Post A Reply
my profile
|
directory
login
|
search
|
faq
|
forum home
»
Flare Sci-Fi Forums
»
Star Trek
»
Starships & Technology
»
Enterprise Class vs. Constitution Class
» Post A Reply
Post A Reply
Login Name:
Password:
Message:
HTML is enabled.
UBB Code™ is enabled.
[QUOTE]Originally posted by thelastguardian: [QB] [QUOTE]Originally posted by The Mighty Monkey of Mim: [qb] I still maintain that an individual ship cannot change classes. Configurations, certainly. But not classes. The NCC-1701 refit cannot be a new class of vessel because it is the same ship, albeit extensively redesigned, as the vessel from TOS---which we know definitively to be [i]Constitution[/i]-class. This coupled with the clearly-seen diagram in TUC, establishing that the NCC-1701-A was also a Connie, is enough for me to maintain my opinion. Unless of course someone can show me more convincing evidence than that one door sign from TWOK that can easily be re-interpreted as having a different meaning. (i.e., the simulator being used by the class of cadets from the [i]Enterprise[/i], as has been said before...) -[b]MMoM[/b] :D [/qb][/QUOTE]For me, it simply makes no sense to have two such radically different vessel types (the TOS Constitution Class and the refit Enterprise) going by the same class designation. At the time of the refit, inasmuch as Enterprise was the first such refit, there surely still were TOS Constitution Class vessels floating around out there. And as more 'refit-type' vessels were refitted or built new from the keel up and their numbers grew, the need for class distinction and clarification would only have increased. At the time I wrote MSG (1986), I was told unequivocally by those in the know that the class of the refit was 'Enterprise.' The signage on the door of the simulator in ST II (and its meaning is clear, I would say) is further evidence. It is only a single, revisionist sheet of paper, seen in the final classic Trek film, that has thrown a monkey wrench into everything. Speaking personally, I'm not going to toss out the evidence of my eyes (the ST II signage) and ears (the information given me directly) just because, more than ten years after the making of TMP, someone decided they liked 'Constitution' better than 'Enterprise' and were in a position to slip it into a film. I believe the 'explanation' I posted earlier for the 1701 refit being 'Enterprise Class' and the 1701-A being 'Constitution Class' is a sound one that harmonizes everything we've seen on-screen, and it works for me. But that and a quarter will get you a phone call. :) If the 'Enterprise Class' thing doesn't work for everybody, that's fine. I can hardly be adamant about it, or about any hole-patching 'theory' of my own creation. We're here to have fun, and to share our thoughts and ideas, and to do our best to trowel over the gaps left in the ST universe by its creators. Since Star Trek is meant to be enjoyed and not to be divisive, the best advice I can pass along was given to me once by Mike Okuda, who said that it is up to each Trek fan to decide for himself what is canon and what is not, what is on-screen 'truth' and what is not, and what is Star Trek and what is not. [i]Fight revisionism![/i] :D Shane [/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