In what TNG episode did this display appear? (Or was it multiple eps? Which was the first?) Can someone please make a screen/DVD cap from the actual show?
Thanks, -MMoM Posted by Mark Nguyen (Member # 469) on :
I think the actual graphic came from that vitual bridge tour CD-ROM. The graphic itself was allegedly one of the repeating bakgrounds they had in the latter seasons.
Mark
Posted by Siegfried (Member # 29) on :
If it isn't an exact replica of it, then it's at least based off of one of the two LCARS displays that they used in the Bridge Observation lounge during the latter seasons of The Next Generation. I wanna say it was the latter half of season five through seven. The first I noticed it was in the two-parter "The Chains of Command." One of the screens showed fleet status (like the one you linked to) and the other was a vehicle status that views of the Enterprise.
Let me see if I can hunt some pictures down.
Posted by Siegfried (Member # 29) on :
Okay, I couldn't find screen captures from the episodes that these displays were in. Hopefully someone else can. In the meantime, I pulled out my old Interactive Technical Manual CD and pulled some captions off of it. Yeah, the quality isn't too hot (since I had convert from *.pic to *.jpg), but it should do in the meantime.
Screenshot 1 -- Here's your display from across the observation lounge. Screenshot 2 -- Here's a close-up of your display's cousin. Screenshot 3 -- Here's a close-up of the display you have.
Posted by The Mighty Monkey of Mim (Member # 646) on :
Pardon my ignorance of exactly what the Interactive Technical Manual is, but: Is this a picture of the actual display or some kind of graphic representation of it? I'm noticing some differences between it and the version from The Captain's Chair. (Spelling of Merrimac and Zhukov registry.)
This now means that we have THREE versions of this display. The one in your pic, (1) the one from The Captain's Chair, which I have always thought might have been altered, (2) and the possibly pre-production version published in the Starlog magazine. And we STILL don't know for sure which one is the canon one...
-MMoM Posted by Spike (Member # 322) on :
I'm pretty sure that the one from the Interactive Manual is canon. It's nearly identical to the one from Starlog, only Yosemite was changed to Merced.
And if you look at this screenshot of the display, you'll see that it is a diplomatic mission to Epsilon Ashanti II and not Aldaraan. http://home.arcor.de/spike730/display.jpg
That ship list display was seen in multiple episodes on the Mission Ops station at the back of the bridge. I remember seeing it just the other day in "Sins of the Father". You can see the Mission Ops station when Dr. Crusher brings up the Intrepid log's medical information on the Environment console.
There's another list just like that one, but I haven't been able to compile the complete list of names yet. The sector numbers are also different at the top of the second list graphic. The second graphic was on a data PADD.
Posted by Siegfried (Member # 29) on :
The Interactive Technical Manual was a CD-ROM that was released in 1994 around the end of The Next Generation. It was essentially Okuda and Sternbach's technical manual for the Enterprise-D but it allowed you to tour the main areas of the ship and look at numerous props. The sets toured included the Bridge, Ready Room, ObsLounge, Engineering, Sickbay, Transporter Room, Ten-Forward, and a few quarters (I think Picard's, Troi's, Data's, and Worf's). It also allowed you to pick up, zoom in, and spin around some of the props (like numerous padds, some medical and engineering tools, etc.). Most importantly, it allowed you to zoom in on many of the LCARS displays.
If I were to hazard a guess, I'd say that the LCARS displays in the Interactive Technical Manual are the same ones that were used on the show. They just created QuickTime tours and took photographs of the sets before they transformed for Generations (or possibly "All Good Things..."). As far as I know, nothing was created or modified especially for the CD-ROM (someone with more info can correct me if I'm wrong).
Posted by The Mighty Monkey of Mim (Member # 646) on :
quote:Originally posted by SoundEffect: That ship list display was seen in multiple episodes on the Mission Ops station at the back of the bridge. I remember seeing it just the other day in "Sins of the Father". You can see the Mission Ops station when Dr. Crusher brings up the Intrepid log's medical information on the Environment console.
