I�m updating my shiplist with canon information only, & I ran across a couple of questions. First, there was the infamous �Operation Retrieve� chart, or another chart with ship info, from ST:VI. These are the ships I believe were written on the chart:
Was this chart actually seen in the movie? Did any of these ships have a class designation? Does anyone have even a small screencap of this chart?
Then, I found the U.S.S. Essex NCC-1697 (not the Daedalus class ship), and the U.S.S. Kongo NCC-1710, both listed as Constitution class ships. Does anyone know the source for this ship information?
Third, I had a question about the runabouts. Besides the first three which debuted in �Emissary,� there were the: Orinoco NCC-72905 Mekong NCC-72917 Rubicon NCC-72936 Shenandoah NCC-73024 Volga NCC-73196 unknown NCC-73918 Yukon NCC-74602 Yellowstone NX-74751
My question is, were any of these registries actually shown on the runabouts? Were there any runabouts that only existed as stock footage?
Finally, my last question concerns the U.S.S. Sao Paulo: Were there ever shots of the ship with this name, or did the ship totally consist of Defiant stock footage?
Posted by Spike (Member # 322) on :
quote:Was this chart actually seen in the movie?
Yes, of course. On the Enterprise-A bridge displays. And some ships were on the Operation Retrieve Chart. We got the ship from Bjo Trimble's Concordance and Kyle asked Ms. Trimble if she has pictures of these displays. But unfortunately she's busy with conventions at the moment.
quote:Did any of these ships have a class designation?
AFAIK no.
quote:Does anyone have even a small screencap of this chart?
Well, I wasn't able to spot these displays but if anyone can specify a scene, I'll make a screenshot of it.
Posted by Matrix (Member # 376) on :
I personally believe those ships listed are not the prototypes of the unseen ships int he Encyclopedias. So:
USS Oberth: Naturally she has a good number for the registry. So she should be the prototype.
USS Eagle: I think someone stated that she was a refitted Connie, if so then she has basically the same story as the Constellation NCC-1017.
USS Whorfin: Is it stated what ship she is? Because she could have same story as the Constellation as well.
USS Scovil: We really have no ships in the 15XX range, so it's up in the air.
USS Helin: Another Connie or even the refit.
USS John Muir: Another Connie or refit
USS Emden: Has a registry close to the Reliant's and Saratoga (one of them at least).
USS Endeavor: Most likely a Miranda class ship than a Connie. But it's a toss up seeing that the previous Endeavor was a Connie.
USS Constellation: Having the NX shows that she is a prototype of something, so she most likely is the Constellation prototype.
USS Korolev: Most likely an Excelsior class, seeing that only a few years later Starfleet commissions a subclass of the Excelsior class, the E-B.
USS Challenger: Same as the Korolev.
USS Ahwahnee: Same as the Korolev.
It is possible to have another Essex in the fleet after 80 or so years after the Daedalus class one. Same goes for the Kongo.
Posted by Spike (Member # 322) on :
quote:USS Eagle: I think someone stated that she was a refitted Connie, if so then she has basically the same story as the Constellation NCC-1017.
Yes, the Operation Retrieve Chart showed refitted Connie silhouettes. But I believe they were just placeholders (like the Potemkin having an Ambassador-silhouette but being an Excelsior-class vessel). On Constitution below 1700 is enough.
Posted by Cpt. Kyle Amasov (Member # 742) on :
quote:Originally posted by Dukhat: Then, I found the U.S.S. Essex NCC-1697 (not the Daedalus class ship), and the U.S.S. Kongo NCC-1710, both listed as Constitution class ships. Does anyone know the source for this ship information?
Encyclopedia. Both. Version 3. Maybe 2, too.
quote: Third, I had a question about the runabouts. Besides the first three which debuted in �Emissary,� there were the: Orinoco NCC-72905 Mekong NCC-72917 Rubicon NCC-72936 Shenandoah NCC-73024 Volga NCC-73196 unknown NCC-73918 Yukon NCC-74602 Yellowstone NX-74751
My question is, were any of these registries actually shown on the runabouts? Were there any runabouts that only existed as stock footage?
The Danube, from the DS9TM. The unnamed Runabout from TNG. And Gander. Hope I forgot none.
quote: Finally, my last question concerns the U.S.S. Sao Paulo: Were there ever shots of the ship with this name, or did the ship totally consist of Defiant stock footage?
Just stock footage.
Posted by DoughBoy (Member # 804) on :
Springfield must be a Soyuz Class with a registry lower than Constellation but higher than the Bozeman.
