I have not read this book, but i'm presuming that itdeals with a starship Saratoga. I cant find the book anywhere to buy it so i was wondering if anyone knows which Saratoga it was.
Posted by Aban Rune (Member # 226) on :
If it's a DS9 book, I'm assuming it's the Saratoga that Sisko served on. I could be wrong.
Posted by Cpt. Kyle Amasov (Member # 742) on :
I read it. The crew of the original ship met at DS9, but they all wanted to go back to earth with the Defiant where the new Saratoga, 31911-A was ready for launch. BTW, it was a Miranda-class ship, too.
Posted by iam2xtreme (Member # 836) on :
Damn. Thanks. I was hoping that they would have made it a more modern ship. And i also hate it when they add the -A on the end. That means starfleet would have hade to dedicate all 39 ships lost at wolf 359 with the -A system, as they wouldn't do that to one and not the rest.
Posted by TSN (Member # 31) on :
Why not?
Posted by Dukhat (Member # 341) on :
Luckily for us, Michael Jan Freidman's drivel is most decidedly non-canon.
However, there was a new Saratoga which docked at DS9 (off-screen, unfortunately), in some episode whose name I've forgotten. I'd like to assume this ship is an Akira or Nebula or whatever, instead of a brand-spanking new Miranda class.
[ July 10, 2002, 13:36: Message edited by: Dukhat ]
Posted by The Mighty Monkey of Mim (Member # 646) on :
The third Saratoga was mentioned in "Wrongs Darker Than Death or Night" (DS9).
And I'll tell you what I hate: People who think that the letter suffix applies ONLY to the Enterprises. That to me is inane. It would make a hell of a lot more sense for Starfleet to apply that system universally, rather than just generating a new registry number for every new ship with an old name.
-MMoM Posted by Aban Rune (Member # 226) on :
I think that the suffix system only applies to the Enterprises. I also think that all the Enterprises save Kirk's have been the Federation flagship...
*ducks and runs for cover*
Posted by Cpt. Kyle Amasov (Member # 742) on :
I don't have a problem with siffixes - unless of course you come up with some 1305-E crap. This is really unrealistic. But I wouldn't mind seeing an -A for some ships or even a -B. Something to show everyone that the previous ship has done something great. Like the ships at Wolf, for example. Of course, this would eliminate every opportunity to determine the ships age or whatever system some people came up with to explain registries. Posted by David Templar (Member # 580) on :
According to the TNGTM, only really distinguished ships earn a suffix.
Posted by Dukhat (Member # 341) on :
I wonder what the Enterprise-B did to make it "distinguished." Certainly not by having a sharp captain, that's for sure.
quote:I don't have a problem with siffixes - unless of course you come up with some 1305-E crap. This is really unrealistic.
How is this unrealistic? For all we know, there were six different vessels with the name Yamato serving from the very beginning of Starfleet to the 24th century. It's no more unrealistic than the Enterprise-E?
Posted by Cpt. Kyle Amasov (Member # 742) on :
I think it's unrealistic because we never saw or heard of the shatship Yamato before that episode. It seems every child knows the adventures of the starship(s) Enterprise, but suddenly there's another vessel that has to be as famous as the E. It would have been OK if it wasn't as high as -E. The whole suffix-system is something special. Why isn't Kirk's ship the NX-01-A, for example? Because Archer was less important for the Federation? Judging by what may happen in the next 6 years, this is doubtful. And later, why was Captain Garrett's ship not the USS Enterprise NCC-26456? Harriman was everything but famous or heroic. Assigning the -A to the new Defiant makes sense, but continuing this would be unrealistic, too. Limiting the ABC-thing to the Enterprise because her whole history is outstanding is one thing, but as soon as there are Yamato-E's and Venture-G's and Constitution-D's Enterprise would only be one ship among many others. And this would make the suffix-thing useless. That's the reason I think -A's are OK if the former ship has done something to deserve it, but going much further shouldn't be done.
Posted by Shik (Member # 343) on :
A well-mentioned point, Alex, & one that's often lost on those who would sling around suffixes willy-nilly.
My point of contention with those who are proponents of the "more suffixes" brigade is that how does one decide what ships are "more worthy" than others? That is to say, if a new Saratoga is 31911-A, what does that say about the crew of Saratoga 1937? Why 74205-A (which I do not accept for myself, by the way) when the crew of Defiant 1764 was bravely lost as well?
I could see adding a suffix to the second ship & starting the lineage as such, like with Enterprise; that makes sense if one was to assume other ships with suffixes. If, say, the new Intrepid in TOS/the flix was 1631-A, or the Yorktown as 1717-A, that would make sense. But it seems they weren't.
And while I'm here, this is also why you won't ever see an "Enterprise-class" ship now--it'd be too annoying. Really, NX-1701-F? No, no one would accept that.
Posted by Cpt. Kyle Amasov (Member # 742) on :
I think the real problem that causes all the trouble is the name-recycling. One could assume that there are enough names out there for all the ships we saw on Trek so far. There's absolutely no need for 3 Saratogas or Intrepids or Lexingtons or whatever. If they recycle the name, they should either add a suffix everytime they do it or never. I think that's exactly what you say - there is no way to determine a 'more worthy' ship because as soon as you do it, you declare that other ship are 'less worthy' or useless.