That means use of it as early as late Season 3. Can ANYONE possibly find out which episode it was first used in? When did the Starlog issue w/the graphic come out? And can someone please get a screenshot from an actual episode. (I don't doubt the veracity of the Tech Manual CD pics, but I'd still like confirmation.)
quote:There's another list just like that one, but I haven't been able to compile the complete list of names yet. The sector numbers are also different at the top of the second list graphic. The second graphic was on a data PADD.
Do you have any pics? Have we considered the possibility that Okuda might have just taken the original version of the display (whichever one that was) and altered it for different appearances?
I think I may have to conceed that Starfleet's vessel is indeed named the Merrimac and not the Merrimack, as it was spelled as the former on both this display and the tachyon detection grid graphic from "Redemption." I suppose it could still be named for the Civil War ship. (If people have been misspelling it for two-hundred years, I suppose they might still be misspelling it in another two or three-hundred. At least this jives with the Franz Joseph ship from TMP...) And now I'm more convinced than ever that the Zhukov's reg is NCC-62136 and not NCC-26136. (I guess Ambassadors were in production until not all that long ago...)
Perhaps someone should consult Mr. Okuda on the subject. I could do it, but perhaps someone who's had a bit more contact with him than I have should do th honors. (I've only written to him once or twice.) Maybe he could help to straighten this whole thing out.
-MMoM Posted by StyroFoam Man (Member # 706) on :
Hmmm... From a Trek-Reality POV, I could understand the mission assignements changeing but not the class-type or NCC numbers... Unless they change the NCC numbers to confuse the "enemy" like the russians did with thier sub-hull numbers.
The class "could" change, prehaps if the entire class was refit or reclassifed or somthing...
Ah, whatever... Back to my extruder... Posted by SoundEffect (Member # 926) on :
MMoM:
The second starship list graphic was on a data PADD. I can scan a photo if you like, but it's really hard to read all the text. What text I've been able to confirm comes from looking at vessel calss name lengths, name lengths and registry lengths, and making comparisons to known vessels. (As an example, the word Tian nan men is broken into 3 parts, so that one was easy. I can tell Thomas Paine is in the list still for the same reason.) The "list 2" picture is on card 072 of the TNG Trading Cards: Fifth Season Commemorative 1991/1992.
From what I can tell, the sector numbers appear to be "25xxx - 29x12", the x's are the numbers I'm not certain of. I can tell it's a slightly different list as the first 3 names at the to are long, short and long, where in the first list Ajax, Aires, and Berlin are about the same length. The new list is as follows:
USS ????? USS Aries USS ????? ___________ USS Tian nan men USS Charleston USS Sutherland USS ????? USS Hood USS Merrimac USS ????? USS Repulse USS Thomas Paine USS ????? USS ????? USS ?????
--------------------
The original list appears in Starlog's version of the TNG Magazine, Vol 15, 90-91 Season, page 35. (K'Ehleyr, Alexander and Worf are on the cover.)
Posted by The Mighty Monkey of Mim (Member # 646) on :
Sure, I'd like to see a scan just for the hell of it, even if it's not really possible to tell a lot from it...
-MMoM Posted by The Mighty Monkey of Mim (Member # 646) on :
I have just sent an e-mail to Okuda regarding this issue, as well as another question about the tachyon detection grid display from "Redemption." I am awaiting his reply...
-MMoM Posted by AndrewR (Member # 44) on :
Is this list we are awaiting a scan of - the lengthy-looking one from "Measure of a Man"?
