Flare Sci-Fi Forums: Star Trek Mag #21

This is topic Star Trek Mag #21 in forum Starships & Technology at Flare Sci-Fi Forums.

To visit this topic, use this URL:
https://flare.solareclipse.net/ultimatebb.php/topic/6/965.html

Posted by The359 (Member # 37) on :

Picked up the latest issue, and just a couple of things. First, the warp nacelles of the Enterprise-D are examined, and we find out that the control room in the nacelles is actually in the back (some people weren't sure as to where it was located I believe). But the thing I really like was in the preview for the next issue, it says they are going to have blueprints and stuff for the S.S. Raven NAR-32450 (and yes, it says S.S., not U.S.S.!)

As for the rest of the mag, it has the following:
Article on Klingon Love Poetry
Interview with Tim Russ
Information on the graphics for "Critical Care"
Short interview with Rene Auberjonois
Briefing on the Enterprise-D weapons systems, cargo bays, warp nacelles, impulse engines, deflectors, and biobeds.
Pullouts of the Enterprise-D battle bridge, Picard's quarters, warp nacelle control room, and sickbay
Interview with Johnathan Del Arco
Behind the scenes on the designing of the Type-6 Shuttlecraft
Briefing on Federation Legal Procedures, Federation Prisons, the Tantalus Penal Colony, and Elba II
Interview with Doug Drexler
Briefing on the Borg Queen's ship with the usual multi-color pullout showing 5 views.
Behind the scenes on the VFX of "Fury", part II
How to spot real Star Trek autographs
Interview with Robert Blackman
Briefing on standard issue equipment from 2266, including the phaser, tricorder, communicator, and a breathing apparatus.

------------------
Me: "Why don't you live in Hong Kong?"
Rachel Roberts: "Hong Kong? Nah. Oh, but we can live in China! Yeah, China has great Chinese food!"

(discussion with fellow classmate, 9/5/00)

Mustang Class Starship Development Project

Posted by Malnurtured Snay (Member # 411) on :

The control room is IN the nacelle? And it's in the BACK of the nacelle? Riiiiight, o...k...

Still, the rest of it seems pretty cool. I got hooked on Trek with TNG, so I'm particularly fond of the Enterprise-D ...

Anyone got any scans?

And what is the S.S. Raven? Voyager reference?

------------------
Star Trek Gamma Quadrant
Average Rated 7.5 out of 10 Smileys by Fabrux
***
Shop Smart -- Shop "S"-Mart

[This message has been edited by JeffKardde (edited December 10, 2000).]

Posted by Spike (Member # 322) on :

Nacelle http://www.8ung.at/fitz/scanns/enterprise/warp1.jpg

Controll room http://www.8ung.at/fitz/scanns/enterprise/warp2.jpg

I'll try to scan the Raven in a few hours.

------------------
"Second star to the right, and then straight on till morning."

[This message has been edited by Fitz (edited December 11, 2000).]

Posted by Sol System (Member # 30) on :

The Raven being the ship Seven and her parents were on prior to their unfortunate end.

------------------
"I finally see that what we thought was a fun way to celebrate our love was really an expression of hostility and disrespect toward Jesus."
--
Bill Metz, in The Onion
****
Read chapter TWO of "Dirk Tungsten in...The Disappearing Planet"! Now with 30% more plot.

Posted by The359 (Member # 37) on :

Yep, those are the nacelle stuff, except ours are in English and have some other info with them.

------------------
Me: "Why don't you live in Hong Kong?"
Rachel Roberts: "Hong Kong? Nah. Oh, but we can live in China! Yeah, China has great Chinese food!"

(discussion with fellow classmate, 9/5/00)

Mustang Class Starship Development Project

Posted by Spike (Member # 322) on :

Raven CGI http://www.8ung.at/fitz/scanns/raven/raven.jpg

Blueprints:

Front http://www.8ung.at/fitz/scanns/raven/raven_front.jpg http://www.8ung.at/fitz/scanns/raven/raven_front2.jpg

Rear http://www.8ung.at/fitz/scanns/raven/raven_rear.jpg http://www.8ung.at/fitz/scanns/raven/raven_rear2.jpg

Side http://www.8ung.at/fitz/scanns/raven/raven_side.jpg http://www.8ung.at/fitz/scanns/raven/raven_side2.jpg

Top http://www.8ung.at/fitz/scanns/raven/raven_top.jpg http://www.8ung.at/fitz/scanns/raven/raven_top2.jpg

Bottom http://www.8ung.at/fitz/scanns/raven/raven_bottom.jpg http://www.8ung.at/fitz/scanns/raven/raven_bottom2.jpg

------------------
"Second star to the right, and then straight on till morning."

[This message has been edited by Fitz (edited December 11, 2000).]

Posted by The359 (Member # 37) on :

Whatever class the Raven is, they were probably all freighters. The Raven was probably just modified for civilian use, with scientific equipment stuck in the bays.

