep in mind, we really have no idea how old that design is. It's entirely possible that some of the earlier Mirandas were originally built with parts that looked more like the TOS Enterprise and were then refit with the new engines and what not around the same time as the Connies.
Possible, yes. But there's nothing to back it up. It's just as possible that the Miranda was designed in the image of the Connie-refit, as actually happened when the Reliant (then called Avenger-class) was designed for TWOK.
quote:I've seen one somewhere...but I have no idea where it was.
I remember seeing detailed sketches in the Trek Art forum over at TrekBBS. You could try there.
-MMoM Posted by Cpt. Kyle Amasov (Member # 742) on :
Maybe there was just no adequate replacement for the Miranda? The Excelsior was there in the 2290's to replace the old Constitutions, so I doubt they built more ships after series production of that class begun. But on the other hand we never saw something that could have replaced the Miranda. Of course, there are some fan-designed ships that look like Miranda-successors, but nothing was ever said on-screen that there was a replacement - or even an interest to replace - for the Miranda. So if updating them from time to time works fine, why bother building a new class?
Posted by MinutiaeMan (Member # 444) on :
It's a cool idea, really, but I have a very hard time believing that the same ships can be in operation for 100+ years. At least, not TOS era ships.
We know from ST3 and ST6 that the two respective Enterprises were considered old, especially from TSFS. It's my belief that early starships had a shorter life span, and that the Galaxy-class of 2360 was supposed to be one of the longest-living classes ever constructed (100 years according to the Tech Manual).
However, the Mirandas have been in service since at least 2280... and that means that some ships could be up to 90 years old by the time of DS9.
Although... all of the Mirandas we saw in DS9 had NCC-21xxx numbers or higher, so they're probably built somewhere in the early 2300's, or 2320's or so.
Still, lengthening the class life by 30-40 years -- even if it's a major refit -- stretches the explanation for me.
And I agree, the service of the Constitution-class refits probably didn't end right after TUC -- but I doubt that it lasted much beyond the 2310's.
Anyway, that brief appearance of the refit Connie in BOBW has never shown up on the versions of the episode that I've seen, so as far as I'm concerned, it's non-canon! Posted by Aban Rune (Member # 226) on :
[ March 12, 2002, 04:12: Message edited by: Spike ]
Posted by Reverend (Member # 335) on :
I think the 3D Gladiators did a version of it too.
Posted by Siegfried (Member # 29) on :
If you look really closely at Franz Joseph's Starfleet Tech Manual designs, you can see that his tug/transport looks a bit like a TOS-era Miranda class starship. Clearly, it lacks the saucer modifications and the rollbar, but add those in and lose the container grappler and you could have a reasonable TOS Miranda.
Posted by targetemployee (Member # 217) on :
!n the era of the first series, there was at least one ship with a registry in the 1800's. This ship, commonly recogized as the USS Intrepid , had the registry NCC-1831 .
A Miranda Class starship, the USS Lantree had a registry of NCC-1837 . Her registry may suggest that this ship was a contemporary of the USS Intrepid .
Posted by The Mighty Monkey of Mim (Member # 646) on :
quote:Originally posted by targetemployee: !n the era of the first series, there was at least one ship with a registry in the 1800's. This ship, commonly recogized as the USS Intrepid , had the registry NCC-1831.
Actually, the Intrepid is NCC-1631. Yes, I *know* the one widely circulated screencap makes it look like an 8. But I just watched the ep the last time it was on, looking especially carefully, and it really could just as easily be a 6. Apparently the Encyclopedia can't decide either. But 1631 is the number on Greg Jein's 1975 Starlog list, which is where the idea that that wall chart number belonged to the Intrepid originated.
-MMoM Posted by TSN (Member # 31) on :
1631 makes more sense, since everything else on the list is either 16xx or 17xx. But it really does look like an '8'.
Posted by CaptainMike (Member # 709) on :
I find it mildly amusing that we are arguing the accuracy of the most bullshit registry idea in Star Trek history.
Posted by Dax (Member # 191) on :
Well, as far as this thread is concerned, it'd actually be quite helpful knowing for sure what the Intrepid rego is. Can someone with the DVD please make a clear cap? I personally would like to see this Intrepid issue resolved.
Posted by Timo (Member # 245) on :
Regardless of whether we get a canonical 1831 in the TOS era, I doubt it will help clarify whether post-1800 ships looked like TOS designs or TMP ones.
