posted
I was running on the assumption that they had stumbled upon it, as indicted....
But if they weren't stealthy then they would be defeating their own purpose.....
-------------------- "You are a terrible human, Ritten." Magnus "Urgh, you are a sick sick person..." Austin Powers A leek too, pretty much a negi.....
Registered: Sep 2000
| IP: Logged
posted
In any case, the Seawolf is still a USN vessel, registered during the same "epoch" as the Los Angeleses and the Virginias, even if there is no obvious sequence or logic to the SSN numbering between these classes.
The NX-01 in turn is run by an organization very different from the one that was supposed to have christened and registered the NX-01*A.
The USN wouldn't worry much about giving, say, the registry "DD-2001" to a new destroyer, even if the very same registry was in use on contemporary British, German or Russian vessels. UFP Starfleet thus might not pay much heed to the existence of Archer's ship when registering its first Dauntless class starship in 2163...
Timo Saloniemi
P.S. Do modern subs even have pennant numbers on the sail? How could the Los Angeles crew identify the Seawolf registry?
Registered: Nov 1999
| IP: Logged
posted
They couldn't, at least from the sonar trace. They would be able to distinguish it from a different submarine, since they would sound different from one another, but the only way they would know the number is if they both surfaced near each other and took a look.
-------------------- The difference between genius and idiocy? Genius has its limits.
Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged
posted
Maybe in the 99.999+% of these people's conversations that occur offscreen, someone questioned the Dauntless registry being the same as Enterprise, everyone scratched their heads, and then they all said, "Fuck it, there are more important things to worry about. Let's go slipstreamin'!"
posted
Dammit, I hate being an ENT apologist... the way continuity has been butchered ticks me off sometimes, but every once in a while I come up with ideas that just might explain things.
(Assuming that Arturis's Dauntless were real,) What if Starfleet was reusing the registry number but not the name? The NX-01 was the first big leap in interstellar travel after Cochrane's original flight. Perhaps they were comparing the slipstream drive to the warp five engine?
-------------------- “Those people who think they know everything are a great annoyance to those of us who do.” — Isaac Asimov Star Trek Minutiae | Memory Alpha
Registered: Nov 2000
| IP: Logged
posted
Of course, there's no reason to assume that the Dauntless' registry was meant to reflect that of the first Starfleet vessel. I see no reason to come up with any explanation other than it being a coincidence. Who knows what kind of effect Arturis was going for. He had plenty of access to Voyager's database. Perhaps he intentionally choice a meaningless registry, on the theory that it was better to make up something rather than try to mimic a more "real" registry and having someone on board catch on because of some minor fact he overlooked.
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
capped
I WAS IN THE FUTURE, IT WAS TOO LATE TO RSVP
Member # 709
posted
i still like the Federation Starfleet differs from the Earth Starfleet defense. that there will be a Dauntless NCC-01... whatever im pretty sure this is on a list of things that the creators will never touch on anyway...
posted
Just wanted to show that the launching of UFP Starfleet's first new ship need not coincide with any significant historical date. Come to think of it, there's no real reason why NX-01 would even have to be the first ship registered. NCC-200 could have been launched years prior...
posted
To those who can�t deal with the fact that the Earth Starfleet�s (ESF) NX-01 doesn�t necessarily have to be the Federation Starfleet�s (FSF) NX-01:
Firstly�What if there�s an NCC class floating around out there too? Then we can argue why the ESF NCC-01 isn�t the Dauntless either?
Secondly�Let�s assume for a second that the Dauntless was indeed the FSF ship that carried the numerical registry designation of 01. That does not mean that it was NX-01. Hell, the Dauntless could have been an older class (even an NX) meaning that it would be NCC-01. If it�s a prototype, it gets an NX�if it�s a standard ship of the line it gets an NCC.
Thirdly�One would assume that if the NX-01 Enterprise is still around when the ESF gets incorporated into the FSF, it will be a tried and true design with many other NX offspring plying the spaceways. Meaning that the 10+ year old ship would not warrant a NX designation anyway. If anything, it would be the NCC-01. However, there is no reason it would necessarily deserve that special honor anyway, especially not because of its numerical registry designation of 01. Every pre-fed ship that is the first of its class would be 01.
-------------------- "Existence is random. Has no pattern save what we imagine after staring at it too long. No meaning save what we choose to impose. This rudderless world is not shaped by vague metaphysical forces. It is not God who kills the children. Not fate that butchers them or destiny that feeds them to the dogs. It?s us. Only us." Rorschach
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
quote:Meaning that the 10+ year old ship would not warrant a NX designation anyway. If anything, it would be the NCC-01.
Now you're mixing ESF und FSF registry schemes. The "NX" in "NX-01" has nothing to do with prototype status as far as we know. That's the class name.
Registered: Mar 2000
| IP: Logged
quote: Now you're mixing ESF und FSF registry schemes. The "NX" in "NX-01" has nothing to do with prototype status as far as we know. That's the class name.
I mix nothing sir!
My point is that, despite the fact we now know that Ent�s NX-01 is based on the class type�not the experimental status of FSF's system, some people still think that the FSF�s NX-01 should be the Enterprise. Why? I don�t know. Perhaps I�ll piss them off enough that they explain it to me using small words�preferably not the four-letter variety...
Anyway, the point I was trying to make with:
quote: Meaning that the 10+ year old ship would not warrant a NX designation anyway. If anything, it would be the NCC-01.
Is that even if the E-nil did end up being ship number 01 in the FSF�s registry system (instead of the Dauntless, or the USS Fred, or the Good Ship Lollypop-A) it would still end up being the NCC-01, not the NX-01, which pretty much invalidates the only argument I can see for it being FSF�s 01 anyway (which I already rambled on about enough in my previous post).
-------------------- "Existence is random. Has no pattern save what we imagine after staring at it too long. No meaning save what we choose to impose. This rudderless world is not shaped by vague metaphysical forces. It is not God who kills the children. Not fate that butchers them or destiny that feeds them to the dogs. It?s us. Only us." Rorschach
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
Topic Closed
Printer-friendly view of this topic
