Post A Reply
my profile
|
directory
login
|
search
|
faq
|
forum home
»
Flare Sci-Fi Forums
»
Star Trek
»
Starships & Technology
»
USS Polaris
» Post A Reply
Post A Reply
Login Name:
Password:
Message:
HTML is enabled.
UBB Code™ is enabled.
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Malnurtured Snay: [QB] Liam, [QUOTE]1/ Something Roddenberry made up on the spot that should in no way be deemed even remotly canonical.[/QUOTE]If you mean the "Yorktown" bit, I actually didn't know he said that. I remember reading a thread on that here on Flare. I do think the case can be made however - all the technical difficulties with the ship can be attributed to the disruption of the Probe. On the other hand, you can argue its a new ship, but then you have to wonder about Utopia Planitia's intelligence: why plop on an old bridge module when you're just going to replace it a couple of months later? [QUOTE]2/ The fact that the crew occasionally says that the ship is being decommisioned, even though at other times they say that it isn't.[/QUOTE]And, gee golly, the decommissioning dialogue is supported by the presence of a brand new USS Enterprise NCC-1701-B in a film prologue set only a few years later. I think I win this one. [QUOTE]Because, Jeffy boy, your assertations that the Enterprise-A was an old ship [/QUOTE]Which is why I said "if we assume" in prefacing my argument. Didn't read that part, didja? Silly Liam. There's more than the dialogue in Star Trek VI supporting the notion that the Constitution-Class was retired, or did you skip over that bit? Let me rehash: If the Enterprise-A was in fact a new(er) Connie, why was she retired so soon (perhaps along with the entire class)? We know she was decomissioned because evidence in "Generations" (namely, a new USS Enterprise) hints that the OLD USS Enterprise is no longer in service. Now, quite a bit of the evidence IS circumstantial - we've never seen a Connie outside of time-travel episodes post-Star Trek VI. We've seen lots of ships from the same time period - Oberths, Excelsiors, Mirandas, Constellations ... pretty clearly, Starfleet was capable of building ships which could last, so why no Constitutions? You could argue that the Enterprise-A was a newer ship, so would have a longer life-span. Okay. The Enterprise-Nil is schedules to be retired in Star Trek III ... I forget how old the Admiral states she is, but I know he's off by a few decades, she's what, forty at that point? So if we assume that the lifespan of a Connie is 40 years, then it makes sense that newer Connies would have the same (minimum) life span, at least 40 years. And yet how many years take place between Kirk & Co. warping out at the end of Star Trek IV in Enterprise-A, and the ship warping out at the end of Star Trek VI to be decomissioned? If the ship IS a new Connie, she's being retired quite a bit early, don't you think? This supports one of two conclusions: the Enterprise-A was an older, recomissioned Constitution, OR, the Constitution-Class was retired. If you don't like my argument, why don't you try posting a counter-argument that amounts to more than brown-nosing Omega? [/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