After all, TMP had all those canonical verbal references to FJ ships. And there was a 2120 there, before the 1701-refit was even launched. We have no canon proof of what that ship looked like, of course, but the mere existence of that registry in that timeframe either
1) undermines any "NCC greater than 1800 means TMP-style nacelles and other design" connection (if we assume the dreadnought was TOS style) or
2) lets that connection stand (if we assume the dreadnought was TMP style), in which case there were TMP-style nacelles and design features in existence *before* the launch of the 1701-refit.
Either way, pre-TMP Mirandas become a strong possibility, and we can argue they were TOS-like or already TMP-like with equal vehemence.
Timo Saloniemi
Posted by Sol System (Member # 30) on :
The general dirth of Constitutions in the TNG and pre-TNG era suggests that they weren't building new ones for much longer after TMP. On the other hand, there are lots of other ship classes that we know exist but don't get to see often, if at all, just because.
Personally, I think we can explain the disappearance of the Constitution and the longevity of the Miranda by contrasting their typical mission profiles. The first twelve Constitutions were the best of the best, but they were also doing the most dangerous jobs. It seems possible that some of the praise heaped upon Kirk and company was due simply to their having survived.
We see elsewhere that the "Explorer" role is a risky one. How many Galaxies, pride of the fleet, have been lost?
So I would suspect that the Constitution class went out, did lots of neat stuff that was really hard on the ships, came back, got refitted, but then found their old jobs replaced by the new Excelsior class. Meanwhile, the Miranda, which seems like it would make a nice fighting ship, found itself without any wars to fight, post-Khitomer (for awhile). And being somewhat less capable in the gosh-wow deep space department, they were held back for more routine missions.
Of course, there are lots of Excelsiors around. Lots and lots of Excelsiors. If they were frontline starships, why are so many left? Well, it seems to me, first of all, that there was a varient of the Excelsior class (Enterprise B) that could very well have been intended as the explorer flavor, and there aren't very many of those around, fitting with the idea of high attrition for such ships. And, not many decades later, the Ambassador was introduced, an even more impressive explorer, freeing up even more Excelsiors from dangerous deep space assignments. And so on.
I expect I'm rambling a bit.
Posted by Mark Nguyen (Member # 469) on :
No, you make the sense. I've always said that the reason we dont' see the Ambassador, or any other big explorers for that matter, was for the simple fact that they were out there *exploring*. When they're all way out there, you don't see 'em anywhere near any other explorers like the E-D.
Mark
Posted by Timo (Member # 245) on :
On that same vein, I suspect a prominent ship design has a certain succession of "stages" in her life.
First, such a ship is built to be the biggest, fastest and baddest there is. She's sent to spearhead any UFP effort, be it in exploration or politics or blasting apart the bad guys.
Then something slightly more flashy comes out of the ASDB, and our ship loses the prominent role in politics. She becomes a mainstream explorer and defender. The new hero ship can still meet her in deep space by happenstance.
As time passes and the Federation expands, the performance of our ship becomes insufficient to take her to the depths of unexplored space. She gets relegated to a defence role, closer to home. The new hero ship can meet her in such a role.
Finally, all that is left for the old workhorse is a posting as a starbase defender that doesn't engage warp much, or a garbage scow, or something. The new hero ship won't touch that wreck with a tractor beam.
I suspect that the Constitutions were in stage two in the early 24th century, stage three just before TNG, but in stage four already when "Encounter at Farpoint" showed us the state of the art of the late 24th century fleet. The succession would be a bit slower for ships that were never intended to operate in the extreme frontlines, which would include the Mirandas.
The Excelsiors in TNG are in stage two, moving to stage three - there are still some exploring examples, but most only have a defensive, intra-Federation role now. In contrast, the TNG design style vessels are still very much into stage one, so they are all in deep space, and only deep space heroes can meet them. (Deep Space Nine heroes cannot, since they are not in deep space. They only get to see the warhorses of stage three.)
Timo Saloniemi
Posted by nx001a (Member # 291) on :
My opinion of the Constitution Class was that all the vessels still in active service were refitted to refit specs except one since Captain Picard said there was one in the fleet muscem. I also think that Starfleet might have constructed one or two new ones as well.
Although it has never been officially confirmed I believed that in 2285 with the believe that the Excelsior Class project was going to be a success the constitution class was destined to be replaced. With the failure of the transwarp drive i believe that the life of the constitution class refit continued until the end of the century. If a vessel was badly damaged it was scrapped or until it reached the end of its operational life. Personally i don't think there was any left by 2367 even though we saw the engineering hull of one at Wolf 359.