Posted by SoundEffect (Member # 926) on :
MMoM:
Here's a scan I did of the trading card with the PADD starship list. It has the same number of ships as the first list, just some of the ships changed as did the sector numbers. It's actually easier to read them on the card with a magnifying glass than it is in the scan I made. I scanned 100% at 600dpi. Hope it helps. I am still going through my list of ships from season 5 and earlier. If I can make any more positive IDs, I'll post in.
quote:Originally posted by The Mighty Monkey of Mim: This now means that we have THREE versions of this display. The one in your pic, (1) the one from The Captain's Chair, which I have always thought might have been altered, (2) and the possibly pre-production version published in the Starlog magazine. And we STILL don't know for sure which one is the canon one... -MMoM
Er, none of them? Since if we treat barely legible text seen onscreen as canon, then we're going to have to add a whole lot of other crazy shit in too.
I'm not saying that the stuff isn't interesting to look at, or to use for research, but I don't think you can argue that any of those versions has any real canonicity over the other two.
Posted by The_Tom (Member # 38) on :
I think there's an emergent syndrome worth studying here, namely the compulsion to grow one's shiplist like some sort of deranged Chia-Pet.
Posted by The Mighty Monkey of Mim (Member # 646) on :
quote:Originally posted by PsyLiam: Er, none of them? Since if we treat barely legible text seen onscreen as canon, then we're going to have to add a whole lot of other crazy shit in too.
I'm not saying that the stuff isn't interesting to look at, or to use for research, but I don't think you can argue that any of those versions has any real canonicity over the other two.
Well, their function shiplist-wise is essentially to "prove" that at least *these* Encyclopedia class/registry/name associations aren't made up. All of the ships listed, IIRC, were mentioned or featured in other episodes, but not necessarily with class and reg info. However, it the classes and regs *were* onscreen. Namely, in the form of these displays.
-MMoM Posted by newark (Member # 888) on :
MMoM,
I once wrote Mr. Okuda on this very subject. He replied that the ship name/class/registry found in the encyclopedia for TNG on was from source material (okudagrams, models) on the filmed episodes and films. We can see this pattern in the encyclopedia. The entries for ships introduced after 1986 never say the information for a particular ship is conjectural. The term conjectural is reserved for ships of TOS, a show for which Mr. Okuda had little or no involvement with.
Posted by SoundEffect (Member # 926) on :
I've been scrutinizing the trading card until my eyes hurt. The following list is based on a few known facts and a few well founded assumptions. I feel my list is about 80% accurate.
Assumptions/Facts: -Many of the vessels from the first list are in the new one in the same places. -Many of the confirmed new entries are from the Tachyon Detection Grid ships, so the unconfirmed ones may be from the rest of that list. -The PADD contains ships from season's 1-5 only. -Even on the trading card the words were difficult to read...most of the information is from ship name lengths compared to class name lengths, name lengths compared to known values elsewhere in the list. Numbers such as 1s, 7s, and other spacings sometimes yield hints. -My list won't include the assignments. Some are the same, but I can't trust the sector numbers.
My take on List 2: (underscores are unknowns)
STARFLEET OPERATIONS - SECTORS 25___ - 2_012
• USS ENDEAVOUR NEBULA NCC-71805 USS ARIES RENAISSANCE NCC-45167 • USS EXCALIBUR AMBASSADOR NCC-26517
• USS TIAN NAN MEN MIRANDA NCC-21382 • USS CHARLESTON EXCELSIOR NCC-42285 • USS SUTHERLAND NEBULA NCC-72015 • USS GODDARD KOROLEV NCC-59621 • USS HOOD EXCELSIOR NCC-42296 • USS MERRIMAC NEBULA NCC-61827 • USS HORNET RENAISSANCE NCC-45231 USS AHWAHNEE CHEYENNE NCC-71620 • USS THOMAS PAINE NEW ORLEANS NCC-65530 USS TRIESTE MERCED NCC-37124 • USS AKAGI RIGEL NCC-62158 • USS HERMES ANTARES NCC-10376
Posted by Reverend (Member # 335) on :
Nothing new then by the looks of it.
Posted by The Mighty Monkey of Mim (Member # 646) on :
I agree with you on every single one of those names except perhaps the Hermes. The class for the last entry looks like Excelsior. Is there any other ship it might be? On the other hand, if it *is* the Hermes, then we have confirmation of the Encyclopedia's listing of it as an Antares-class vessel.