------------------
Me: "Why don't you live in Hong Kong?"
Rachel Roberts: "Hong Kong? Nah. Oh, but we can live in China! Yeah, China has great Chinese food!"

(discussion with fellow classmate, 9/5/00)

Mustang Class Starship Development Project

Posted by Michael Dracon (Member # 4) on :

Well what do'ya know, the thing has landing-gear.

------------------
"We survived."
"Yeah, it was some battle."
"I meant high school."

- Buffy the Vampire Slayer

Posted by Spike (Member # 322) on :

quote:
the thing has landing-gear.

Not very surprising. Many of the new introduced ship types have landing-gears, eg Defiant, Intrepid and Prometheus.

------------------
"Second star to the right, and then straight on till morning."

[This message has been edited by Fitz (edited December 11, 2000).]

Posted by Dukhat (Member # 341) on :

That little symbol at the front of the nacelles; the red circle with a yellow arrowhead...doesn't that look like the symbol on the Constitution class Enterprise from the original series? (located on the sides of the engineering hull)

Judging by the registry #, the Raven could be a Surak Class ship.

------------------
Homer: "I'm not normally a praying man, but if you're up there, please save me, Superman!"

Posted by The359 (Member # 37) on :

Could be Istanbul class too.

I like the cargo doors on the bottom though. And where the heck have you been hiding these pics? We needed them earlier!

------------------
Me: "Why don't you live in Hong Kong?"
Rachel Roberts: "Hong Kong? Nah. Oh, but we can live in China! Yeah, China has great Chinese food!"

(discussion with fellow classmate, 9/5/00)

Mustang Class Starship Development Project

Posted by Spike (Member # 322) on :

quote:
And where the heck have you been hiding these pics?

In my Fact Files folder # 4. The FF use the same illustrations as the ST Magazine, but the pro is, that they are published weekly, so I get the most pics long before they are published in the Mag.

quote:
Judging by the registry #, the Raven could be a Surak Class ship.

NCCs and NARs are "compatible"?

------------------
"Second star to the right, and then straight on till morning."

[This message has been edited by Fitz (edited December 11, 2000).]

Posted by Hobbes (Member # 138) on :

If you mean NAR can be used on classes that Starfleet also uses, yes. There's an Oberth-class NAR.

------------------
"Everyone should speak English or just shut up, that's what I say!" - Calvin.
This post is sponsored in part by the Federation Starship Datalink

Posted by Spike (Member # 322) on :

No, that's not was I meant.

Do Federation ships and Starfleet ships share the same numbering system? So when the Raven has NAR-32450, there's no Starfleet ship with NCC-32450? Otherwise you can't say what class the Raven maybe is.

------------------
"Second star to the right, and then straight on till morning."

[This message has been edited by Fitz (edited December 11, 2000).]

Posted by Dukhat (Member # 341) on :

As far as the NCC & NAR #'s being compatible: Maybe, maybe not. I was just going by the numerals, and on my rego section of my shiplist, the class with one of the closest registry numbers to the Raven (32450) is the Surak class Zapata (33184). The next possible class would be the Istanbul (34043, 34852, 38529). And before anyone says anything, yes, I know there's no hard evidence that registries are chronological. It's just my opinion.

I vaguely recall that the Raven's dedication plaque only had the name of the ship, and no other info. I could be wrong, though. Anybody have a 'cap?

------------------
Homer: "I'm not normally a praying man, but if you're up there, please save me, Superman!"

[This message has been edited by Dukhat (edited December 11, 2000).]

Posted by AndrewR (Member # 44) on :

The Raven could be a relative of the Lakul... transport from Generations?

------------------
"This is cooling, faster than I can..." Tori Amos "Cooling"

Posted by Dukhat (Member # 341) on :

Actually, the Raven is probably not an Istanbul. The Istanbul class Constantinople was described as a transport carrying over 2,000 colonists. That's twice the crew complement of a Galaxy class starship! The Istanbul class must be a huge ship, and I seriously doubt a ship like the Raven would be able to hold that many people (unless they were packed in like sardines).

------------------
Homer: "I'm not normally a praying man, but if you're up there, please save me, Superman!"

Posted by Nim (Member # 205) on :

I'd like to do a "maquis" on the Raven. If it could be done with the smaller raiders then this would be a nugget!
I see it now! Dual torpies fore and aft, phaser-strips on nacelles, beefed-up hull, mmm...

------------------
Here lies a toppled god,
His fall was not a small one.
We did but build his pedestal,
A narrow and a tall one.

-Tleilaxu Epigram

Posted by Timo (Member # 245) on :

Interestingly, if we assume that the NAR numbers run separately from NCC numbers, then the difference between the ferry in ST6 (NAR-20000 or thereabouts) and the Raven is surprisingly small. In NCC-registered vessels, a difference of just 10000 numbers seldom indicates a major difference in construction and design philosophy.

Yet the ST6 ferry seems "basic" enough, almost TOS-like in its simplicity (save for the miniature Galaxy class nacelles in its belly!), while the Raven has many Voyageresque and Danubesque features: the design of her deflectors is only seen in the Voyager and her type 9 shuttles plus the Delta Flier, while the cargo hold arrangement, the cockpit windows and the overall design are very Danube-like.

