Follow the link on the page. Starfleet A-D are up and running. The rest of Starfleet should be up within a few days. (All the typing, etc., is done but I haven't created html files for the pictures yet. Damn Angelfire, no direct-image linking! ) Federation and Pre-Federation won't be along for some time though, I'm afraid.
Enjoy! -MMoM Posted by Shik (Member # 343) on :
"The ship was named for the U.S. Navy aircraft carrier (CV-31) of the same name."
I suggest you read some history. Perhaps under "Jones, John Paul."
"The ship was obviously named for Captain Jonathan Archer of the S.S. Enterprise NX-01."
[Danny DeVito in "Twins"] Oh, OBviously..![/Danny DeVito in "Twins"]
And Saratoga was 31911.
Posted by Harry (Member # 265) on :
Good work on the color coding, I like that.
One little nit: ...S.S. Enterprise NX-01... It's "Enterprise NX-01", without a prefix.
Posted by EdipisReks (Member # 510) on :
all of the individual pages gave me the ever so sweet angelfire page not found screen. oh well. i really don't want to read a page written by someone who doesn't know who John Paul Jones was. Posted by Bernd (Member # 6) on :
But I had no idea who was John Paul Jones either. That will let my visitor count drop seriously. Posted by Reverend (Member # 335) on :
I just found out today that the Trieste was a submarine.
Oh look! a squirrel!
Posted by The Red Admiral (Member # 602) on :
Yeh, a lot of the pages can't be accessed. For a substantial work such as this it requires, and warrants, a more reliable host. You needn't spend to much and you can have a professional host and your own domain...
Posted by Harry (Member # 265) on :
quote: Follow the link on the page. Starfleet A-D are up and running. The rest of Starfleet should be up within a few days.
Posted by AndrewR (Member # 44) on :
Are you going to put little pictures of each ship next to each entry!?! That might be good!?! This could become the DEFINITIVE Starship info source on the web!! Well done.
Just something (not about your site) but about the U.S.S. Ahwahnee NCC-73620. Now this was at Wolf 359. I'm sure it's been discussed before but the U.S.S. Ahwahnee NCC-71620 participates in Picard's Romulan blockade!
All sorts of inferences could be made about this - but shouldn't we just put it down to both being either 71? or 73? I would say 71 cause 73 is a bit high for Season 3/4 TNG isn't it? The Runabouts were 72 weren't they?
Either way - is this just another 'muck up' that should be over-looked and the 'correct' registry agreed on? Like the Prommie actually starting with a 7, and the Sabre really being a 7 not an 8. I would then be happy with the Akira, Steamrunner, Sabre and Norway being of the 7 vintage instead of the 6's and 5's. I know that FC is a delicate point but not wanting to delve too deep - there are just TOO many circumstances which lend towards these ships NOT being from the time of the 5's and 6's. (even IF they are refit or not).
Andrew
[ November 10, 2002, 11:27: Message edited by: AndrewR ]
Posted by Veers (Member # 661) on :
Good job, Mim! It's finally done! So far, it looks like this may become the best source of info for ships on the web.
Posted by Dat (Member # 302) on :
I suggest you delve further into your history. You are listing ships that you say are named after modern ships. An example... Bonhomme Richard... there was an American frigate with that name in the late 18th century. Also, ever heard of the frigate Constellation from that time period as well?
Posted by newark (Member # 888) on :
Something I have never understood. In the list of starships in the second Encyclopedia, Mr. Okuda lists the U.S.S. Ahwahnee with the registry of NCC-71620 as having been at Wolf 359. Why do we need to have two ships named U.S.S. Ahwahnee with slightly different registries (a 3 instead of a 1), when Mr. Okuda has himself implied that he made a mistake on the model and the correct registry for the Cheyenne Class starship is NCC-71620? Yet, in all websites which have a ship list, they list both registries for the U.S.S. Ahwahnee. Why do you not acknowledge the correction in your web sites?
Bernd,
The Ahwahnee were a native South California tribe who lived near or in what would be called Yosemite National Park. They were an insignificant tribe driven to extinction by the introduction of the Spaniards. Only their name lives on in the names of streets, of boats, and of hotels. (There is an Ahwahnee hotel in Yosemite.)
Posted by The Mighty Monkey of Mim (Member # 646) on :
quote:Originally posted by Dat: I suggest you delve further into your history. You are listing ships that you say are named after modern ships. An example... Bonhomme Richard... there was an American frigate with that name in the late 18th century. Also, ever heard of the frigate Constellation from that time period as well?
I am not ignorant of the fact that there have been long legacies of these names, but I think Gene Roddenberry wanted to convey the Connies as the aircraft carriers of the 23rd century, thus he named them after aircraft carriers of the day. That was the premise I was going for with those particular ships, anyways.
Shik: I fixed the Saratoga reg in the Bellerophon entry. Thanks.
Harry: Let's not get into this argument again. Is it my shiplist or yours?
Bernd: Funny...sort of.
