quote:

---

Originally posted by Vice-Admiral Michael T. Colorge:
Mark, for all we know the ship could turn out to be the same class as the Tolstoy.

---

No way! I have a nice concept for the Rigel based on the four-nacelled Excelsior-study. No one touches that name!

Besides liking the dedication for the ship, I think it's a good name for it.

You said you discussed the name with someone who's name shall not be revealed. The tell us just how official the guy is (scale from 1-10, 1=fanboy, 10=Mike Okuda, sort of).
 

---

Posted by Vogon Poet (Member # 393) on :
 
Portland, Oregon or Portland, Maine? 8)
 

---

Posted by Boris (Member # 713) on :
 
"No, No, No! The Centaur has been Baracus class for 28 years, and now comes some ARTIST, and calls it Bananas-class. It's an insult to the Flare Group, who did so much to rationalize these ships over the years. No way, it's gotta be Baracus-class and Bananas-subclass."



[ March 14, 2002, 06:34: Message edited by: Boris ]
 

---

Posted by The Mighty Monkey of Mim (Member # 646) on :
 
Uhhh...what exactly is the point of this thread?
 

---

Posted by Vogon Poet (Member # 393) on :
 
Of course, we may well ask which Portland the Chimerra-class starship is named after; but maybe it's named after a bit of both. 8)
 

---

Posted by Mark Nguyen (Member # 469) on :
 
The point of this thread is that we're assigning a class name to a starship that needs one. And I personally support staying away from established name classes in the off chance that that name would be assigned to something in the canon eventually... And if the Centaur ends up being one of them officially, we can more easily discard a fandom name for the official one than switch official ones around. Besides, I don't think any of us want to steal the thunder from the great work the boys over at ASDB are doing. As for the nameless one, I promised not to tell who or why for a while. And no, I'm not being an elistist bastard withholding info or something. The story will eventually be told.

Regardless, I like the Centaur being a Baracus-class starship, so I'm sticking to it. Obviously, Reg Barclay (or one of his ancestors) had something to do with this ship looking so nutty.

Mark

[ March 14, 2002, 08:50: Message edited by: Mark Nguyen ]
 

---

Posted by Boris (Member # 713) on :
 
I suggest using either a canon name or an official name that's likely to appear onscreen, or no name at all. If you really, really need it for a publication, it makes sense to connect ship names and classnames, even though that isn't always the pattern.

Remember that the U.S.S. Jenolan (named after Jenolan caves near Sydney) is Sydney class, or that the runabouts follow the river pattern, or that the Apollo-class continues with Agammemnon and Ajax, or that the Istanbul-class comprises the Constantinople and Sarajevo....

Boris

[ March 14, 2002, 10:18: Message edited by: Boris ]
 

---

Posted by David Templar (Member # 580) on :
 
You guys gotta keep Mark busy with the "You're the Admiral!" thread, before he starts suggesting even siller things.
 

---

Posted by Shik (Member # 343) on :
 
It can't be the Baracus-class because then the ship would be USS Clubber Lang. Or USS Inspectah Collect...
 

---

Posted by Vogon Poet (Member # 393) on :
 

quote:

---

I don't think any of us want to steal the thunder from the great work the boys over at ASDB are doing.

---

I give as much of a flying fuck about what the twats over at ASDB are doing as I give about FASA, Franz Whatthefuck (Joseph?) and any other if-enough-fanboys-agree-on-it,-it-becomes-canon wankathon. But I see your point about how complicated it gets if the Centaur turns out to be a different unseen class entirely. It was hard enough calling the Shelley the Curry instead, as it was. 8)
 

---

Posted by Mark Nguyen (Member # 469) on :
 
Ta-dah...

So now, is it possible to give a Baracus-class ship the registry NCC-1-800-COLLECT?

Mark
 

---

Posted by Peregrinus (Member # 504) on :
 
Wow, thanks, Vogon.