About the U.S.S. Enterprise-A being an new ship. Previous ships had deck numbers using letters but this one had numbers. I know that the Enterprise cannot have more than 24 decks but if it was an old ship it must have taken a big effort to renumber all its decks. I still think that it was the yorktown and not the atlantis or the ti-ho.
Posted by Harry (Member # 265) on :
And what of the U.S.S. Olympia (or what the name was) from "The Sound of Her Voice"? The wreckage was another reuse of the ST3 Enterprise wreck.
Can we assume that Starfleet sent out an 80 year old ship on an 8-year exploration mission!?
Posted by Timo (Member # 245) on :
Depends on what the Olympia was exploring. Not "deep space" in the sense that it would have been awfully far away from Earth - after all, the Defiant picked up the SOS and reached the site pretty rapidly, despite being tasked with escorting a convoy of transports. Such a convoy would have no business being farther out than DS9 from the Federation heartland, especially in wartime.
So perhaps the Olympia was exploring an area between Bajor and Earth. Easily within reach by elderly ships, but politically a bit risky in the early 2360s.
The writers probably don't think on these terms, but in the Trek reality the exploration ships have to be far faster and more capable than the warships. Speed means range, at least in space. It never meant range on Earth's oceans, because all ships were pretty much equally slow yet never loitered far away from the coasts - even the Pacific isn't big enough to make a fast clipper a better explorer than a slow collier. And a fast steamship was the poorest choice of all for exploration, because of fuel exhaustion. In space, a slow ship would spend a far greater proportion of exploration time just getting there, sailing through uninteresting empty space or passing explored planets. And fuel exhaustion doesn't seem to be an issue.
Timo Saloniemi
Posted by CaptainMike (Member # 709) on :
Keeping in mind that, if you like chronological registries, 1701 was used in 2245... so the 2250s and 60s could theoretically have seen a lot of increase over it, up to the 2120 (and counting on the fact that the Excelsior project probably had been in the works for a long time, and that its NCC was way behind the times by its 2285 commissioning) (BTW thats what i think happened to the Prometheus too)
Posted by TSN (Member # 31) on :
"Can someone with the ['Court Martial'] DVD please make a clear cap?"
The screencap that's out there was made by me from the DVD, and it was as clear as I could get.
Posted by Mark Nguyen (Member # 469) on :
Olympia used the ST3 crash? That's new.. Where'd you get this?
Mark
Posted by CaptainMike (Member # 709) on :
i think we saw connie refit nacelles.. where was the wreck seen again??
Posted by The Mighty Monkey of Mim (Member # 646) on :
The wreck of the Olympia was represented by the blown-up saucer and nacelle of the NCC-1701 from ST3. Same parts were seen in the Wolf 359 graveyard. (Along with a secondary hull.)
That being the case, I kind of always thought she should be a Connie, I started a thread about it a ways back, but nobody seemed to like the idea...
I apologise if I offended you regarding the screen cap, Tim. I'm just pissed off that they never released the TOS DVDs here.
Posted by Harry (Member # 265) on :
This is from one of the earlier Flare threads, IIRC.
Posted by Wraith (Member # 779) on :
i like the idea of the older ships gradually being relegated to less important duties, such as starbase defense or even planetary defense (a few connies wouldn't go amiss in the Mars Defense Perimeter, if you ask me). This could explain why admirals so often use Excelciors instead of newer ships; they were assigned to intra-federation duties and so were near to the Admirals Starbase or even Starfleet command.
Posted by Wraith (Member # 779) on :
For some reason it repeated the above so I deleted it.
[ February 23, 2002, 07:24: Message edited by: Wraith ]
Posted by CaptainMike (Member # 709) on :
howcome every screencap i see lately is from my local station.. creepy
Posted by Vogon Poet (Member # 393) on :
About 4 years back someone - Aaron the Overlord, maybe? - here did a really good TOS Miranda design, and Tachy even modelled it. I thought I might have some pics of it, but can't find any. . .
Posted by Wraith (Member # 779) on :
I'm sure that I've seen a TOS Miranda- possibly at the Daystrom Institute. I think It's on the size chart section.
[ February 24, 2002, 11:31: Message edited by: Wraith ]
Posted by MinutiaeMan (Member # 444) on :
That's it, I'm sure I'm invisible now...
I posted the link to that DITL Miranda image way back on the first page of this thread!
Posted by Ultra Magnus (Member # 239) on :
Y'know, I think that some guy posted a link to that DITL Miranda earlier on. But I could be wrong.