There was a nice theory I discussed with a friend some time ago. (Actually, it was his theory, but that's something I can live with. ) Let's assume for a moment Yamato's NCC-1305-E was not an error. And neither was the 71xxx. What if every time they reuse a name the ship automatically earns an A or B or whatever letter comes next. The captain or staff can choose whether to use the old registry + suffix or the 'factory code'. You'll be the next Captain of the Hood, and they ask you if you want to use the registry 42xxx-A or the standard 76100. Most of them choose the latter, or maybe you can only take the offer if you commanded the last ship of this name, too, or starfleet tells you to if you can do it or not (this could be the case with the Defiant), or maybe the -A or -B is a special annotation on your dedication plaque, something like that. In other words, when Picard assumed command of the ship, he had to choose between NCC-1701-D and NCC-71801, for example. Of course, since the ship was the Enterprise, he didn't really have a choice. Posted by Thoughtchopper (Member # 480) on :
The real answer, of course, is that a good portion of the general public remembers NCC-1701, and the producers think they'd get confused if the registry changed every time the Enterprise was blown to hell.
The fact that each Enterprise should have a different registry doesn't matter in this context.
I assume that the special circumstances of the Enterprise registry aren't related to the ship being the flagship of the fleet either. In the context of the fiction, the Enterprise hasn't always been the flagship...I do believe the Excelsior held that title for awhile--at least for the majority of one movie. And when various Enterprises get blown up, the flagship (a fairly stupid concept when you have thousands upon thousands of vessals) would be something else.
I always thought the NCC-1701 code was there as a sort of good luck superstition...and nothing more.
Anyway.
Posted by TSN (Member # 31) on :
"Let's assume for a moment Yamato's NCC-1305-E was not an error. And neither was the 71xxx. What if every time they reuse a name the ship automatically earns an A or B or whatever letter comes next. The captain or staff can choose whether to use the old registry + suffix or the 'factory code'. You'll be the next Captain of the Hood, and they ask you if you want to use the registry 42xxx-A or the standard 76100. Most of them choose the latter...."
That's exactly the theory I've been touting for years now.
Posted by Siwiak (Member # 842) on :
I tend to find it more unrealistic for a Captain to have the choice in the whole NCC game. While I'd have liked to see a few more -As now and then, I agree that it should belong to a ship name is, for lack of a better word, special.
Just because Harriman didn't do anything noteworthy in the movie doesn't mean that the suffix dies with him. Besides the point that a more capable Captain could have taken command later on and saved the Earth again, it just doesn't make sense to kill the line if one ship isn't breaking the records.
There are a lot of naval vessel names that just get reused throughout history, because people grow attached to the name. Go to a history site and see just how many Lexingtons, Enterprises and so forth were built in the last 300 years. You don't scrap a name simply because something that got sunk before it had the same name... that's just not human. We give things names... we refer to them as "she," and we go so far as to pump a great deal of emotional investment into them.
Ah crap... I haven't really made any good points, and I'm too lazy just to delete this. I'm gonna take a nap.
Posted by The Mighty Monkey of Mim (Member # 646) on :
Okay, I agree that maybe it shouldn't be that all ships get suffixes, but I think it's stupid that the Enterprise is the only one we've seen. (Apart from the Yamato, which was retconned out, and the Nash, which was...just plain wierd...)
I refuse to believe that no one besides Kirk did anything great enough to earn the honor.
-MMoM Posted by Thoughtchopper (Member # 480) on :
Are they trying to suggest with the letters that it's the same ship? That it's only been overhauled, and this one has a new engine?
Posted by TSN (Member # 31) on :
"...the Enterprise is the only one we've seen. (Apart from the Yamato, which was retconned out, and the Nash, which was...just plain wierd...)"
And the Relativity.
Posted by The Mighty Monkey of Mim (Member # 646) on :
quote:Originally posted by Thoughtchopper: Are they trying to suggest with the letters that it's the same ship? That it's only been overhauled, and this one has a new engine?
Wha??? No.
Posted by Thoughtchopper (Member # 480) on :
Good. Heinous alarms were going off in my head. Love of Star Trek was almost comprimised.
Posted by CaptainMike (Member # 709) on :
by the way, the novel sucked. it was a boring rehash of 'Reunion' except without the interesting characters, and the surprise revelation at the end was pointless and confusing. plus i dont think Friedman eve watched DS9 for all his grasp of Sisko's character.
yeah, and the A-suffix was stupid.
I think that the A suffix is given on a political basis, has to be approved by the Federation Council when they are doing the ships appropriation contract (based on NCC being Naval Construction Contract).. so basically, you get honored like that if your ship impressed the council or some political fund source. seems realistic, anyway. .. my theory also states that is only happened a couple dozen times since the inception of the Federation.. basically, suffix registries are so rare youll hardly ever see them, thus satisfying the TNG TM claim that they are rare, but supporting the non-canon works supposition that there are other ships that have it (which we know because there is a 1305-E).. ill find the relevant Galactopedia article.
Posted by Topher (Member # 71) on :
As long as no one follows that weird fandom thing where dreadnoughts of a certain class were refitted into another class and they all got a '-B' suffix.
Posted by CaptainMike (Member # 709) on :
*brrrr*.. no those give me the willies.. that geocities page that helps perpetuate that has been (mostly) taken down, and most of the printed manuals that feature such idiocy should be in a book burning program by now
Posted by Spike (Member # 322) on :
quote:And the Relativity.
And the Dauntless. Nobody aboard the Voyager seemed to be surprised to see a ship with a suffix.
Posted by Cpt. Kyle Amasov (Member # 742) on :
quote:Originally posted by Topher: As long as no one follows that weird fandom thing where dreadnoughts of a certain class were refitted into another class and they all got a '-B' suffix.
I know, but as soon as he had to incorporate ships for the Excelsior class for example, he got some serious problems. Did you know that Reliant's successor was a Leavenworth-class ship? Posted by Topher (Member # 71) on :
Yeah, I know about the Leavenworth. IIRC ships of that class also have -B registries, no?
Posted by CaptainMike (Member # 709) on :
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)