Posted by Magna Ultrus (Member # 239) on :
Yeah, well it's not.
Posted by Dukhat (Member # 341) on :
Thanks everyone for your replies. Now, the responses:
quote:Yes, of course. On the Enterprise-A bridge displays. And some ships were on the Operation Retrieve Chart.
If these names were seen in the movie, then I'll add them to my list. As far as the Eagle goes, I'll list its class as unknown because I agree with Spike that the silhouette was just a placeholder. However, I'll list the Oberth & the Constellation as the class ships, as I believe they were intended to be. The only question is the U.S.S. Whorfin. Is it a class ship? Is there any canon info stating that the El-Aurian transports were "Whorfin-class," or that the two should be synonymous?
quote:Encyclopedia. Both. Version 3. Maybe 2, too.
You must have a different Encyclopedia than I have, because none of mine showed any information at all about the Kongo or the Connie Essex (and I have all three versions).
quote:The Danube, from the DS9TM. The unnamed Runabout from TNG. And Gander. Hope I forgot none.
I'm not using any info from written sources, so the Danube won't be on the list. But, thanks for the TNG runabout; I'd forgotten about that one. Did it have a registry number? Also, I did have the Gander; just forgot to list it.
Posted by Dat (Member # 302) on :
I believe Okuda did make graphics for the E-B's Science Officer's (the woman other than Demora) display stating the ships names as SS Lakul and SS Robert Fox both as Whorfin class. I believe he even added reg numbers for the ships. I think I read somewhere that Okuda did intend for these two ships to be the same class as the USS Whorfin and that the Whorfin was the class ship. Could be wrong though.
[ June 10, 2002, 20:44: Message edited by: Dat ]
Posted by The359 (Member # 37) on :
Looking at my Star Trek VI DVD, the Operation: Retrieve section goes like this:
Page 1: 3 Constitution class starships, unsure if there is info printed alongside them or not (too small to read)
Page 2: 3 starships shown flying towards Rura Pentha. 1 is a Constitution, 1 is possibly an Excelsior, and the other is unknown, it's smaller then the other two. I would guess Miranda, but it looks too small to even be that. It could also be Oberth.
Beside each of these three ships is a name and registry number. The small ship has a short name and even shorter registry number then the rest. I would take a stab at this being the USS Oberth NCC-602. Both the other two ships have long names and 4-digit registry numbers.
In the upper right is a top view of a Constitution class with another long name and 4-digit registry number. Below that are top views of two small ships similar to the one mentioned above. One has the same short name and registry, the other has a longer name and 4-digit registry.
Page 3: No ships
As for the bridge screen on the Enterprise, from what I can make out on it, it does indeed list classes. I can clearly see where the entry for the USS Constellation is, since it has the longest name and is the only registry with an NX.
Posted by Harry (Member # 265) on :
If you have a DVD player in your pc, could you please make some screenshots.
Posted by Eclipse (Member # 472) on :
quote:Originally posted by Dat: the E-B's Science Officer's (the woman other than Demora)
You mean Jenette (Aliens' Private Vasquez) Goldstein?
Posted by Spike (Member # 322) on :
quote:The only question is the U.S.S. Whorfin. Is it a class ship?
The ships in "Generations" didn't look like Starfleet ships.
quote:You must have a different Encyclopedia than I have, because none of mine showed any information at all about the Kongo or the Connie Essex (and I have all three versions).
The Essex is mentioned in the E3's "Constitution-class" entry.
quote:I'm not using any info from written sources, so the Danube won't be on the list.
Since "Danube-class" was mentioned onscreen, would'nt it be logical to assume that a USS Danube exists?
quote:If you have a DVD player in your pc, could you please make some screenshots.
Does anyone have a timeindex for the bridge displays?
Posted by Cpt. Kyle Amasov (Member # 742) on :
Essex is from the Constitution-index, as Spike said (thanks for the images... ), but I didn't find Kongo. Strange, since I remember the ship from different sources, even before the information about West's chart was available. For example, the model kit of the original Constitution included decals for all ships, including the Kongo. I think they even gave the registry for the ship (as well as for the others, starting with 1700 - 1711, and the 1017).
Dat: We could ask him.
Posted by Spike (Member # 322) on :
AFAIK the Kongo was mentioned in "The Making of ST", "Starfleet Technical Manual" and according to the TUC-display the Kongo was on Neutral Zone Patrol.
Posted by The359 (Member # 37) on :
NCC-1710 was on the Ship Status Chart in "Court Martial" and the USS Kongo NCC-1710 was indeed somewhere in Star Trek VI.