Posted by Wraith (Member # 779) on :
Yes you are right, sorry! About what time period would the 'new, Mirandas have been built. Are there any early (NCC-18xx) Mirandas in service in TNG?
Posted by CaptainMike (Member # 709) on :
The DITL TOS Miranda is all over the web.. and completely inaccurate IMO. Its a lousy GIF-bash, if i may coin a term. See Ships of the Star Fleet, Coventry-class and Surya-class
I modeled a Coventry a few years ago, but i dont know if any images survived the last crash.
In TNG, there was the USS Lantree.. NCC-1837 IIRC..
LODLSM
*edit* OH, BTW a much better view of a TOS version is on my site (which wont be available until 1400 hours EST because of a bandwidth cutoff) either paste these in [noclick]http://www.geocities.com/captainmike47/Images/coventry.gif[/noclick] [noclick]http://www.geocities.com/captainmike47/Images/surya.gif[/noclick] [noclick]http://www.geocities.com/captainmike47/Images/cortezuss.gif[/noclick]
[ February 25, 2002, 12:00: Message edited by: CaptainMike ]
Posted by Spike (Member # 322) on :
quote:Are there any early (NCC-18xx) Mirandas in service in TNG?
Yes, the Lantree NCC-1837.
Posted by CaptainMike (Member # 709) on :
I just said that.
What was actually the correct reg of the first Saratoga (TVH)?
Posted by Dat (Member # 302) on :
Saratoga was 1867.
The model went from Reliant 1864 -> Saratoga 1867 -> Lantree 1837 -> Brattain 21166 -> Bozeman 1941 -> Saratoga 31911 -> unnamed from "Generations". There were a few other appearance in between, but we have no name or number for them. After "Generations" all Mirandas have been CGI, but unsure of FC appearance. (even Generations appearance may have been CGI as well, but no evidence to support that)
Posted by CaptainMike (Member # 709) on :
we also have low registries for the Bozeman (1941) and, according to Okuda, the Constellation (1974). The Bozeman should be 2270s and the Constellation many say should be placed later, although ships of that type could theoretically go back as far as the Bozeman (the Hathaway 2593 is dated around mid 2280s to further toy with its class orgiin date, and to further toy with the Excelsiors 2000 as possibly being a throwback)
Posted by Wraith (Member # 779) on :
If Starfleet did decide to commission 'new' Constitution refits then presumeably they would be for some second line purpose, like those Mirandas w/the roll bar removed (transports). I think that Starfleet, like modern day militaries would try to get as much milage as possible out of it's designs and spaceframes.
Posted by MinutiaeMan (Member # 444) on :
Agreed. The Constitution refits would doubtless make superb patrol cruisers, either in low-priority areas, or in regions where the prestige of these warhorses could have an effect. But they'd probably be pulled off of, say, the Romulan Neutral Zone by 2300.
Posted by CaptainMike (Member # 709) on :
Just like Excelsiors have stayed useful for so long, but not as flagships, but serving the newer flagships
BTW i fixed that link on the last page for reading about the Coventry-class
Posted by Commander Dan (Member # 558) on :
Constitution-refit??? Oh, you must mean the Enterprise class! Or, are you refereeing to the Constitution II class?
(Just trying to stir up trouble! Sorry, I couldn’t resist!) Posted by AndrewR (Member # 44) on :
Maybe the lack of Constitution classes in later years, was because of the Khitomer Accords... maybe the Klingons stipulated an end to the production of the Constitution class... and the Feds relented (cause they had the Excelsiors, and the Ambassadors coming down the production line.
Andrew
Posted by J (Member # 608) on :
maybe Excelsior but Khitomer I was in 2290's, and the Ambassador was designed in the late 2310's.
Posted by Mark Nguyen (Member # 469) on :
We don't know that.
Mark
Posted by Matrix (Member # 376) on :
Look at it this way, B-51s are in still in use becuase they were designed to handle any type of bomb and drop many of them. That would be like the Excelsior class, the Constitution class would be the B-17 bomber. In WW2 they were effective and very durable. But by 50's they were practically useless.
Maybe by the 2360's the Connie's were useless by then. The one we saw was most likely brought out of mathballs in emergency to combat the Borg.