Good work.
-MMoM Posted by SoundEffect (Member # 926) on :
Page 65 of "The Continuing Mission" book gives evidence of the first starship list.
Posted by The Mighty Monkey of Mim (Member # 646) on :
quote:Originally posted by SoundEffect: Page 65 of "The Continuing Mission" book gives evidence of the first starship list.
What does it say?
Posted by AndrewR (Member # 44) on :
Are we talking about that ship list from Measure of a Man??
Posted by SoundEffect (Member # 926) on :
Sorry, I figured everyone had this book.
It shows a shot of the conference lounge from behind the windows looking in. The gold models are gone, so it's the later season horizontal detail. Through one of the windows, you can see the list on the starboard side viewer, and from the name lengths, it's ovbious it's the first ship list. Here's a scan of the pic:
[ December 09, 2002, 10:31: Message edited by: SoundEffect ]
Posted by The Mighty Monkey of Mim (Member # 646) on :
quote:Originally posted by SoundEffect: Sorry, I figured everyone had this book.
It's like the ONE book I don't have. It was too expensive and seemed not to have all that much new info in it that would be valuable to me...
Incidentally, I've changed my mind about the Hermes. I can see it now...
quote:The original list appears in Starlog's version of the TNG Magazine, Vol 15, 90-91 Season, page 35. (K'Ehleyr, Alexander and Worf are on the cover.)
Would you happen to have this? Can a better scan be made of that list than the one I have? I'd like to see what the "Beta xxxxxA" system in which the Fearless operates is. (This goes for anyone who's got the issue, as well.)
-MMoM Posted by AndrewR (Member # 44) on :
quote:Originally posted by The Mighty Monkey of Mim:
quote:Originally posted by SoundEffect: Sorry, I figured everyone had this book.
It's like the ONE book I don't have. It was too expensive and seemed not to have all that much new info in it that would be valuable to me...
-MMoM
The list shown in that screen cap above is in Continuing Mission!?!
I got the second-version of the book. I got it for about $5.00 Posted by SoundEffect (Member # 926) on :
Partially because of this thread, I recreated the graphic in Illustrator. Anyone want to see it?
Posted by Dukhat (Member # 341) on :
Every time I click on one of Sound Effect's links, all I get is the FortuneCity logo.
Posted by SoundEffect (Member # 926) on :
Dukhat:
For probably a similar reason, the same happens for me with Angelfire sites...I don't know why.
You may be able to get it by right-clicking and selecting 'Save Target As'.
I know many people have been able to see it, so I assure you the pic's there. I don't know why it wouldn't load.
Posted by Dukhat (Member # 341) on :
Hmm. I tried what you said & it still gave me the logo. I don't suppose you'd be willing to email your pics to me? My addy is [email protected]. I'd really like to see them.
Posted by Reverend (Member # 335) on :
Forgive me for being a little slow but do we actually know which lists were used in what season? Since knowing that would help anyone who is obsessive about making excruciatingly detailed ship lists. *guilty look*
Posted by SoundEffect (Member # 926) on :
quote:Originally posted by Reverend: do we actually know which lists were used in what season?
To a degree we can. Many have noticed that Mike Okuda hides little fun in-jokes in most of his Okudagrams, the number 47 or M*A*S*Hs 4077 number or something of that nature. Well I also noticed that many of his screen graphics also have a number which seems to correspond to the season he made the graphic, at least it works in most cases. If you look to the left of the word USS Zhukov in the first shiplist graphic, you see the number 40274. The number at the end indicates the season of the graphic. The number was 40271 in season 1 and so on.
Posted by The Mighty Monkey of Mim (Member # 646) on :
Great pic, SE!
"Mahoga." Never would've guessed that one...
Dukkie, all of the pics have worked fine for me. Perhaps SE could put them on Flare Upload and make them available that way.
