Over at the BBS that shall not be named, there has been a lot of civil and uncivil debate about the Bonaventure from TAS. It prompted me to get out some of my recent illustrations and look them over to see if I still liked what I'd come up with. I found out that I really didn't.
So, I started over. In the "Federation Reference Series" history, the inconsistencies of the TAS ship looking too advanced for the 21st century were dealt with by having two ships by that name, one from 2065 and one from 2202 (the TAS ship). I always liked the Greg Jein model of the 2065 ship, but the whole idea of having nacelles produce warp power in early starships (which originated with, I'm guessing, Phoenix) didn't fit with anything I'd done (which predated Phoenix by quite a bit and was based on the Matt Jefferies ringship as shown in TMP).
So, even though I like the NX-01 design and could work with it, and like Phoenix (but not its launch system), and like that JeinBonaventure, I decided to figure out how I would have done it. This is based on only the materials I would have had available at the time, so it's (more or less) how I imagine a circa-2065, very early warp ship designed by Matt Jefferies for TOS might have looked.
The FRS idea of warp evolution was a bit different from what eventually was adopted. In short, in going from that ringship to NCC-1701, I charted a course that had early starships not have nacelles, but be a nacelle. Much as Masao accords the development of the M/AM reactor great historical importance, I made the development of paired nacelles, working in tandem to converge two warp bubbles, a big deal. I was also basing this on how long it took to get from one in-line motorjet (Coanda 1910) to the first turbo twinjet in 1939.
So, as you can see from the cross section, this early ship has a big gravity source at the front and back, and a big scoop in the front. Its two rings amidships can be seen as distant precursors to the warp coils in later nacelles. This ships does have nacelles, but they are M/AM rockets and serve the purpose of later impulse engines. Within the protection of the big rings is the rest of the ship, which is designed to have a vaguely DY look. Smooth, because it's meant to be in the Jefferies style like the DY-100 and ringship, but with some exposed stuff, because it's meant to be primitive.
Huh. That's weird. Alos, I don't think I've ever seen this "Jein Bonaventure" you mention.
Posted by Toadkiller (Member # 425) on :
Hmm. I don't like the pre-TOS "ring ship" concept too much. So, I expected to not like your ship...but I do. It looks like it could belong in the trek-universe.
Nice.
Posted by Dukhat (Member # 341) on :
Shik: He's referring to Zefram Cochrane's first warp ship that Jein built for the first edition of the Chronology. You know, the one that's now invalidated by the appearance of the Phoenix.
The thing about the TAS Bonaventure is, there's just no way of getting around the fact that Scotty referred to it as the "first warp ship." If you're like me, who selectively picks & chooses certain things from TAS that I feel could be canon, and disregard other things that just don't work in the larger scheme of things, then you should just ignore what Scotty said. Or even better, ignore the ship, as it looks pretty stupid anyway and definitely was not built during Cochrane's time.
Posted by Toadkiller (Member # 425) on :
We could also disregard Phoenix as having not been a "ship" as far as Scotty was concerned. But rather a "craft" or even a "testbed".
Leaving the Bonnie as the first "real ship" that Earth fielded. Certainly the thing we see in FC doesn't quite count as a "ship".
Posted by Shik (Member # 343) on :
quote:Originally posted by Dukhat: Shik: He's referring to Zefram Cochrane's first warp ship that Jein built for the first edition of the Chronology. You know, the one that's now invalidated by the appearance of the Phoenix.
Oh. yes. of course. I always liked that model myself, so much that I easily noted its other reuses.
quote:The thing about the TAS Bonaventure is, there's just no way of getting around the fact that Scotty referred to it as the "first warp ship." If you're like me, who selectively picks & chooses certain things from TAS that I feel could be canon, and disregard other things that just don't work in the larger scheme of things, then you should just ignore what Scotty said. Or even better, ignore the ship, as it looks pretty stupid anyway and definitely was not built during Cochrane's time.
One could submit that Scotty meant "warp drive" as in modern-style warp drive.
Posted by Dukhat (Member # 341) on :
quote:We could also disregard Phoenix as having not been a "ship" as far as Scotty was concerned. But rather a "craft" or even a "testbed".
Leaving the Bonnie as the first "real ship" that Earth fielded. Certainly the thing we see in FC doesn't quite count as a "ship".
Unfortunately, the TAS Bonaventure looks more advanced than the Daedalus class which had to have come before it tech-wise. No, I'd say that the first real "warp ship" to have a regular crew and mission was the Valiant, that we know of.