Also, the Status Screen can be best seen over Uhura's shoulder. The best look at it I can remember is when Uhura announces that Kirk and McCoy have been arrested. The screen is upper right, right next to Scotty's face.
[ June 11, 2002, 13:21: Message edited by: The359 ]
Posted by Dukhat (Member # 341) on :
quote:NCC-1710 was on the Ship Status Chart in "Court Martial"
Uh, no it wasn't. The NCC numbers on the "Court Martial" list were (from top to bottom):
It's possible you thought the "1718" might read 1710 because of the blocky numbering, but it is 1718.
quote:Since "Danube-class" was mentioned onscreen, would'nt it be logical to assume that a USS Danube exists?
If it was mentioned onscreen, then yes. But its registry number isn't canon.
Posted by Cpt. Kyle Amasov (Member # 742) on :
quote:Originally posted by Dukhat: If it was mentioned onscreen, then yes. But its registry number isn't canon.
'Hippocratic Oath', fourth season. The Jem'Hadar identified the crashed Runabout as 'Danube-class'.
Posted by Ryan McReynolds (Member # 28) on :
quote:Originally posted by The359: Also, the Status Screen can be best seen over Uhura's shoulder. The best look at it I can remember is when Uhura announces that Kirk and McCoy have been arrested. The screen is upper right, right next to Scotty's face.
If you mean this, I'm afraid it's useless. It's the only thing vaguely near Scotty's face that looks like a ship list.
Posted by Dukhat (Member # 341) on :
Getting back to the Operation: Retrieve chart, the 3rd page shows a total of six ships, as Dat stated. Three are flying toward the symbol for Rura Penthe, and three are shown on the side of the chart (possibly to be used as replacements or reinforcements). Anyway, these six ships match the six known vessels used in OR, namely:
Looking at the chart, we have one Excelsior silhouette, two Constitution silhouettes, and three smaller vessel silhouettes of unknown type. If we are to believe that these six ships are an exact match for the names given, and that the silhouettes correspond to the class of ship used, then there's no way that the Eagle is a Constitution. Two of the three small vessels have the shortest names (Eagle & Scovil), and the top Constitution has the longest name (Springfield). The other Constitution looks like "Ahwahnee" to me, which leaves the Endeavour & the Challenger. Since the Endeavor's rego is 1895, while the Challenger's is 2032, then I would guess that the Excelsior silhouette is the Challenger, and the last small ship is the Endeavor.
All of this, of course, is just speculation on my part, based on the information presented.
Posted by Reverend (Member # 335) on :
Works for me.
I wonder if a closer look at the bridge display would be as revealing.
Posted by Dat (Member # 302) on :
quote:Getting back to the Operation: Retrieve chart, the 3rd page shows a total of six ships, as Dat stated.
I said what? I don't remember making any statement concerning the Operation: Retrieve chart. The only thing I said in this thread was concerning the Whorfin class/USS Whorfin NCC-1024
Posted by The359 (Member # 37) on :
I was the one talking about Operation Retrieve.
And how do you know those 6 ships were the ones on the chart?
And yes, that is the ship status screen on the Enterprise, but maybe it's from later on in the movie that you can see it better. Check where they are translating Klingon.
Posted by Timo (Member # 245) on :
Dukhat's scheme has three shortcomings at the moment:
1) The connection between the six names and Operation Retrieve remains vague. Why couldn't one of those ships be, say, USS Oberth or USS John Muir? Which source connects just these six with OR? Trimble herself?
2) Six ships are not sufficient to account for three Constitution silhouettes, three small silhouettes and one Excelsior silhouette. (But is the Excelsior an Excelsior? It could be another Connie, at the resolution of those 'caps.)
3) The Endeavour is "generally considered" to be a Constitution, and this has a longer fan history than the idea that the Eagle is a Constitution. Okuda himself says the Endeavour is a Connie.
I would very much like the Eagle to be a non-Constitution. However, I fear that the connection does come from this very chart that shows a silhouette coupled with a registry and a name. I hope it's just a mistake by Okuda - Dukhat's arguments about name and registry length seem to prove that the Eagle=Connie thing isn't from the second page of the charts. But it could still be from the first page...
And no, I don't really believe in the placeholder idea here when it's clear that there are at least two and possibly three types of silhouettes in use on these charts. Sure, it's possible that a Constitution stands for all ships from Miranda to Constellation, an Oberth for all small ships, and an Excelsior for all vessels larger than the Constitutions. But it's also possible that the chart indeed shows the true classes in detail: it doesn't sound logical to have different symbols for the roughly similar Constitution-sized and Excelsior-sized ships, and then not differentiate more carefully between the small ship types.
