Post A Reply
my profile
|
directory
login
|
search
|
faq
|
forum home
»
Flare Sci-Fi Forums
»
Star Trek
»
Starships & Technology
»
starfleet fleet size in comparison with registries
» Post A Reply
Post A Reply
Login Name:
Password:
Message:
HTML is enabled.
UBB Code™ is enabled.
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Timo: [QB] I think that semi-canonically the multiple-continuum theory is confirmed - some display or another already had a NAR registry that matched an existing NCC registry. I'll have to do some digging, though. Anyway, here's something that's been said many times before: Multiple separate continuums (continuae? continui?) would make sense if one wants to hold on to chronological registries, too. We saw NARs in the 20000 range back in ST6's time, and heard of NARs in the four-digit range in pre-Federation times - the NCCs seem to be dragging behind if we take them to be even roughly chronological. As for starbases, those apparently aren't chronological. In TOS, we had SB 200 already, and in TNG, SBs up to the high 700s - yet SB 173 only came online during the run of TNG. So either SB numbers are recycled, or then many of them were left unused originally and Starfleet is now slowly filling in the gaps. SB numbers might very well be based on sector numbers or something, instead of chronological order. Timo Saloniemi [/QB][/QUOTE]
Instant Graemlins
Instant UBB Code™
What is UBB Code™?
Options
Disable Graemlins in this post.
*** Click here to review this topic. ***
© 1999-2024 Charles Capps
Powered by UBB.classic™ 6.7.3