And anyway, do a bit of research before you pop off like that. FJ's works were official/canon (the terms are somewhat interchangable in his case) up until around '85. It wasn't until his and Gene Roddenberry's ralationship soured and died over perceived insults and miscommunications related to a non-Trek project they were working on that Gene started setting out to invalidate FJ's contributions...

But the makers of the first three Trek movies still incorporated fragments of his stuff into the sets and dialogue.

According to Andy Probert, the refit 1701 was the first Enterprise-class ship, and the set decorators took that into consideration for Star Trek II.

It wasn't until Gene found a good tool in Mike Okuda that fandom started being expunged from the Trek universe. I don't fault Mike for this -- he had every right to listen to the creator of Star Trek, and didn't necessarily know some bad blood had resulted in some irrational peevishness in the Great Bird of the Galaxy.

--Jonah
 

---

Posted by Vogon Poet (Member # 393) on :
 
Er, sorry? Who the fuck are you anyway? Joseph's info may have been considered "official" (I can make the distinction even if he couldn't) but just because some of it made it onscreen and is therefore "canon" doesn't mean that anything else he did is. Sorry, but there it is. I know how some of you dream that one day something you suggested might be so honoured, but it takes all kinds to make a world, I guess. . .

So Mim had a very good reason to ask what the point of this thread is. It's not going to solve anything. Nothing on Earth will make me take seriously that the Centaur is a Baracus-class starship, any more than I'd expect any of you to accept my theory it's a Chimera.

"Do a bit of research," heh heh heh. Get through puberty and then try talking to me like that again.

[ March 14, 2002, 19:15: Message edited by: Vogon Poet ]
 

---

Posted by Sol System (Member # 30) on :
 
I don't think any good can come from this, but I'd like to point out that I read that as "talk to me angina," which sounds rather fatalistic.
 

---

Posted by NeghVar (Member # 62) on :
 
Look fools the only thing that is a Baracus Class is a 1982 Custom GMC Van - Black with a Spoiler in back.

No if's, and's, but's, or why's.

Oh yeah...WTF were those prints that Scotty was looking at in ST6 that said Constitution Class? Last time I checked you don't spell Enterprise Class - C-o-n-s-t-i-t-u-t-i-o-n.

Probert is a great guy...but he also says that single and tri-nacelled ships shouldn't exist. Seems to me that I have seen more than my fair share of those...and I don't buy that dual warp coil shit either...

Later...
Art
 

---

Posted by TSN (Member # 31) on :
 
Well, back when the question was asked, I thought the point of this thread was humor. But that theory went down the shitter mighty fast...
 

---

Posted by The Mighty Monkey of Mim (Member # 646) on :
 
Yeah...now we seem to be getting nasty. Let's let it be.

-MMoM
 

---

Posted by Peregrinus (Member # 504) on :
 
I apologize for causing the serious turn things took. Being one of those twats over at the ASDB, I was just a little offended by that remark. That, and the fact that the succeeding comment about FJ seemed pretty damned uninformed got my hackles up.

I mean... I know what I know, and part of what I know is a pretty clear picture of the history of GR's and FJ's relationship, the nature of FJ's pseudo-research for the Tech Manual and deck plans -- and the errors therein, and how both of those affected what (and who) came after.

This reconstruction I've pieced together from conversations with Andy, Mike, Matt, Rick S., Majel, and FJ's daughter, both personally and in interviews. Forgive me for asking that assertions be backed up with facts and evidence rather than insulting vitriol.

--Jonah

P.S. I'm 27 -- puberty is a fading memory.
 

---

Posted by Vogon Poet (Member # 393) on :
 
Apology accepted. I personally have had enough of the opinion which some people have expressed, that because I maybe don't post in the Forum on a regular basis anymore, that I don't know my stuff.