Timo Saloniemi
Posted by Identity Crisis (Member # 67) on :
Trimble also lists the Potemkin, NCC-1657, as being on the OR chart. Thus giving seven ships in total.
Now the Potemkin was a Connie in TOS 'The Ultimate Computer'.
All seven ships also appear on the Status Chart where they're missions are given as follows:
Ahwahnee NCC-2048 (deep space exploration) Challenger NCC-2032 (deep space exploration) Eagle NCC-956 (colony resupply mission) Endeavor NCC-1895 (deep space exploration) Potemkin NCC-1657 (scientific survey) Scovil NCC-1598 (astronomical research) Springfield NCC-1963 (neutral zone patrol)
Posted by Timo (Member # 245) on :
Whee! Curious, that. If those "deep space exploration" missions are for real, and not just euphenisms for anti-Klingon saber-rattling at the borders, then how could those ships be available for OR? What sort of explorable deep space would there be at or near the Klingon border?
None of the missions seems to betray the class of the ship in question. Colony resupply isn't the monopoly of freighters only, nor is scientific survey (as opposed to commercial or military survey?) forbidden from big warships, as NCC-2000 proves in the very same movie.
I still very much doubt the Endeavour would be a non-Connie, given that Okuda probably controlled every aspect of the creation of that chart, and would have insisted on a Connie identity...
Timo Saloniemi
Posted by Fedaykin Supastar (Member # 704) on :
I dunno if ppl have discussed this but, why is that OR plan/chart on printed paper....wouldnt they have computer screens or something??? ..i'm not saying its a bad move (i actually prefer that to a comp. display) just interesting to note. On a relevant point, i liked the use of a 'real' galley rather than food repicators (if they had food replicators in this era - i'm not too great on this tech stuff).
if it means anything, i have (from ages ago) a TOS type Constitution-class model [i dont remember which kit is was) but on the decal sheet one of the ship names was 'Kongo'.
..i am also interested to know if the word 'Kongo' means anything or refers to someone - if anyone knows please let me know.
Buzz
Posted by Spike (Member # 322) on :
quote:..i am also interested to know if the word 'Kongo' means anything or refers to someone
quote: I said what? I don't remember making any statement concerning the Operation: Retrieve chart.
Oops. My bad.
quote: And how do you know those 6 ships were the ones on the chart?
I don�t know that for a fact. Perhaps you guys missed it when I said �All of this, of course, is just speculation on my part, based on the information presented.�
quote: The connection between the six names and Operation Retrieve remains vague. Why couldn't one of those ships be, say, USS Oberth or USS John Muir? Which source connects just these six with OR? Trimble herself?
As stated above, I was going by the information so far presented to me. And as far as I know, all of it might be wrong. My information stated that the six ships used in Operation Retrieve were the Scovil, the Endeavor, the Springfield, the Challenger, the Ahwahnee, and the Eagle. I got that information from Reverend�s original shiplist, which I�ve heretofore modified. I don�t know where he got his information from. And I didn�t know about the Potemkin.
quote: Six ships are not sufficient to account for three Constitution silhouettes, three small silhouettes and one Excelsior silhouette. (But is the Excelsior an Excelsior? It could be another Connie, at the resolution of those 'caps.)
Whoa, hold on. Let�s get the numbers right. On page two of the chart, three Constitution silhouettes are shown. However, as far as I can see, no names or registry numbers appear next to them, so these probably don�t represent any specific ships. It�s the third page that�s interesting, because at least three distinctly different silhouettes are shown. We have two Connies, an Excelsior (or at least that�s what it looks like to me), and three smaller silhouettes whose saucer circles are much smaller than the others. SIX ships total, with six names & registry numbers to match.
quote: The Endeavour is "generally considered" to be a Constitution, and this has a longer fan history than the idea that the Eagle is a Constitution. Okuda himself says the Endeavour is a Connie.
Well, Okuda also says that the Biko is an Olympic when it's very clearly an Oberth. But you�re probably right about this.
quote: I would very much like the Eagle to be a non-Constitution. However, I fear that the connection does come from this very chart that shows a silhouette coupled with a registry and a name.
But that�s what I�ve been saying. IF the Eagle is one of the ships involved in OR, and IF it is represented on this chart, then my argument was that it COULDN�T be a Connie, because its short name doesn�t jibe with the names of the larger ships on the chart.