AndrewR and newark: I am going by the assumption that they were two different ships, primarily because there was only one survivor of Wolf 359 and IMO that was indeed the Endeavour. Also, because I am considering both studio models and computer displays as canon in this list, there need to be two ships to explain the two different registries. Actually, though, there is really no evidence that the NCC-71620 ship is a Cheyenne-class vessel. I should eliminate that and propose that it was an older vessel recommissioned after the NCC-73620 was destroyed.
Everyone else: Thanks for the encouragement. Sorry if there are technical difficulties.
Posted by Herr Kapitan Mike (Member # 709) on :
USS Carolina -- Daedalus-class
USS Centaur -- Excelsior-class
can I just say... buh?
Posted by Spike (Member # 322) on :
quote:USS Carolina -- Daedalus-class
The Carolina was identified as Daedalus-class vessel in the ST Encyclopedia. As you probably know, the Encyclopedia is a flawless canon source.
quote:USS Centaur -- Excelsior-class
According to the DS9 TM the Centaur is a Excelsior-class variant. The TM is also a flawless canon source.
Posted by Dukhat (Member # 341) on :
quote:USS Carolina -- Daedalus-class
USS Centaur -- Excelsior-class
can I just say... buh?
Let's cut Mim some slack here. I believe what he's doing is just extrapolating data from all official & canon sources, whether they contradict each other or not. As Spike says, both the Encyclopedia and the DS9 tech manual do indeed state these things.
However, there comes a point where, even though the authors presumably tried to do the best they could, we don't necessarily have to agree with them. Okuda did a good job with the Encyclopedia, but everything in there isn't 100% correct. He even stated as much in the introduction. That's why I ended up making a separate, canon-only shiplist to complement my official list.
Anyway, as Mim said, it's his list. I probably won't necessarily agree with everything in it (I remember when he said he thought the Challenger & the Springfield from the Star Trek VI list were the actual class ships of the Challenger & Springfield class ), but he has a right to believe that if he wants to.
Posted by The Mighty Monkey of Mim (Member # 646) on :
I assure you that I am trying to be as sensical as possible with this list, but I am counting the so-called "canon publications" as I do indeed believe is fitting. If you'll read my annotations, you'll see that I have mentioned when something is questionable or inconsistent.
If you really want to get nitty-gritty about it, there's no concrete reason why the Carolina couldn't be a Daedalus. Perhaps a few of the ships remained in service as convoy freighters or some-such even after the class was officially "retired." Or, there could be some far-fetched explanation similar to what happened to the Bozeman or something. (This is all pulled straight out of my rectum, of course, but I must at least defend myself, you know... )
I do not consider it to be unreasonable for the Centaur to be called an "Excelsior variant," nor do I think it unreasonable for the Yeager to be called an "Intrepid variant." (The Curry/Raging Queen and Elkins being "Excelsior/Consitution" and "Intrepid/Constitution" variants are indeed more of a stretch even for me, but I'm trying to be as "official" as possible. I wouldn't have put it in there if they weren't called that in the DS9TM. I will be also be using the "official" Connie registries as well, though I will include plenty of annotations about FJ's alternate registry scheme.) I know this discussion has been had before, and I know that there will be some things that people rigidly object to in my list...but so be it.
Dukkie, I long ago conceeded that the TUC ships could not in any way be the class ships of the TNG era vessels, and you'll see that reflected in the Challenger entries.
I'm not necessarily going to be changing a lot of stuff, but I like this proofreading you guys are doing though, please keep it up.
-MMoM Posted by The Mighty Monkey of Mim (Member # 646) on :
BTW, Starfleet E is now up.
Posted by Dr. Phlox (Member # 878) on :
Two tiny nits, in the entry for the Elkins, the Raging Queen is mentioned with a USS prefix, but USS was missing from the name on the model. In the Enterprise NX-01 entry, it has the SS prefix, which it shouldn't. It's very interesting reading, looks like you put a ton of work into it.
Posted by The Mighty Monkey of Mim (Member # 646) on :
^Doctor, I have no doubt that the Raging Queen "really" has a U.S.S. prefix, even though one is not painted next to the name.
*refrains from comment on the NX-01*
-MMoM Posted by Dr. Phlox (Member # 878) on :
Okidoki. Another thing, although not a nitpick... In the entry for the USS Fredrickson, you say "whether this means the ship existed as both physical and computer generated forms is unclear, but seems likely." Well, in the documentary in the TNG season two DVD about the props warehouse, the physical model is shown with the Fredrickson labels on it, I think it was the one built for Flashback. Here's part of a screencap.
Posted by AndrewR (Member # 44) on :
Tiny nitpick - the Eagle on Apollo 11 and all it's sister ships was a LEM - Lunar Excursion Module was it not? Not a "Lunar Landing Module" just a little thing.