Are NAR ships built in such low numbers in comparison to NCC ships that a 2280s-90s design and a 2350s one can get nearly matching NAR registries? Are NARs perhaps allocated so that every number from 1 to n is used, while NCCs regularly skip numbers?

One could use this as an argument against separate NCC and NAR numbers. Then again, one could also argue that a 32000-range registry cannot describe a ship with Intrepid and Danube features, which are usually associated with NCCs in the 72000+ range, so NCC and NAR numbers must be separate!

Timo Saloniemi

Posted by Ritten (Member # 417) on :

Designer #1: Yeah, when I was helping with the design of the Danube runabouts I just wasn't feeling very creative, so I dug out the old Starship Design History and came across a class that caught my notice, the Raven. Took a few ideas from that, wow, did the esign team take off at that.

Designer #2: Hey, I did the same thing when I was design the Intrepid class, from the same Raven class no less.

------------------
Well, it's done, yes, the deed is done.

Posted by The359 (Member # 37) on :

Here's a list of all the NAR ships I have on my list:
SS Nenebek NAR-2066
SS Vico NAR-18834
Unknown name NAR-25820 (the shuttle from Star Trek VI)
SS Raven NAR-32450

Now, the Nenebek was a small shuttle used on TNG, and she did look very old, but if NAR and NCC registries matched up, that's around the time of Excelsior in the 2290s. It is possible that the Nenebek was in use from the 2290s to the 2360s, seeing as how old and ratty she looked. Didn't her control panels also use movie era design?

SS Vico, an Oberth class starship used in TNG, which we couldn't tell how old she was because she was destroyed. I believe she had TNG-era consoles all over, making it possible she was launched sometime around 2340 - 2360, or that she was merely refitted.

The Sydney-style shuttle used in Star Trek VI seems to be the one that puts the whole kink in things. If NAR registries were seperate from NCC registries, then the shuttle would be launched around 2290, the Vico sometime after that, and the Nenebek's launch would be pushed back into the TOS era. But, we only saw that shuttle for a few seconds. The only way we know that shuttle is from the picture of it with the registry number clearly painted across it. Now, my theory is, that picture of the shuttle is from "Trials and Tribble-ations". The shuttle didn't have nacelles in that episode, did it? Even though the shuttle has the old UFP logo, it's possible to explain it as just an old shuttle that the Federation gave to the Temporal Authorities just as their own personal ship to go wherever they wanted and they just left the logo on it. Now, the shuttle in Star Trek VI would be labelled as SD-103, as she was called to by the dock master in flight. SD-103 is similar to how shuttles are registered on starships, as NCC-1701/7 or something along those lines. This signifies that the shuttle isn't its own indepedent vessel, that it belongs to Spacedock, and that this is shuttle #103 that belongs to Spacedock (which is what SD would stand for). Another way the registry could be read is SD-1/03, signifying that this is Spacedock 1 (the DS9 Tech Manual refers to it as Spacedock 1), and this is shuttle #3 for Spacedock 1.

As for Raven, all we know is that she could come at any time after all these other ships. The only problem is, again, the computer consoles are modern (in fact, more modern then Voyager's, which is a big mistake). Therefore she must have been refit too.

So, here's my thinking:
2290s - SS Nenebek NAR-2066 is launched
2293 - SD-103 or SD-1/03 transports Kirk and co. to Spacedock
2310s - USS Vico NCC-18834 is launched
2320s - NCC-25820 is launched, later given to Federation Temporal Authorities and given NAR registry
2330s - Freighter USS Raven NCC-32450 is launched
2350s - USS Vico and USS Raven both transfered to civilian status after refit, given NAR registries.

Does that work, or did that make no sense whatsoever?

------------------
Me: "Why don't you live in Hong Kong?"
Rachel Roberts: "Hong Kong? Nah. Oh, but we can live in China! Yeah, China has great Chinese food!"

(discussion with fellow classmate, 9/5/00)

Mustang Class Starship Development Project

Posted by Spike (Member # 322) on :

AFAIK the ship from "Trials and Tribble-ations" was the Sydney-class USS Nash.

------------------
"Second star to the right, and then straight on till morning."

Posted by The359 (Member # 37) on :

Well, yeah, we've seen a USS Nash NCC-2010-B labeled on a model, but we don't know when that picture was taken. It was merely assumed by some that the Nash was the ship in "Trials and Tribble-ations".

Maybe it was USS Nash NCC-25820 (since they obviously couldn't use NCC-2010-B), later changed to SS Nash NAR-25820?

I'm really going out on a limb here...

------------------
Me: "Why don't you live in Hong Kong?"
Rachel Roberts: "Hong Kong? Nah. Oh, but we can live in China! Yeah, China has great Chinese food!"

(discussion with fellow classmate, 9/5/00)

Mustang Class Starship Development Project

Posted by Dukhat (Member # 341) on :

Or you could just go by the numerals like I did, and forgo all this NCC/NAR stuff.