My take on these lists is this: -There were only two lists ever used onscreen. The one pictured in Siggie's pic from the Interactive Tech Manual, and the one from SE's trading card. -The Starlog one was, as thought previously, as preproduction version. Okuda must have either decided he didn't like the Yosemite-class designation or else he thought of some reason why Merced would be better. There appears to be no other difference between the Starlog version and the episode version. -The one from the Captain's Chair was altered in order to 'fit better' with what had since been published in the Encyclopedia, etc. (Specifically, the spelling of Merrimack and the registry of the Zhukov were changed, and Okuda or whoever else took the opportunity to drop in a couple new sector and starbase numbers and the Star Wars joke.)
Cool that we could get this sorted out. But we still need to figure out the following: -In which episode did the "real" display appear, and how long did it remain in use? -Is the second display (the one that also includes the "Redemption" ships) visible in any episodes, and if so, which ones?
I suspect that the newly-released Season 6 TNG DVD boxed set will help with these. But then again, SE said he noticed the first display as early as "Sins of the Father." Spikey, can you or someone else verify this?
-MMoM Posted by Dat (Member # 302) on :
A reminder for all that the Flare upload is only available to those members who have made at least 250 posts and are declared "Senior Member".
Posted by Spike (Member # 322) on :
quote:Is the second display (the one that also includes the "Redemption" ships) visible in any episodes, and if so, which ones?
IIRC Picard had a PADD in "Redemption" when he chose the ships for his fleet.
Posted by newark (Member # 888) on :
This PADD and the shiplist are, for me, definitive proof there was only one U.S.S. Ahwahnee of the Cheyenne Class. You will argue, the U.S.S. Endeavour is reputed to be the only vessel to survive the Wolf 359 battle. My response, What is the exact definiton of "to survive"? Does it mean the ship left the battle on its own power, like the U.S.S. Nevada at the Battle of Pearl Harbor, or does it mean like the ship was intact and could be salvaged later, like the U.S.S. California damaged at the aforementioned battle and later salvaged? I think the former, not the latter. We know from detail study of the battle area that the U.S.S. Endeavour was not there and the U.S.S. Ahwahnee was. Furthermore, the U.S.S. Ahwahnee was not as badly damaged as the other ships and could have been salvaged.
It's rather silly attempting to rationalize a discrepancy when Mr. Okuda has already provided an answer.
Posted by Spike (Member # 322) on :
Maybe the Endeavour didn't encounter the Borg at all. AFAIR Amasov only said: "It is my opinion that the Borg are as close to pure evil as any race we've ever discovered."
It is possible that he was at Wolf 359 after the battle and saw the destruction the Borg left there.
Posted by The Mighty Monkey of Mim (Member # 646) on :
I am in agreement, and my next shiplist update will reflect this. However, I'm a bit irked at the registry change. Why? It has been said that Okuda felt NCC-73620 was too high a number for a vessel in service in 2367, but it doesn't seem too far out of range. (After all, the Danube-class runabouts that were in service a year or so later had NCC's in the 72900's and 73000's.)
Spike: Is there a point where the PADD graphic is visible enough to make a screencap?
-MMoM Posted by SoundEffect (Member # 926) on :
Double post. Sorry.
[ December 11, 2002, 17:53: Message edited by: SoundEffect ]
Posted by SoundEffect (Member # 926) on :
quote:Originally posted by The Mighty Monkey of Mim: I'm a bit irked at the registry change. Why? It has been said that Okuda felt NCC-73620 was too high a number for a vessel in service in 2367, but it doesn't seem too far out of range. (After all, the Danube-class runabouts that were in service a year or so later had NCC's in the 72900's and 73000's.)
But is was Okuda who did the correction in the Encyclopedia, and the registry is brought down by only one number, not a complete change opf numbers. It's so much a cleaner solution to just accept one name, class, and registry for the ship than trying to justify two so close together. Again we go back to the Yamato example. Okuda made a 'correction' to the effect of "please ignore that last reference." I see the same thing being done to the Ahwahnee.