Keep in mind that all I�m doing is speculating. Until we see the actual chart up close, no one will have a definitive answer. The only thing I�m reasonably sure of is that �John Muir� probably wasn�t one of the ships, if only because I don�t see any break in any of the ship names.
[ June 13, 2002, 11:21: Message edited by: Dukhat ]
Posted by Spike (Member # 322) on :
How about blackmailing Okuda to give us better pictures of this chart?
[ June 13, 2002, 11:22: Message edited by: Spike ]
Posted by The359 (Member # 37) on :
I think someone has already asked him about the chart. In fact, I seem to recall doing it myself...
Posted by Cpt. Kyle Amasov (Member # 742) on :
I asked Okuda sometime ago, he said he doesn't have them anymore (MIA somwhere in the storage rooms of the lot). But he said Bjo Trimble could have some notes and/or pictures somewhere. So I asked her. But she said that there could be notes somewhere, but she doesn't find them. Pure speculation: Is there anyone from the art departement who worked on that movie and who might know something more than those two?
Posted by Cpt. Kyle Amasov (Member # 742) on :
Uh, err... shiplist: everyone seems to list Mekong as 72617 (given in Encyclopedia 3), but the ship chart of the Encyclopedia gives 72917. What's correct (Rubicon is 72936, Orinoco is 72905, som the 917 would make more sense, IMO). Not important enough to start a thread, but this seems to be the perfect place for it...
Posted by Dukhat (Member # 341) on :
I use the 72917 reg in my shiplist.
On another note, I don't believe that the U.S.S. Whorfin is the class ship for the Whorfin class. The Whorfin's mission was deep space exploration. Why would you send a transport ship (which is clearly what the Lakul & the Robert Fox are) to explore deep space? Presumably, the Federation Whorfin class transports (aside from the fact that they look nothing like Starfleet ships) are a separate entity from the Starfleet U.S.S. Whorfin, which for all we know is a Constitution class vessel.
Posted by Reverend (Member # 335) on :
quote: As stated above, I was going by the information so far presented to me. And as far as I know, all of it might be wrong. My information stated that the six ships used in Operation Retrieve were the Scovil, the Endeavor, the Springfield, the Challenger, the Ahwahnee, and the Eagle. I got that information from Reverend’s original shiplist, which I’ve heretofore modified. I don’t know where he got his information. And I didn’t know about the Potemkin.
To be honest I'm not sure where I got that info from, but it most likely came from here or off of Ex Astris. Treat it with suspicion because the list could easily be wrong. Just to double check what’s on your copy, this is what my current database has on the ST:VI ships:-
U.S.S. OBERTH NCC-602 OBERTH-CLASS On deep space exploration in 2293
U.S.S. EAGLE NCC-956 >UNKNOWN< On colony re-supply mission in 2293, Potential participant of Operation Retrieve
U.S.S.WHORFIN NCC-1024 WHORFIN-CLASS First of it's class, A deep space explorer, Assigned to neutral zone patrol in 2293
U.S.S. REPUBLIC NCC-1371 >UNKNOWN< Kirk's post as an Ensign along with Ben Finney. Assigned to neutral zone patrol in 2293, Assigned to Terran system as a training ship since 2320's
U.S.S. SCOVIL NCC-1598 >UNKNOWN< On astronomical research in 2293, Potential participant of Operation Retrieve
U.S.S. POTEMKIN NCC-1657 CONSTITTION-CLASS Participated in disastrous war-game drill with M-5 in 2268, On scientific survey in 2293, Potential participant of Operation Retrieve
U.S.S. HELIN NCC-1692 >UNKNOWN< Scientific survey ship on neutral zone patrol in sector 21290 in 2293
U.S.S. KONGO NCC-1710 CONSTITTION-CLASS Assigned to neutral zone patrol in 2293
U.S.S. JOHN MUIR NCC-1732 >UNKNOWN< Underwent upgrade at Starbase 24 in 2293
U.S.S. LANTREE NCC-1837 MIRANDA-CLASS Class-6 supply ship equipped with class-3 defensive armaments, carried colony supplies in sector 22858 in 2293, Commanded by Captain L.Isao Telaka in 2365, all 26 crew members killed by accelerated ageing, ship scuttled by U.S.S. Enterprise NCC-1701-D
U.S.S. EMDEN NCC-1856 >UNKNOWN< Assigned to neutral zone patrol in 2293
U.S.S. ENDEAVOUR NCC-1895 >UNKNOWN< On deep space exploration in 2293, Potential participant of Operation Retrieve
U.S.S. SPRINGFIELD NCC-1963 >UNKNOWN< Assigned to neutral zone patrol in 2293, Potential participant of Operation Retrieve
U.S.S. CONSTELLATION NCC-1974 CONSTELLATION-CLASS Underwent NX stage certification tests in 2293, Transported Jem'hadar to Starbase 201 in 2371, Assisted in the search for survivors of U.S.S. Honshu NCC-60205 with the U.S.S Defiant NX-74205
U.S.S. KOROLEV NCC-2014 >UNKNOWN< On diplomatic mission in 2293
U.S.S. CHALLENGER NCC-2032 >UNKNOWN< On deep space exploration in 2293, Potential participant of Operation Retrieve
U.S.S. AHWAHNEE NCC-2048 >UNKNOWN< On deep space exploration in 2293, Potential participant of Operation Retrieve
As I said, treat this with suspicion; it's not carved in stone.