In a similar vein, if you go by the numerals with the "Curry" (the Excelsior/Constitution kitbash from DS9, you might find something surprising. The Curry's rego is NCC-45617. The two conjectural classes with the closest regos are the Rennaissance (45XXX) and the Mediterranean (43XXX). This is also within the realm of many Excelsiors having a 42XXX registry. The design doesn't really match the description of the Rennaissance class Aries in "The Icarus Factor", that of a small scout ship. However, it does match the description of the Mediterranean class Lalo, which was a Federation/Starfleet freighter. It does look like a freighter-like version of the Excelsior. This could also mean that, going by similar Excelsior-family designs, the Centaur could be of the Rennaissance class. Timo's statement about classes tending not to differ within 10000 regos also bears this out. But again, of course, this is just my opinion. I'm just going by screen and official source evidence here, but I would rather have Bernd's ASDB designs for those classes
------------------
Homer: "I'm not normally a praying man, but if you're up there, please save me, Superman!"

[This message has been edited by Dukhat (edited December 12, 2000).]

Posted by Spike (Member # 322) on :

quote:
Well, yeah, we've seen a USS Nash NCC-2010-B labeled on a model

I'm not 100% sure, but it could be NCC-2010-5.

quote:
Maybe it was USS Nash NCC-25820 (since they obviously couldn't use NCC-2010-B), later changed to SS Nash NAR-25820?

But the Nash and the NAR-25820 were different ship types.

------------------
"Second star to the right, and then straight on till morning."

Posted by Fabrux (Member # 71) on :

Don't forget the ship on the list from "Up The Long Ladder". It was launched in the 2100's and had a registry of NAR-9678 or something thereabouts.

------------------
ayr.virtualave.net
"C'est la nuit blanche/let's go out all night"
-11:30, La Nuit Blanche

Posted by DeltaFlyer on :

That's funny. I always thought the Raven was the same class as the Erewon class ship seen in Star Trek Deep Space Nine.

------------------
Delta Flyer

Posted by Dukhat (Member # 341) on :

That's just a popular misconception. There's no canon evidence that the Raven is Erewhon class.

------------------
Homer: "I'm not normally a praying man, but if you're up there, please save me, Superman!"

Posted by colin (Member # 217) on :

The NAR prefix is first introduced by the new United Nations before 2079 and is used by Earth ships to at least 2123. Two ships are known to use this prefix:
a.) NAR-7678 S.S. Mariposa
b.) NAR-18834 S.S. Seattle.

Between 2123 and 2293, the next recorded instance of the NAR prefix, the NAR prefix seems to have been retired and reinstituted by the agency or agencies in charge of registries. Ships of this second period include:
a.) NAR-2066 Nenebek
b.) NAR-18834 S.S. Vico
c.) NAR-25820
d.) NAR-32450 S.S. Raven.

The technological foundations and registries used by these later ships can be argued to indicate this second period.

NAR-2066 Nenebek uses technology employed by starships in the last two decades of the 2200's.

NAR-18834 S.S. Vico is given the registry of another ship, the S.S. Seattle. The S.S. Seattle, of an unknown class, is given the registry NAR-18834 by the United Nations before 2079.

If the next series is set before Star Trek, the first series, will we see additional examples of ships bearing the NAR- prefix? This is conceivable.

Based on limited information, I place the registrie prefixes in this order:
NAR- mid 2000 to mid 2100
NCC- 2161 to present
NFT- mid 2200's
NX- late 2200's to present
NAR- (second phase) late 2200's to present
NDT- late 2200's to present
NCD- 2300's to present
NGL- 2300's to present
NSP- 2300's to present
BDR- mid 2300's to present
YLT- mid 2300's to present
NCV- 2400's to 2900's

------------------

takeoffs are optional; landings are mandatorya

[This message has been edited by targetemployee (edited December 13, 2000).]

Posted by Shik (Member # 343) on :

Here's another thought: what if numbers are "purchased" en masse by corporations, foundations, etc. & are then reused & reassigned like transferring license plates to a new car? This could allow for the Seattle & the Vico to have the same number; indeed, the Seattle & Vico may be the same ship--renaming is not uncommon (esepcially in the former Soviet bloc).

------------------
"Omigod. Singing meat. This is altogether too much."

Posted by Timo (Member # 245) on :

The NAR regos do seem to require some sort of a "batch" approach, or else they have to be considered nonchronological (which does not bode well for us who want to see the NCCs as at least roughly chronological). It's a nice idea that pre-Federation NARs are separate from post-Federation ones.

Perhaps NAR and NCC had some specific meanings in the old Earthfleet, and were adopted as "meaningless" prefices in the Federation fleet roughly along the lines the original NAR and NCC were assigned. NAR could have once stood for "New United Nations Astronomical Research ship" while NCC was, say, "NUN Cruiser" or "NUN Combat ship". In the 2160s, the former was chosen for all civilian vessels of Earth origin (even though later these assumed non-research roles and the meaning of the abbreviation was lost), and the latter for Earth Starfleet vessels (which all tended to be "cruisers" or "combat ships" at that point, and again historical developments caused the meaning to be lost).