As for opinions of FJ's work, again it comes down to how you view canon. He may have done a lot of theoretical work in the 70's, work which was either the basis of or inspiration for FASA etc., and it may well have influenced development of modern Trek through the Phase II TV show and then the movies, but that to me doesn't mean I have to accept everything he ever did as official. I don't denigrate his work either; his misfortune was to have ended up viewed by GR as a rival Trek expert; who knows, if GR was alive today Okuda might have suffered a similar fate. . .
 

---

Posted by Peregrinus (Member # 504) on :
 
Ah, now I see where you're coming from. And I see how my comments could have been interpreted differently from what I intended.

I know much of the conjectural stuff in FJ's Tech Manual is way out there and utterly unsupported by what came before or after. However, several elements that were used in the first three movies should not be dismissed as errors -- nor should they be used to try to prop up the rest of his fantasizings.

As much as I support certain aspects of the TM, I also roundly bitch him out posthumously for not thinking to track down Matt Jeffries for Enterprise/Starfleet-related material -- and for utterly fucking up the registry system as a result, among other things.

On the flip side, I also don't interpret everything from the pen of Mike Okuda as holy writ. Nor do I view the finished films and episodes as 'incontravertable proof' of how things really are...

Indeed, the only source I consider inviolable is Matt Jeffries. Everything else is based off of his original material or misinterpretations of it. I can cite chapter and verse the things he put forth that no one else involved in the production of Star Treks since bothered to find out about, and that if followed, would have resulted in a far more consistent and logical structure of Starfleet than what we've got to rationalize over nowadays.

--Jonah

P.S. I personally don't care for Baracus-class... pity me.
 

---

Posted by Guardian 2000 (Member # 743) on :
 
To take the thread on a turn for the silly:

"I think it is quite plain that Lt. Reginald "Howling Mad" Barclay was a Flint-like character, but one who, unlike Flint, was psychologically incapable of living with his immortal condition with all of his marbles. It all makes sense . . . he had passed himself off as Capt. "Howling Mad" Murdock during the late twentieth century, when, in keeping with is later Broccoli-ism, he was a mental case.

We can see the pattern of advancement in his disguise work . . . after all, he had combat experience with the master of disguise, John "Hannibal" Smith. So, after a late twentieth century stint as a guy with no first name, he finally (by the twenty-fourth century) was using a first name, clearly showing his learning process in action.

We may theorize that Murdock/Barclay was born sometime in the so-called "Age of Chivalry", since we are aware of his fascination with swordplay. The Cytherians probably chose him as their emissary because they were aware of his long experience. And, of course, we mustn't forget that it was Barclay's immune system that was responsible for the genetic illness that afflicted the crew in "Genesis". Naturally, any Flint-like immortal would have to have a peculiar, powerful immune system, which Dr. Crusher would naturally have been unable to predict when she gave him her treatment and saw it go awry.

Now, while I at first balked at the concept of naming the Centaur a "Baracus Class Starship", I think it is clearly a good theory. After all, not only does it bear philosophical similarities with the slapped-together buttwhoopers Murdock/Barclay had helped "Bad Attitude" Baracus construct back in the twentieth century, but it also has some of the grace and charm of Face's Corvette, which Murdock/Barclay, as a pilot, would have always favored.

Thus, it is readily apparent that Barclay was either a starship designer prior to his Enterprise-D work, or else a starship designer in a life immediately prior to his time as Reginald "Howling Mad" Barclay, during which time he helped create and name the Centaur-type starships."

There ya go, guys. Lighten up. :-)
 

---

Posted by Peregrinus (Member # 504) on :
 
Oh, and NeghVar? When Andy drafted the Enterprise for TMP, he dubbed it Enterprise-class, as it was so distinct from what we saw in TOS. The carried over into Star Trek II, with the sign on the Academy wall reading "Mark IV Simulator - Enterprise Class". I know in our current state of trying to rationalize everything, the accepted notion is that it's the simulator set aside for use by the cadet class assigned to the Enterprise, but...