Posted by MinutiaeMan (Member # 444) on :
quote:Originally posted by Shik: One could submit that Scotty meant "warp drive" as in modern-style warp drive.
You mean like the warp five engine? (Says he who really isn't fond of the lousy tech background of said show.)
Posted by AndrewR (Member # 44) on :
Well, we could be creative and say they cut out some of Scotty's lines - he could have said that "That's THE FIRST WARP SHIP... that he served on".
Might have been the first FEDERATION Warp Ship? The others were just EUSPA or Earthfleet or whatever?
Posted by Sean (Member # 2010) on :
quote: Might have been the first FEDERATION Warp Ship? The others were just EUSPA or Earthfleet or whatever?
Wouldn't that be the Daedalus?
Posted by Daniel Butler (Member # 1689) on :
Or we could point out that TAS isn't canon and say the Bonaventure didn't exist or that Scotty never said that . Still, in the interests of geeky rationalization, maybe he meant first "modern" warp ship that was actually Federation Starfleet. Was the Daedalus ever confirmed on-screen anywhere to be the first Fed warp ship?
Posted by Sean (Member # 2010) on :
quote: Or we could point out that TAS isn't canon and say the Bonaventure didn't exist or that Scotty never said that
Or we could, ya know, not.
Posted by Dukhat (Member # 341) on :
quote:Or we could, ya know, not.
Why? TAS had pretty much been considered non-canon for years, until Paramount started selling the DVDs.
Posted by Sean (Member # 2010) on :
Exactly, but isn't it considered canon now? It'd be like someone saying the Enterprise doesn't exist, Masao aside.
I always thought that the Daedalus was the first vessel that was developed through contributions of Federation worlds, which would make it the first truly Federation Warp vessel. Although it could just as easily be a recent type of Earth vessel that was drafted into Fed SF service, and then further produced by the Federation after it was found satisfactory.
Are there any ships in the SF Museum that look similar to the Bonaventure (TAS version), to at least give us a theoretical idea of when it may have been produced?
Posted by MinutiaeMan (Member # 444) on :
Masao has the Bonnie placed around 2200-2210, as a contemporary of the Lancaster, the Quetzalcoatl, and the Paris.
Posted by Sean (Member # 2010) on :
Then maybe Scotty could have said-
"Thats the first warp ship (new design) of the this century."
Posted by Dukhat (Member # 341) on :
quote:Exactly, but isn't it considered canon now? It'd be like someone saying the Enterprise doesn't exist, Masao aside.
Masao never said Enterprise didn't exist. He said that he wasn't going to change the Starfleet Museum to reflect what was shown on ENT. That was his choice, but it doesn't constitute a denial of the existence of ENT.
I, however, personally feel that all four years of Enterprise was just a holodeck re-creation by Riker, and that the real events of 2151-54 were completely different. And no one is going to convince me otherwise Posted by Masao (Member # 232) on :
I'll say it now. Enterprise doesn't exist! I'm not sure about Bonaventure.
Posted by Daniel Butler (Member # 1689) on :
Er, and since when is TAS "canon now"? What did I miss?
Posted by aridas (Member # 1051) on :
As long as we are talking Bonaventure, this is what I'm working on as a means to give some Trek meaning to that odd shape seen in TAS.
The background I'm considering has this Bonaventure be a research prototype for a class of cruisers whose design is tweaked somewhat in response to the loss of the first ship.
Posted by AndrewR (Member # 44) on :
Looking at that... maybe the Bonaventure was a systems test-bed for tech that eventually was incorporated in the Constitution Class?
Posted by Mars Needs Women (Member # 1505) on :
I,like Shik, enjoy Jein's Bonaventure as well. I feel it could fit continuity better than the Bonaventure in TAS(ie it could have been the ship Cochrane used to leave Earth and end up on the planet with the she-cloud). The TAS Bonaventure could be err...shoved into canon as the "first warp ship" of the Federation in the sense that it could have been the first ship developed with the combined input of early Federation members, whereas the Daedalus may have predated the Federation's founding and be an entirely Earthly design.
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
(Says he who really isn't fond of the lousy tech background of said show.)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
. Still, in the interests of geeky rationalization, maybe he meant first "modern" warp ship that was actually Federation Starfleet. Was the Daedalus ever confirmed on-screen anywhere to be the first Fed warp ship?