Posted by EdipisReks (Member # 510) on :
quote:Originally posted by The Mighty Monkey of Mim: I am not ignorant of the fact that there have been long legacies of these names, but I think Gene Roddenberry wanted to convey the Connies as the aircraft carriers of the 23rd century, thus he named them after aircraft carriers of the day. That was the premise I was going for with those particular ships, anyways.
i completely 100% disagree with that approach, but you can have whatever opinion you want on the matter. besides, if you name a ship after a ship that was named after yet another older ship then you are still ultimately naming the new ship after the original ship.
Posted by The Mighty Monkey of Mim (Member # 646) on :
Phlox: Thanks for the studio model pic. The reason why there must have been both a physical and a digital Fredrickson is, IIRC, beacuse Mojo told us the CGI ship from "Relativity" was the Fredrickson. Or are you trying to tell me something that I'm not getting?
-MMoM Posted by Dr. Phlox (Member # 878) on :
quote:Originally posted by The Mighty Monkey of Mim: UPDATE: Phlox: Thanks for the studio model pic. The reason why there must have been both a physical and a digital Fredrickson is, IIRC, beacuse Mojo told us the CGI ship from "Relativity" was the Fredrickson. Or are you trying to tell me something that I'm not getting?
-[b]MMoM
I was confirming that there definitely was a physical model as well as the CGI one used in the Voyager shots.
[ November 11, 2002, 19:52: Message edited by: Dr. Phlox ]
Posted by The Mighty Monkey of Mim (Member # 646) on :
Oh, okay.
Posted by Masao (Member # 232) on :
quote:Originally posted by AndrewR: Tiny nitpick - the Eagle on Apollo 11 and all it's sister ships was a LEM - Lunar Excursion Module was it not? Not a "Lunar Landing Module" just a little thing.
After reading a few pages, I can say that you've done a great job here, MMOM. I do suggest that for the origin of ship names that you go back further than US Navy carriers. For example, although Bonhomme Richard was a carrier, the more famous ship was John Paul Jones's ship (from Ben Franklin's Poor Richard's Almanac) that defeated the RN frigate Serapis in 1779.
[ November 11, 2002, 22:08: Message edited by: Masao ]
Posted by Mark Nguyen (Member # 469) on :
It WAS originally the LEM, but about halfway through the design they dropped the Excursion part, just calling it LM. However, most people continued to call it the "LEM" (pron. "lehm") as a more convenient acronym.
Mark
Posted by Timo (Member # 245) on :
And for more expansions of the LEM abbreviation, see Stanislaw Lem's "Peace on Earth"...
Timo Saloniemi
Posted by The Mighty Monkey of Mim (Member # 646) on :
Okay, the deal is:
I have a friend who has kindly offered to let me put my list on his server, and I've decided to take him up on it because, as has been pointed out, it should be earsier and more manageable on "real" host rather than Angelfire.
Therefore, I will be setting up at this new site over the next week or so. The pages that are already up at Angelfire will remain so for the time being, and I'll post the new address when it's configured, but it'll mean no updates for a few days. But you're all patient people...
-MMoM Posted by EdipisReks (Member # 510) on :
hey mim, i want to
your webpage.
Posted by The Mighty Monkey of Mim (Member # 646) on :
Umm...What...the...fuck???
I'm not quite sure how to take that. Posted by EdipisReks (Member # 510) on :
you should take it as a joke, which is what it is. Posted by Harry (Member # 265) on :
It is illogical. Posted by EdipisReks (Member # 510) on :
that's pretty good, Harry Posted by MrNeutron (Member # 524) on :
Mim. Reading your entry on the Enterprise A got me wondering... At the end of "The Undiscovered Country" Kirk's logs says "This is the final cruise of the starship Enterprise under my command. This ship, and her history, will soon become the care of another crew." Seems pretty clear from that it's the crew that's being retired, not the ship. Yet, in Generations we see the Enterprise B being taken out for her maiden flight, not ages after TUC (supposedly). So which is it?
Silly writers...
[ November 18, 2002, 02:08: Message edited by: MrNeutron ]
Posted by EdipisReks (Member # 510) on :
well, another line in TUC states that the ship is to be decommisioned. maybe the "other crew" is the janitorial crew which vacuums the carpet before the ship is torn apart.
Posted by The Mighty Monkey of Mim (Member # 646) on :
Yeah, I think that Kirk's ambiguous line aside, (he was probably just referring to the "legacy" of the ship rather than the actual object) the other dialogue in the film coupled with GEN clearly indicates that the ship was decommissioned. To me anyway...
BTW, I've finished my Starfleet ship listing and have moved it to another server. I started a new thread here. Just so's we don't clutter up the board by having TWO threads open simultaneously, any further discussion about my list should be carried on in the new thread.
![[Mad]](mad.gif)
) Federation and Pre-Federation won't be along for some time though, I'm afraid.![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Cool]](cool.gif)
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
![[Embarrassed]](redface.gif)
)![[Smile]](smile.gif)
It's very interesting reading, looks like you put a ton of work into it.
![[Confused]](confused.gif)