[ June 13, 2002, 18:14: Message edited by: Reverend ]
Posted by Spike (Member # 322) on :
quote:U.S.S. POTEMKIN NCC-1657 CONSTITTION-CLASS Participated in disastrous war-game drill with M-5 in 2268, On scientific survey in 2293, Potential participant of Operation Retrieve
Nooo! Don't confuse the two Potemkins. The first Potemkin (NCC-1657, Baton Rouge-class) was decommissioned in 2244. After that Starfleet built the Constitution-class Potemkin NCC-1711, which was destroyed in 2291. NCC-1657 was re-commissioned by Cartwright in 2293 to have more ships available.
[ June 13, 2002, 15:58: Message edited by: Spike ]
Posted by CaptainMike (Member # 709) on :
sweet jeebus, noooo....
BTW, your spell checker seems to have raped that list.. a colony crisply mission?
Posted by Reverend (Member # 335) on :
quote:Originally posted by CaptainMike: sweet jeebus, noooo....
BTW, your spell checker seems to have raped that list.. a colony crisply mission?
Damn, if it's not my spell checker changing things it shouldn't then it's this buggy keyboard and it's wonderful typos... To be fair though, that database has about 260 entries....can't check them all.
Posted by CaptainMike (Member # 709) on :
is true.. all the connies are listed as CONSTITTION-CLASS too
Posted by Reverend (Member # 335) on :
quote:Originally posted by CaptainMike: is true.. all the connies are listed as CONSTITTION-CLASS too
Yeah, I already spotted that one and have corrected the database.
Posted by Magna Ultrus (Member # 239) on :
"Nooo! Don't confuse the two Potemkins"
You mean the real one, and the one that smells finely of fanboy ass, because that's whence it came from?
Posted by CaptainMike (Member # 709) on :
Agreed... more politely, even though an older, non-Constitution Potemkin would explain the low registry assigned by Okuda and Jein, most of the world regards the registry given in the Encyclopedia as the registry of the Potemkin from The Original Series. I don't think theres any point in making complicated explanations, the simplest one, to follow the razor, is that the registry system is a little cocked up and therefore, not at a sequential when dealing with Connies for reason or reasons unknown. More complicated explanations equal more complicated inaccuracies between sources.
Posted by TSN (Member # 31) on :
Assuming the seven supposed names of the OR ships are right, I think they might match up like this. I suspect the Potemkin is one of the ships on page 2. I'm not sure about the Springfield and Challenger, though. They could be the other way around.
I figured this out basically by comparing the length of each ship name to the length of its "USS".
[ June 13, 2002, 23:59: Message edited by: TSN ]
Posted by Timo (Member # 245) on :
The one you name Challenger could also be the John Muir - there's a teeny weeny gap between the two halves of the name, dividing it into two segments that are each as long as the supposedly four-digit registry number below.
Of course, "undergoing an upgrade" is even less likely an assignment than "deep space exploration" for a ship that's going to be drafted for a rapid-reaction covert operation...
Timo Saloniemi
Posted by TSN (Member # 31) on :
I took that gap to be an 'L'. There seems to be a black bit at the bottom of the gap. Unfortunately, there don't seem to be two 'L's. And there aren't enough letters to make up "ENGER" after it. I'm somewhat doubtful about the Challenger and the Springfield completely, really. But this is assuming the names we have are correct...