The Enterprise-refit as Constitution-class didn't crop up until Mike Okuda's revisionist history at the behest of Gene got into full swing. You can cite Star Trek VI all you want. Mike put that blueprint in Scotty's hand specifically to kill off the notion that the refit was "Enterprise-class", as fandom had been eschewing for years based on Andy Probert's take on things over a decade previous.

--Jonah
 

---

Posted by Timo (Member # 245) on :
 
If the same amount of effort had been put into an attempt to decanonize the idea that the TMP ship was the TOS ship refitted, I'd send Mike 47 truckloads of champagne or something. Back in the days of the first couple of movies, it wouldn't have been completely impossible to drive a wedge between 1701-TOS and 1701-TMP and to defeat the intent of the TMP writers while preserving much of the spirit of the dialogue.

Alternately, Probert could have done a more believable "refit" in the first place...

Timo Saloniemi
 

---

Posted by Vogon Poet (Member # 393) on :
 
So do people think the TMP-1701 is a refit of the TOS-1701 or not? I think so. But as for renaming the class, I'm not so sure. The only 'canon' example of an extreme refit getting a new class name is the Soyuz. I know there's this whole subculture out there for identifying sub-classes, from FASA onwards, you know, the Avenger, Bonhomme Richard, etc., etc., but I think you all know my attitude to such fan-originated theories like that by now. 8)
 

---

Posted by Peregrinus (Member # 504) on :
 
Would you like some more toilet paper, VP?

--Jonah
 

---

Posted by NeghVar (Member # 62) on :
 

quote:

---

Oh, and NeghVar? When Andy drafted the Enterprise for TMP, he dubbed it Enterprise-class, as it was so distinct from what we saw in TOS. The carried over into Star Trek II, with the sign on the Academy wall reading "Mark IV Simulator - Enterprise Class". I know in our current state of trying to rationalize everything, the accepted notion is that it's the simulator set aside for use by the cadet class assigned to the Enterprise, but...

The Enterprise-refit as Constitution-class didn't crop up until Mike Okuda's revisionist history at the behest of Gene got into full swing. You can cite Star Trek VI all you want. Mike put that blueprint in Scotty's hand specifically to kill off the notion that the refit was "Enterprise-class", as fandom had been eschewing for years based on Andy Probert's take on things over a decade previous.

---

quote:

---

Nor do I view the finished films and episodes as 'incontravertable proof' of how things really are...

---

And as for your commentary on this...you just fucked your credibility for knowing what is or is not "canon."

I can understand conflicting "canon" facts and how people have their own opinions on which is right, and which is wrong. But you would choose an illustrator's view over the creative director's/creator's view?

At least we agree that the "Baracus" Class idea is dumb as shit...

Later!
Art
 

---

Posted by The Mighty Monkey of Mim (Member # 646) on :
 
Now, now, children...
 

---

Posted by NeghVar (Member # 62) on :
 
Thanks Mim ...needed that...I will take a time out...

Art
 

---

Posted by Ryan McReynolds (Member # 28) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Vogon Poet:
The only 'canon' example of an extreme refit getting a new class name is the Soyuz.

---

I thought you hated "fan theories." Where is the canon that indicates the Soyuz is a refit?
 

---

Posted by Vogon Poet (Member # 393) on :
 
I wasn't quoting anything. I merely meant that since the Soyuz is a Miranda with a few extra bits sticking out of it - the only serious addition is the 'stretched' rear - It stands to reason there must be a connection.
 

---

Posted by Copernicus (Member # 789) on :
 
What about the Apollo class. You know: Apollo, Ajax, Agamemnon .... Centaur.
 

---

Posted by Cpt. Kyle Amasov (Member # 742) on :
 
And why is Hermes not an Apollo? Or Bellerophon? Or Prometheus? Or Daedalus?
 

---

Posted by Copernicus (Member # 789) on :
 
There is no other class with so much greek names in it like the Apollo. A class with even a greek name.
 

---