The Ahwahnee was in service before Wolf 359 happened, so it had to be around in 2366 as well. So being 2 or more years away from the 2368 Runabouts puts its registry a bit on the high side.
[ December 11, 2002, 14:27: Message edited by: SoundEffect ]
Posted by SoundEffect (Member # 926) on :
I'm not authorized to delete double posts.
Posted by Dat (Member # 302) on :
I don't think anyone can delete posts... except Charles seeing as he's the one who's working on the coding.
Posted by The_Tom (Member # 38) on :
Oh, done it can be, yes. But a certain administrator would bust a Capps in our ass.
Posted by CaptainMike (Member # 709) on :
sodom-tastic!
Posted by The Mighty Monkey of Mim (Member # 646) on :
quote:Originally posted by SoundEffect: Partially because of this thread, I recreated the graphic in Illustrator. Anyone want to see it?
I'd like to see it. Could you also make one with the proper class designation for the Trieste?
-MMoM Posted by SoundEffect (Member # 926) on :
Here's my Illustrator version of Shiplist 1. The colors are the same as the ones from the second list. The Trieste's Class name was altered to be the corrected one. (No point in making a diagram with incorrect information, is there!)
Posted by Spike (Member # 322) on :
It looks like the one SoundEffect posted earlier.
Posted by The Mighty Monkey of Mim (Member # 646) on :
Nifty. Posted by SoundEffect (Member # 926) on :
Spike, the cap you have there may in fact be the same list of ships, but from the trading card pic it's a physically different PADD (details) and the colors on the LCARS screen are vastly different than on the card. I wonder where specifically the trading card PADD made it into the show?
Posted by The Mighty Monkey of Mim (Member # 646) on :
quote:Originally posted by SoundEffect: Spike, the cap you have there may in fact be the same list of ships, but from the trading card pic it's a physically different PADD (details) and the colors on the LCARS screen are vastly different than on the card. I wonder where specifically the trading card PADD made it into the show?
No, it looks the same to me. It's just that Picard is holding it upside-down. Posted by SoundEffect (Member # 926) on :
Well, there are sticker differences and the colors don't match, even upside down.
Posted by The Mighty Monkey of Mim (Member # 646) on :
Several weeks ago I e-mailed Okuda about some of this stuff and here was his reply, which I received just before Christmas but didn't rememeber to post until now:
quote:Dear Kristofer:
Thanks for the note and for your thoughtful questions. I'll try to address some of your points:
Regarding differences in ship assignments, I'd simply assume that these were due to the fact that each chart was prepared at different times.
Regarding spelling of "Merrimack," it was originally spelled incorrectly in scripts and on my screens. Someone pointed out the error, and we fixed it in later versions. In general, I prefer to regard material on screen as "authoritative," but in this case, since the writer of the episode clearly intended to honor a real ship and its crew, it seemed appropriate to make it historically accurate, even if it meant changing something that was established on screen.
I seem to recall that I changed the class listing of the Trieste because we did indeed see a U.S.S. yosemite in a TNG episode, and it was clearly a re-use of the Grissom model. I think you're the first person to catch this particular change. (Or at least, you're the first to point it out to me!)
Some of the links you mentioned in your msg appear to be broken, but the images from the Captain's Chair and Interactive Tech Manual CDs were indeed photographed on the actual set. I'm pretty sure the Starlog stuff was also provided by the art department, too. Most of the Interactive Tech Manual images were, if I recall, photographed just a few weeks before the TNG sets were demolished to make room for Voyager. I believe that the Captain's Chair images of the Enterprise-D were mostly re-uses of material originally shot for the Interactive Tech Manual, since the Captain's Chair was made after the sets were gone.
Regarding the ship chart in the 1997/1999 Encyclopedia: Yes, there are typos in that chart. I did supervise the person who compiled the chart, but I did not rigorously check the data, so I allowed an unfortunate number of typos to slip through. In general, I'd tend to suggest that the data in the individual encyclopedia entries are more likely to be accurate. On the other hand, Margaret Clark, our editor at Pocket Books, caught and fixed a fair number of goofs on her own, so it's entirely possible that there are things in the chart that are more accurate than some of the individual encyclopedia entries. (I personally typed the chart in the first edition of the Encyclopedia, so any typos there are entirely my own.)
