Post A Reply
my profile
|
directory
login
|
search
|
faq
|
forum home
»
Flare Sci-Fi Forums
»
Star Trek
»
Starships & Technology
»
Durations of Starship Service
» Post A Reply
Post A Reply
Login Name:
Password:
Message:
HTML is enabled.
UBB Code™ is enabled.
[QUOTE]Originally posted by SoundEffect: [QB] I will repectfully disagree with you on the recommissioning point. I can't find evidence in Trek that this has been done before, most of the dates on plaques make sense. As an example, by your logic, the plaque for the Excelsior should probably list a later date than the Enterprise-A's plaque, since the Excelsior was 'recomissioned' from it's NX status to NCC, including several yard changes. Yet the stardate on the Excelsior plaque from Trek VI still lists a date consistent with Trek III's timeframe. J: I don't quite understand what you meant with the USS Galaxy reference. It was launched in 2357 and has a hull number of 70637. That doesn't seem unreasonable to me. According to a line by O'Brien the Runabouts were first commissioned in 2368. As an aside, TNG era Stardates do make more sense than most people give them credit for. I have a large sheet of paper here where I worked out how TNG Stardates are likely calculated. After figuring out the numbers on my chart, I went through my canon resources for any stardates that had corresponding calendar dates. My chart has not been off by more than 2 days max, and in most cases is dead on. The first test was the Enterprise-D's launch date of October 4, 2363 and Stardate 40759.5. Although we didn't have the official date of Voyager's commissioning, my chart worked it out to the premiere date of the Voyager series in mid-January! Someone was thinkin'! :) My chart is only reliable for TNG era dates back to 2323. [/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