Posted by Cpt. Kyle Amasov (Member # 742) on :
quote:U.S.S.WHORFIN NCC-1024 WHORFIN-CLASS First of it's class, A deep space explorer, Assigned to neutral zone patrol in 2293
If it is a deep space explorer, it is not a Whorfin-class ship. The fact that we say it's the class ship originates in the speculation of this ship being of the same type as Lakul and Robert Fox. On the other hand Lakul and Robert Fox could have been of the same class as Whorfin, but then it can't be an deep space explorer.
quote: U.S.S. REPUBLIC NCC-1371 >UNKNOWN<
Unknown? Oh no! Not again this discussion! *runs out of the room screaming*
quote:U.S.S. CONSTELLATION NCC-1974 CONSTELLATION-CLASS Underwent NX stage certification tests in 2293, Transported Jem'hadar to Starbase 201 in 2371, Assisted in the search for survivors of U.S.S. Honshu NCC-60205 with the U.S.S Defiant NX-74205
Do you think this was the same ship that was mentioned twice on DS9? Hardly believable. (Yes, I know what Okuda thinks, but...)
Posted by Timo (Member # 245) on :
The Whorfin mentioned in the OR charts or other ST6 material is probably named after the same Whorfin the two ST:G ships were. And probably *not* after the Buckaroo Banzai Whorfin, but a "real" counterpart in the Trek universe.
In any case, the Lakul and the Robert Fox were given registries with an NFT prefix - so they weren't Starfleet vessels (and the design is also non-Starfleet), but the N there might suggest they still were Federation vessels (and so does the name Robert Fox). Both Starfleet and this civilian organization could have respected the same Whorfin in the naming of two very different ships (the class ship of the freighter class, and then this Starfleet ship).
There would be no conflict there, since the operating organizations would be completely separate. This is a bit different from having a USS Constellation in DS9 that isn't of Constellation class, if Starfleet still operates the Constellation class at that time - *that* would be a potential cause of much confusion.
Timo Saloniemi
Posted by Spike (Member # 322) on :
quote:Do you think this was the same ship that was mentioned twice on DS9? Hardly believable.
Well, the Lantree's also on that list and she was active until 2365. So the Constellation, probably newer than the Lantree, could be active a few years more.
quote:if Starfleet still operates the Constellation class at that time - *that* would be a potential cause of much confusion.
We know that the Constellation-class was active at least till 2374.
Posted by Dukhat (Member # 341) on :
quote:Unknown? Oh no! Not again this discussion! *runs out of the room screaming*
Whether you like it or not, there's NO canonical evidence that the Republic NCC-1371 was a Constitution class ship. None. The ship was never shown, never referred to as Connie class, and there are no charts or displays showing the ship to be Connie class.
BTW, here's an interesting page I found, even though they got the registry wrong...
That's an interesting page. And if Republic - Kirk's Republic - was another ship and not a Constitution, the ship mentioned in DS9's 'Valiant' might have been a newer vessel, maybe even a Constitution (And since Ron Moore said he concidered it to be the old Constitution...). Is the 1371 from the OR-chart, too? Otherwise (and this would be an interesting speculation on the production run of the Constitution - if we assume the successor was a Constitution) there would have been a Constitution launched after 2293. On the other hand, if we exclude Republic and Constellation from the Constitution-run, ~2245-~2293 is not that impressive. Miranda and Oberth both ad a much longer production run. So yes, it's OK to assume that Republic was not a Constitution, but the ship would have been pretty old by the time of TUC. What if the unidentified small image shows the real class of the vessel Republic and the others were of that unidentified class, too? It does remind me somehow on the old Phase-2 Stardestroyers. And they were at least in service until Star Trek 3. Posted by Timo (Member # 245) on :
If we're venturing to comic territory (!), then I feel it only appropriate to mention that Diane Carey has a new USS Republic in the novel "Wagon Train to the Stars". She's a smallish escort vessel built in the early to mid 2270s, and distinguishes herself in battle against Orion pirates. Not an implausible candidate for a training ship later on.
Timo Saloniemi
Posted by Dukhat (Member # 341) on :
On a similar vein, my canon shiplist has five different Yorktowns. Some could be the same ship, or they could be all different ships. However, they are probably not all the SAME ship. Here's what I came up with:
1. U.S.S. Yorktown (2268) Scheduled to rendesvous with the Enterprise NCC-1701.
2. U.S.S. Yorktown (2286) Disabled by cetacean probe.
3. U.S.S. Yorktown (2293) Ensign Tuvok's father was posted to this ship.
4. U.S.S. Yorktown (operating in the 2360's) Riker wanted to get a message to this ship while incarcerated in the Tilonus mental hospital.