Posted by Wraith (Member # 779) on :
I would debate the comparison of the Excelcior to the B-52 and the Constitution to the B-17. The bombers both have completely different powerplants, one is prop, the other jet; granted the Excelcior was intended to have transwarp but the final production version does not. Also the obsolete arguement only applies to front line vessels; the Connies could easily have been modified to second line purposes; a modern day example of this is the DC-3 Dakota, designed in the 1930s it is still in service w/about 10 air forces and several civilian airlines today. I would say that the Connies were modified to be system defense cruisers or something along these lines; the science labs could easily be replaced with long range sensors or additional weapons, possibly with a downgraded warp propulsion system.
Posted by Sol System (Member # 30) on :
Did I see a registry for the Constellation class Constellation?
Posted by CaptainMike (Member # 709) on :
NCC-1974, according to Okuda
Posted by The Mighty Monkey of Mim (Member # 646) on :
It's from a display (a starship mission assignment list) used on the bridges of the Enterprise and Excelsior in TUC. The Constellation, NX-1974, was undergoing certification trials at Starbase 24 at the time of the film. The Encyclopedia lists the uprgaded standard service number, NCC-1974.
-MMoM Posted by Sol System (Member # 30) on :
Hmm. I knew this, I think. Don't have my list handy to check, though.
Posted by Matrix (Member # 376) on :
Look at the general look of the warp nacelles evolution.
TOS Era Nacelles: Red basaard collector, with cyclinder non-colorful design middle, end cap of some sort of design. Daedalus, Constitution, and the NX classes have this type of nacelle.
Movie Era Nacelles: Varies slightly but basically is a long nacelle, with a non-glowing grid. The basard collector is normally integrated with the nacelle and not glowing. Constiution II, Miranda, Oberth, Constellation, Excelsior, and Centaur classes have this.
TNG Era Nacelles: The design varies, but general design is the back grid is blue and the bassard collector is red. All TNG era ships all have this.
This shows that a few things 1.) Nacelle fashion design is consistent with their respective eras. 2.) There are three generations or more of nacelle design. 3.) Nacelle design is not consistent and can be effectively redesigned.
Posted by TSN (Member # 31) on :
"...basaard...basard...bassard..."
I'm sure Dr. Bussard is unimpressed...
Posted by AndrewR (Member # 44) on :
I'm replying to this from page '2' even though - I have yet to get through reading pages '3' and '4'...
Timo said:
quote:Depends on what the Olympia was exploring. Not "deep space" in the sense that it would have been awfully far away from Earth - after all, the Defiant picked up the SOS and reached the site pretty rapidly, despite being tasked with escorting a convoy of transports. Such a convoy would have no business being farther out than DS9 from the Federation heartland, especially in wartime.
I think, that it was mentioned by Cap'n ?Cusak? that the Olympia was on its way BACK from it's Deep Space mission... So it could have been close enough for the Deffie to make it. ALSO, why didn't the Olympia send out a distress beacon before it crash-landed on the planet!?! Thus the message would have reached them in Season 2.
Posted by Wraith (Member # 779) on :
quote:Originally posted by AndrewR: Maybe the lack of Constitution classes in later years, was because of the Khitomer Accords... maybe the Klingons stipulated an end to the production of the Constitution class... and the Feds relented (cause they had the Excelsiors, and the Ambassadors coming down the production line.
Actually I would have thought that the Khitomer Accords would have produced the opposite effect; Connies in service for longer. With little or no threat from the Klingons, there would be no need to build new warships so production would be scaled back. Then, with increased pressure from the Romulans and Cardassians production of the Excelcior would be increased, rusulting in those with higher reg. numbers.
Posted by Dat (Member # 302) on :
quote:ALSO, why didn't the Olympia send out a distress beacon before it crash-landed on the planet!?! Thus the message would have reached them in Season 2.
No it wouldn't. Like the "real time" communication between the Defiant and Capt. Cusack, it would have time-shifted ahead a few years and so would not be received until the time actual communication occured in the episode.
Posted by AndrewR (Member # 44) on :
Wasn't it just the surrounding planet that was phase-shifting her messages? One would assume if a distress beacon was let off before the ship 'entered' the field of the planet then it would have been free to send a 'current time' message.
Posted by Wraith (Member # 779) on :
Just wondering; is there any evidence for Excelcior class ships (other than NX/NCC-2000) being in service in the 2280s/90s?
Posted by J (Member # 608) on :
Enterprise-B was 2290's. There are probably a few more examples.
[ March 08, 2002, 13:58: Message edited by: J ]
Posted by Shik (Member # 343) on :
Repulse. NCC-2544, right? Well, Hathaway was NCC-2593 & she was built in 2285, so...if you're into chronoregistry...
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Confused]](confused.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)