The change in the Ahwahnee's registry was my mistake. I was probably working from handwritten notes and couldn't read my writing. I don't recall the specific reason that I conjectured that the Endeavour was at Wolf 359. I did have reasons, however tenuous, for each ship listed to have been in that battle, but in some cases these reasons were tenuous, indeed.
In some cases, they were listings in scripts that were changed before the episodes were aired. (I believe the U.S.S. Chekov falls into that category. It was mentioned in the script, and the line was filmed, but was edited out of the final episode.) In others, I listed names that were on models that were filmed in the graveyard scene, but were never legible on screen. This last was fairly complicated because the graveyard scene was filmed at least twice (three times, if you count some visual effects re-dos) .
You may recall that "The Best of Both Worlds, Part II" was somewhat ambiguous as to the exact number and names of ships that survived. Later episodes of TNG, DS9, and VGR all gave additional clues that may have contradicted assumptions that I made when I did art for earlier episodes. This sort of change was fairly common, but was, I hope, seldom noticed, except by detail-oriented fans like yourself. Still, I did a reasonable amount of attention to getting these details as consistent as possible, specifically because I thought fans would enjoy it. Nevertheless, given the perpetual crunch of TV production, I never really had time to figure things out in rigrous detail, so these things are inevitable.
Anyway, thanks again for your note, and I hope that this gives some insight into the nature of the process.
Take care and hope your holidays are happy.
-Mike Okuda
So, according to this, the changing of the Ahwahnee's registry was simply a mistake and really had nothing to do with adjusting the registry range to fit the timeframe. For now at least, I'm going back to listing the ship as NCC-73620. (It just happens to be my personal preference that when a studio model and computer display or other graphic are in conflict, the model should take precedence unless it is a case of clear-cut mislabeling like the Brattain.)
I'm not sure whether he's aware that Starfleet would appear to be just continuing an historical trend by calling the ship Merrimac.
Was TNG really "ambiguous" about how many ships survived Wolf 359? I thought it was pretty cut & dried. (BoBW said 40 ships were rallied for the battle, and "The Drumhead" said that 39 of those ships were destroyed, correct?) Did we just mis-interpret a line or something?
Unfortunately, he wasn't able to give me any specifics for when the assignment list display first started being used. (Spike, et al: Any luck examining the DVDs for evidence?)
-MMoM Posted by PsyLiam (Member # 73) on :
Hanson said "We're massing a fleet of 40 ships." Whether he meant exactly 40 or around 40 is up in the air. It also seemed to be Federation only ships, and I'm sure that there have been suggestions that Klingon ships might have been at Wolf 359 as well.
Posted by Captain Stark (Member # 70) on :
MMoM: Thanks for the post from Okuda. That makes sense with the Yosemite Class from the earlier graphic (that I'm currently looking at from the Starlog TNG Magazine #15. Does anyone still need a scan of that graphic?)
Since Okuda has been willing to help us out with our ship lists and clarifications from different published materials, do you think it would be possible to posts his replies on a website somewhere so when we go back to do research we are not searching through a ton of old threads on the message board?
Thanks
Posted by The Mighty Monkey of Mim (Member # 646) on :
Well, generally I include any relevent info from Okuda, Sternbach, et al in the annotations of my shiplist. The actual text of the message simply boils down to what is written there, in most cases.
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
Have we considered the possibility that Okuda might have just taken the original version of the display (whichever one that was) and altered it for different appearances?![[Embarrassed]](redface.gif)
![[Cool]](cool.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
Perhaps SE could put them on Flare Upload and make them available that way. ![[Confused]](confused.gif)
![[Frown]](frown.gif)
(Spike, et al: Any luck examining the DVDs for evidence?)