5. U.S.S. Yorktown (anti-time future of 2380?; referred to as "Zodiac Class" in the Encyclopedia) Made long-range scan of the Devron system.
Notes for each ship:
1. This Yorktown, AFAIK, was never canonically seen or referred to as Constitution class, or given a canon registry number. Okuda lists it as Constitution class NCC-1717, which I believe originally came from FJ's tech manual.
2. This Yorktown was in ST:IV, but only a small portion of the interior bridge was seen, in the Connie refit style. However, yet again there is no canon info for this ship's registry or class. For all we know, it could have been a Miranda. However, I think Okuda states that this is the same ship as the one above.
3. This Yorktown is either the same ship as above, or a new vessel commissioned after events in ST:IV, if the idea is believed that the Enterprise-A is really the #2 Yorktown. Either way, there has to be a Yorktown of some kind for Tuvok's dad to serve on in 2293.
4. This TNG ship is probably NOT any of the above ships, but again, canonically we don't know. If the #3 ship was a newly commissioned Miranda or Excelsior, then it's reasonable to assume that it might still be operating in the 2360's, with all the Mirandas & Excelsiors we've seen so far. Again, no class or registry number is given for this ship, although Okuda hints that this is the same ship as #5 (see below).
5. Canonically speaking, the existence of this ship is a matter of debate, since the circumstances of its use never took place. I don't recall if this ship was used in the "present" anti-time or the future anti-time, but if it was in the present, then it's logical to assume that it's the same ship as #4. If it was used in the future anti-time, then it's possible that it is an even newer ship than #4. Either way, yet again there is no canon registry or class for it.
If any of my information is in error, please let me know.
[ June 18, 2002, 10:40: Message edited by: Dukhat ]
Posted by Spike (Member # 322) on :
quote:On a similar vein, my canon shiplist has five different Yorktowns.
Some reported that a USS Yorktown appeared on the ship list in DS9 Whispers (2370).
quote:Okuda lists it as Constitution class NCC-1717, which I believe originally came from FJ's tech manual.
According to FJ's manual the registry is NCC-1704.
quote:5. I don't recall if this ship was used in the "present" anti-time or the future anti-time
IIRC the anti-time Riker mentioned that the ship was on Neutral Zone patrol.
[ June 18, 2002, 11:16: Message edited by: Spike ]
Posted by Dukhat (Member # 341) on :
quote:According to FJ's manual the registry is NCC-1704.
Oops, my mistake. I meant to say that the Yorktown's NCC-1717 registry came from the TNG Officer's Manual, a FASA publication.
As for the Yorktown being on the Whispers list, it was most likely the same Yorktown mentioned in "Frame of Mind." Anybody got a 'cap of the Whispers list?
[ June 19, 2002, 09:48: Message edited by: Dukhat ]
Posted by Reverend (Member # 335) on :
quote: As for the Yorktown being on the Whispers list, it was most likely the same Yorktown mentioned in "Frame of Mind." Anybody got a 'cap of the Whispers list?
I have one somewhere, but it's of a very poor quality and incomplete, since the list was scrolling.
As to whether or not the future Yorktown is around during TNG depends on 2 things.
1. That registry numbers are chronological (which they usually are)
2. The Zodiac-Class's NCC-61137 is correct. Given that we don't have unrestricted access to every Okudagram ever made, we may never know about this one, so I'm willing to trust Okuda in this instance.
Since the story about the E-A's origins came from the great bird himself and that it doesn’t appear to contradict anything we know, I tend to accept this too. Given that the E-A was decommissioned just a few short years later. It seams unlikely that this was a brand new hull and as such it was probably the same Yorktown that we saw at the beginning of ST:IV could easily have been the Yorktown from TOS. Again, if the NCC-1717 registry is correct then this is almost certainly the case.
As for the 2293 Yorktown, it certainly can't be the NCC-6xxxx range Zodiac and it probably isn't the NCC-1717, so it most likely is in fact a new ship of undetermined class and registry. (However an Excelsior-Class ship in the NCC-2xxx range seams logical)
What we have here I think is 5 sighting of at least 3 different ships and until there is any information to the contrary, that is what I shall believe.
Of course you people can come to your own conclusions and make up your own minds.
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
), but I didn't find Kongo. Strange, since I remember the ship from different sources, even before the information about West's chart was available. For example, the model kit of the original Constitution included decals for all ships, including the Kongo. I think they even gave the registry for the ship (as well as for the others, starting with 1700 - 1711, and the 1017).![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Confused]](confused.gif)