Incidentally, are we sure the shuttle in ST6 was SD-103 or SD-1/03? Could it have been SB-1/03 instead? Some sources claim that the mushroom in Earth orbit is Starbase One, even though this makes little sense - why build the first/primary Starbase where you already have significant presence, and not on the Romulan front or something where you don't already have assorted dockyards and smaller stations and thus you *need* a dedicated Starbase there?

Timo Saloniemi

Posted by Spike (Member # 322) on :

Which ship had a NCD-prefix?

Additionally we had
2119 RT-
2137 BBI-

------------------
"Second star to the right, and then straight on till morning."

[This message has been edited by Fitz (edited December 13, 2000).]

Posted by PsyLiam (Member # 73) on :

OTOH, building a Starbase for the first time would be a lot easier in Earth orbit than on the edge of Federation space (or pre-Federation, if you like). They'd need somewhere to service (and in the beginning, perhaps build) ships, and Earth orbit seems the most sensible place.

------------------
"I am in one of those rare periods of life where I am convinced I am a sexy devil."- Simon "Sol System" Sizer

Posted by The359 (Member # 37) on :

NCD comes from the Toron Class Shuttle used by that super-tall Klingon in "Chain of Command". Her registry number was NCD-31775.

I also believe it was SD-1/03 and not SB-1/03.

------------------
Me: "Why don't you live in Hong Kong?"
Rachel Roberts: "Hong Kong? Nah. Oh, but we can live in China! Yeah, China has great Chinese food!"

(discussion with fellow classmate, 9/5/00)

Mustang Class Starship Development Project

Posted by Timo (Member # 245) on :

The beef I have with SB-1 is that Earth orbit should already be full of decentralized spaceship-servicing facilites, so there would be no need to construct a centralized facility. Earth might get its starbase at some point, but other, more remote locations would probably have the first dibs for such a construction effort.

Then again, perhaps SBs weren't built in a chronological order (cf. SB 173 (?) coming online as late as in "Measure of a Man"), and the one in Earth's orbit got retroactively named SB 1.

Assuming, of course, that there is a starbase in Earth's orbit. So far, we have seen two constructs that looked like known starbases, but both (Spacedock of ST3 and Orbital Office of TMP) were significantly smaller than their Starbase equivalents. I'd be happier with saying that there are no starbases in Earth orbit, not even under a different name (like "Spacedock"). Instead, there's this big decentralized gaggle of facilities, none of which is a full starbase (in the sense that a typical floating dock has no crew provisions, and Spacedock One has no ship repair facilities).

Timo Saloniemi

Posted by PsyLiam (Member # 73) on :

Spacedock is too small to be a Starbase? What are you using as your definition of starbase? The big mushroom ones? I know SD mus tbe smaller, but it's obviously the same design. A mini-me starbase (I know it's the same model, and there's scale issues with the Ent-A and Ent-D going through the doors, but still). Besides, I doubt the orbital Starbases in Kirk's day were TNG sized mushrooms. And in fact, starbases WEREN'T the big mushroom things until "11001001" anyway.

Then there's the Regula-I refit starbase from Measure of a Man.

And the loads of Starbases that seem to be planet based, especially in TOS.

And Deep Space Nine, which was occasionally called a Starbase.

So really, "Starbase" seems to refer to a base, that's in the stars. Or on a planet. Which is pretty much everything. Tsk, definition writers, eh?

------------------
"I am in one of those rare periods of life where I am convinced I am a sexy devil."- Simon "Sol System" Sizer

Posted by Davok (Member # 143) on :

Not exactly, because you don't call everything travelling between stars a "starship" either, otherwise you woul have to call shuttles "starship" too.

I think Starfleet does differ between starbases, outpost etc. etc.
I don't think the Deep Space X stations are (formally) regarded as starbases, otherwise DS9 would be called "starbase xyz".

------------------
USS Allegiance LCARS Database

Posted by PsyLiam (Member # 73) on :

I always thought that "Deep Space n." was just a designation for a Starbase that was out in the sticks. According to "Parallels" [TNG], at least one Deep Space starbase has the Regula-I starbase design.

Plus, Sisko has said "Federation Starbase Deep Space Nine" on more than one occasion.

------------------
"I am in one of those rare periods of life where I am convinced I am a sexy devil."- Simon "Sol System" Sizer

Posted by AndrewR (Member # 44) on :

Here's one -

What's the difference between a

Star Station

Space station

and a star base

its a wonder we haven't had space base

The federation station: deep space nine...

has a nice ring to it...

Andrew

------------------
"This is cooling, faster than I can..." Tori Amos "Cooling"

Posted by Sol System (Member # 30) on :

Space station is just a generic term for any facility in space that doesn't move around. (At least, beyond orbiting something else.) Heck, we've had three space stations already. No starbases yet though, which has always struck me as being a more formal term.

------------------
I have been floated to this spot this hour
On a series of events
I cannot explain
--
Olivia Tremor Control
****
Read chapters one and two of "Dirk Tungsten in...The Disappearing Planet"! Read, read, read, read, read me now.

Posted by Alpha Centauri (Member # 338) on :

In response to an earlier post in this topic (by Fitz):

The RT- and BBI-series were not registries. They were class"names", just like the DY-series. At least, as far as I can tell.

And according to the DY-Series Comparison Chart (non-canon, anyway), DY-numbers were also used as registries, where DY-100 series ships would have had registries in the DY-1xx range, and DY-500 ships registries beginning with DY-5xx. Of course, the huge amount of new DY-serial numbers (DY-732, DY-500-B, etc.) introduced by the Ficus Sector ship chart invalidates this theory, but it's interesting, anyway.

Oh, and Sol, starbases are not per definition space stations. Starbases can be ground-based too.

------------------
Signature.

[This message has been edited by Alpha Centauri (edited December 16, 2000).]

Posted by Malnurtured Snay (Member # 411) on :

Couldn't the argument be then made that Starfleet Command is in fact Starbase One?

------------------
Star Trek Gamma Quadrant
Average Rated 7.5 out of 10 Smileys by Fabrux
***
Shop Smart -- Shop "S"-Mart

Posted by Sol System (Member # 30) on :

I didn't define them as such.

Posted by Harry (Member # 265) on :

quote:
And according to the DY-Series Comparison Chart (non-canon, anyway),

And what in the name of all things voodoo is this Chart? Never heard of it, but it sounds very interesting. Is it a book? Or is it a picture? Is it on 'THE WEB'??

------------------
"There's no such thing as overkill when it comes to killing."
-Gaseous Anomaly, December 11, 2000
---
Titan Fleet Yards - Harry Doddema's Star Trek Site

Posted by Dukhat (Member # 341) on :

Well, I just saw the mag issue with the Raven, and as I expected, it gave absolutely no information on the ship's class. It didn't even have the nice CGI side view that was in the previous issue's "Coming Up Next Issue" page. Would it be possible for someone to scan that side view, even if it is kinda small?

BTW, the next issue will have information on both the Steamrunner class and the Saber class. Apparently TPTB have decided it is "Saber" and not "Sabre."

------------------
"Although I do not know how World War III will be fought, I do know how World War IV will be fought - with rocks and clubs." -Albert Einstein

Posted by Mark Nguyen (Member # 469) on :

I doubt we'll get anything really useful for the Steamrunner and Saber... Nothing more than what was released four years ago, in any case. Some schematics, perhaps a production sketch or two, butn nothing new.

Mark <--- wants bridges for those two, dammit!

------------------
"Why build one, when you can build two at twice the price?"

- Carl Sagan, "Contact"

Posted by colin (Member # 217) on :

The issue that I have with the Star Trek: Magazine is that the articles are summary of information from the episodes and films. If I spend 10 dollars for a magazine, I want that magazine to be a super-duper magazine with information from the episodes and films being the basis, not the core, of the magazine. And I want to see additional information that will add to my understanding of the Star Trek universe.

For instance, the SS Raven. I would like to see the class information on this ship and her sister ships, the history of the ship, and the ship's place in the Star Trek universe. Contents would include:
1. Class history of the SS Raven type.
Questions-When was the class commissioned? What are the specifications of the class? Who used the ships? etc.
A select listing of ships in this class.
2. History of the ship.
Questions-When was this ship commisioned? What were the former owners of the this ship? etc.
3. Place in Star Trek
Self-explanatory
These are a few select questions. I am sure others would have different or more questions.

------------------

takeoffs are optional; landings are mandatory

Posted by Tech Sergeant Chen (Member # 350) on :

Are you kidding? The Magazine can't even get the information they're given right, and you want them to make things up? It'd be a real continuity nightmare then. They're obviously not fans, just some graphic designers and writers who have a license to steal.

They can't even get their website right. The last time I went there, they had missing pages and they were using a Verisign certificate from drinksworld.com, some kind of wine and spirits company. HUH??? And I bet they don't even sell Saurian brandy.

Posted by The359 (Member # 37) on :

Am I the only one who notices that it's odd the February 2001 issue of the Magazine is coming out in mid-December?

------------------
Me: "Why don't you live in Hong Kong?"
Rachel Roberts: "Hong Kong? Nah. Oh, but we can live in China! Yeah, China has great Chinese food!"

(discussion with fellow classmate, 9/5/00)

Mustang Class Starship Development Project

Posted by PsyLiam (Member # 73) on :

Assuming that everyone else here buys monthly magazines, then yes.

------------------
"And Mojo was hurt and I would have kissed his little boo boo but then I realized he was a BAD monkey so I KICKED HIM IN HIS FACE!"
-Bubbles

Posted by theotime on :

I'm a novice here, so I may have missed something.

Anyways ...

Seems to me some time ago I read that the NCC designation stood for "Naval Construction Code". Then by extension, NAR might stand for "Naval Acquisition Registration". This would account for a lack of class ship, since the numbers would be assigned in order of purchase, as opposed to the block numbers assigned when Starfleet orders a group of ships of the same class to be built. They're basically "off the shelf", pre-built and retro-fitted to mission. Ships with the NAR designation would fall in the same catagory as British RFA or American USNS ships, auxiliaries working within the Starfleet authority but not actually part of the fleet.

------------------
Theotime

Posted by The359 (Member # 37) on :

AHHHHHH!

NAVAL CONSTRUCTION CODE!

RUN!

No, seriously Theotime, welcome to Flare. Unfortunatly, in answer to what you've read, it was thought up my a lot of NON-CANON (you'll hear this word a lot here) groups that NCC stood for Naval Construction Contract or Code when there was very little proof that this was true. As far as the reality of the Trek Universe goes, there is no definition for the acronym NCC that we know of.

------------------
Me: "Why don't you live in Hong Kong?"
Rachel Roberts: "Hong Kong? Nah. Oh, but we can live in China! Yeah, China has great Chinese food!"

(discussion with fellow classmate, 9/5/00)

Mustang Class Starship Development Project

Posted by Vacuum robot lady from Spaceballs (Member # 239) on :

Somebody should set up a FAQ about this or something. We need to stem the tide of corrupted newbies.

------------------
"...screw logic, let's go for a theory with no evidence!" - Omega.

Irony ensues.

Free Jeff K

Posted by Daniel (Member # 453) on :

Actually, Todd Allan Guenther's Ships of the Starfleet,
(non-canon), lists NCC as standing for Naval Construction Contract or Navigational Contact Code, not Naval Construction Code. If you think about it, that doesn't even make much sense. When Matt Jeffries came up with NCC, he picked the letters relatively randomly. He knew NC was used in the Navy or Air Force for something, and just added an extra C to make it sound better. But anyway, you're right. There's never been a canon reference as to what it means, (although the non-canon stuff sounds pretty good to me!)

Posted by Ritten (Member # 417) on :

Civilian aircraft, in the States, use the NC...

------------------
"One's ethics are determined by what we do when no one is looking" Nugget
Star Trek: Gamma Quadrant
Star Trek: Legacy
Read them, rate them, got money, film them

"...and I remain on the far side of crazy, I remain the mortal enemy of man, no hundred dollar cure will save me..." WoV

Posted by Dukhat (Member # 341) on :

I believe that Roddenberry took the "NC" used for airplanes (he was a pilot at one point in his life) and added the extra "C" to it for the starship registries. I know I read this in a canon source, but it escapes me at the moment.

------------------
Star Trek: Legacy

Posted by Michael Dracon (Member # 4) on :

Roddenberry took the NC-1701 from his own little boat, and added a C.

------------------
"That's your plan? Wile E. Coyote would come up with a better plan than that!"
- Crighton, Farscape.

Posted by The_Tom (Member # 38) on :

His own plane, actually... I think I've seen a picture in a book of him standing next to it...

------------------
"People have the right to discriminate based on religion."
"There is no "seperation of church and state" in the Constitution"
-Omega, Jan 26 and 30, respectively

Posted by Michael Dracon (Member # 4) on :

Uhm, plane yes. Did I say boat? I meant plane. Really!

------------------
"That's your plan? Wile E. Coyote would come up with a better plan than that!"
- Crighton, Farscape.

Posted by theotime on :

I stand corrected.

Still works, though, if only because the writers in the show (STTNG, STDS9, STV, etc...) keep having to reverse-engineer reasons and definitions in order to straighten out storylines. (doesn't always work, though) Eventually, they'll come up with a reason for NCC.

I didn't know about the aircraft connection. Did he originally base his series on the Air Force?

------------------
Theotime

Posted by Dukhat (Member # 341) on :

He based the series not on the Air Force but the Navy. He probably didn't know any actual naval registries, or what they meant if he did. So he probably just went with what he knew.

------------------
Star Trek: Legacy

Posted by Sol System (Member # 30) on :

Dispatch from horse's mouth:

"I wanted a very simple number that could be spotted quickly. You'd have to eliminate 3, 6, 8, and 9, so I just went for 1701, which, incidentally and coincidentally, happens to be very close to the license number on my airplane - NC-17740. But I have never really stepped out and squashed the rumor that the number on the Enterprise came off my airplane."
--
Matt Jeffries

------------------
I will shout until they know what I mean.
--
Neutral Milk Hotel
****
Read three (three!) chapters of "Dirk Tungsten in...The Disappearing Planet"! Then, go insane!

Posted by AndrewR (Member # 44) on :

Also somewhere in that same page was mention of the fact that the Soviet letters were CCC... so its as if they combined NC and CCC and got NCC! voil�.

------------------
"This is cooling, faster than I can..." Tori Amos "Cooling"

Posted by Shik (Member # 343) on :

The Sovs used CCCP, as in the name of the nation. Simpler, really.

------------------
"You just push off....and the falling sort of happens on its own." ---Dave Titus

Posted by Peregrinus (Member # 504) on :

Nooo. "CCC" as in the USSR's international civilian craft prefix. Again from the horse's mouth (nobody tell Matt we're calling him a horse):

"Since the 1920's, N has indicated the United States in Navy terms, and C means 'commercial' vessel. I added an extra C just for fun. Interestingly, Russia's designation is CCC."

------------------
"It's obvious I'm dealing with a moron..."

Posted by Peregrinus (Member # 504) on :

Regarding starbases and whatnot...

I've always taken Starbase to indicate an advance Starfleet post in an area where there wasn't much Federation government to speak of (yet).

Some fluffy material on the margins of semi-canonicity (novels, etc.) have Starbase 1 out in the fringes of the Solar system, and I personally love McQuarrie's concept painting of a Starbase in an asteroid for that.

In the Earth-Luna system, without counting Spacedock, or having to go to any other planets in this stellar system, we have the:

San Francisco Yards
McKinley Station
Copernicus Fleet Yards
Baikonur Yards
Puget Sound Yards
Newport News Yards

And probably many others that I am either forgetting or aren't canon. Earth orbit (and to a lesser degree, Lunar orbit) is probably a pretty busy place.

--Jonah

------------------
"It's obvious I'm dealing with a moron..."

--Col. Edwards, ROBOTECH

Posted by Sol System (Member # 30) on :

I'd have to disagree with part of your classification system. Starbases seem to be part of the larger command structure. Admirals and the like are stationed at them. This suggests, at least to me, that they're located where ever Starfleet needs a local HQ. Outposts on the edges of Federation space are Deep Space stations, no? And these don't seem to be places where orders originate from.

------------------
I will shout until they know what I mean.
--
Neutral Milk Hotel
****
Read three (three!) chapters of "Dirk Tungsten in...The Disappearing Planet"! Then, go insane!

Posted by AndrewR (Member # 44) on :

How does "Star Station" fit into all this... as in Star Station India from "Unnatural Selction" [TNG]?

Andrew

------------------
"This is cooling, faster than I can..." Tori Amos "Cooling"

Posted by Timo (Member # 245) on :

Well, there are probably as many theories as there are theorists on this, but my take is that "star station" is a civilian installation. Starfleet in turn operates a network of starbases used for military, research and other purposes, but with one common factor - they all support starship operations. These starbases are given numerical identifiers, but some of the venerable ones also acquire nicknames like "starbase Montgomery". These stations are within the Federation, and vastly outnumber stations outside UFP borders.

Then there are deep space stations that are located outside Federation territory, hence the name. Once the space around a DS station gets absorbed to the UFP, the station becomes another starbase, and the DS number is freed for future use (which is why even in the late 24th century, Starfleet still uses single-digit DS numbers).

In addition, Starfleet operates "outposts" (with more limited missions than starbases - they can be science-only installations like in "Gambit" or defence-only ones like the outposts of the RNZ) and "relay stations" (as seen in "Aquiel" - there might be civilian commnets, too, but apparently Starfleet maintains a network of its own) and other special installations with special naming systems.

So there. No need to agree with this - it's just one possible way to organize this mess.

Timo Saloniemi

Posted by Sol System (Member # 30) on :

What about Deep Space Station K-7? Personally, I'd like consider this a DS just like DS9, but whence the K? Perhaps a change in the record-keeping system between TOS and TNG.

Of course, now that I think about it, K-7 was a civilian station, wasn't it? So it need not fit into any Starfleet naming scheme.

------------------
I will shout until they know what I mean.
--
Neutral Milk Hotel
****
Read three (three!) chapters of "Dirk Tungsten in...The Disappearing Planet"! Then, go insane!

[This message has been edited by Sol System (edited February 10, 2001).]

Posted by Peregrinus (Member # 504) on :

Back to registries for a second. I don't know how this will fit into people's NCC/NAR/whatever debates, but the Vico from "Hero Worship" was evidently Starfleet surplus. It still had the SF pennant on it according to the miniature...

Go fig.

--Jonah

------------------
"It's obvious I'm dealing with a moron..."

--Col. Edwards, ROBOTECH

Posted by Lee (Member # 393) on :

Probably the commander of Station K-9,when it was built, got so much teasing from the other Captains about having a dog of a posting, that as soon as he got to be an Admiral he changed the system. . . 8)

------------------
"I rather strongly disagree, even if I share the love of Dick. Speaking of which, that would be the most embarrasing .sig quote ever, so never use it."

- Simon Sizer, 23/01/2001

Posted by Ritten (Member # 417) on :

Okayyyyy....

------------------
"One's ethics are determined by what we do when no one is looking" Nugget
Star Trek: Gamma Quadrant
Star Trek: Legacy
Read them, rate them, got money, film them

"...and I remain on the far side of crazy, I remain the mortal enemy of man, no hundred dollar cure will save me..." WoV