And is that NCC-8000 Cochrane then the one from "Emissary", or is there a reason to believe the 5xxxx registry the Encyclopedia gives for that?

quote:

---

If we accept the NCC-1305-E registry as valid (which I do)...

---

quote:

---

You can't seriously think that the ship was supposed to have said that in WYLB, can you? It was just laziness on the part of the VFX guys. It should be ignored.

---

Let's discuss the latter part. The argument for the third Defiant's registry is that since it is visible as NX-74205, the registry is valid. The counter-argument is that the VFX staff were rushed and didn't have the time to complete all changes.

I am not taking sides in this debate. However, I will point to several registry issues. Here they are:

U.S.S. Hood
This Excelsior Class starship is introduced in "Encounter at Farpoint". The underside of the saucer is seen as the ship pulls away from the U.S.S. Enterprise. The registry is that of the U.S.S. Excelsior-NX-2000. Later, in "Redemption, Part 2", the U.S.S. Hood is given an unique registry-NCC-42296. Then, finally, in "Tears of the Prophets" and according to insiders, the U.S.S. Hood is given the registry of the U.S.S. Lakota- NCC-42768. If we follow the argument illustrated above for the U.S.S. Defiant, then the U.S.S. Hood started life with registry- NX-2000, then had a change in registry-NCC-42296, and finally was given another registry-NCC-42768. This is seen for the most part on screen and can thus be ruled canonical. Or we could argue that the U.S.S. Hood had only one registry and that the other two registries were inadvertent.

S.S. K.E. Tsiolkovsky
This ship, from "The Naked Now", has one visible registry-NCC-638 (seen as the ship careens into the solar fragment). This is the registry of the U.S.S. Grissom, of ST III. On the other hand, there is the dedication plate which is seen and not readable in the episode. This has the registry of NCC-53911. Since the visible evidence is more noticeable, can we say the S.S. K.E. Tsiolkovsky had the Grissom's registry? Or is this another instance of inadvertence?

U.S.S. Prometheus
This ship has two registries-NX-59650 and NX-74913. This one has been the focal point of many controversies and I will simply point to this case.

Danube Class starships & U.S.S. Rio Grande
This is a more interesting case. The first known runabout in Star Trek history, the U.S.S. Rio Grande had the registry NCC-72452. This is seen when the ship is ascending to the outer hull of the station. AFter this introduction, every runabout, including the runabout destroyed in the TNG episode, carried this registry to "One Little Ship". In that episode, the U.S.S. Rubicon was seen with a registry-NCC-72936, followed by the U.S.S. Shenandoah with registry NCC-73024. Then we see again the U.S.S. Rio Grande and her sister ship, the U.S.S. Gander. Both ships carry the registry NCC-73024. Finally, one of the last appearances of the runabout had the ship carrying registry NCC-73918.

So, in effect, the visual evidence tells us that from 2368 to 2374, all runabouts with the possible exception of one had registry NCC-72452. Then in 2374, runabouts had two registries. A year later, the runabout had two registries with the last registry as NCC-73918.

I will leave you to figure this mess out.

U.S.S. Cochrane
In the first episode for this ship, as confirmed by the TNG Companion and StarTrek.com, the U.S.S. Cochrane is seen in "The Drumhead". Her registry is four digits long and could be NCC-8000 or NCC-9000, which could account for the ease that this ship is transformed into the U.S.S. Yosemite NCC-19002. Returning to the subject matter, this same ship is seen in "The Game" and "A Fistful of Datas", as the U.S.S. Biko. Then in "The Emissary", we see an Oberth Class starship docking with DS9. Her registry is NCC-19002, that of the U.S.S. Yosemite. (BTW, this could be argued as proof that the ship seen in "A Fistful of Datas" was stock footage. And the ship seen in "Realm of Fear" was a new reuse of the Oberth Class model.) According to the StarTrek.com site and the Encyclopedia, this is the U.S.S. Cochrane. Years later, we see this ship on a display in DS9.

The thing about the Defiant is that we see it multiple times, not just once, and clearly, so it doesn't really matter WHY it was onscreen. It was and so that's what we have to accept as the reg.

It's not 'S.S. K.E. Tsiolkovsky' it's U.S.S. Tsiolkovsky. Whatever the dedication plaque says, it's the name and prefix in the encyclopedia that are considered correct. The NCC-53911 is the correct reg.

The NX-59650 reg is correct for the Prommie because that's what was most visible (plastered all over the hull) in the ep. That's also what the Encyc says in the text of the entry. The other graphics are overruled by the text.

The latest theory is that there were two Oberth-class U.S.S. Cochranes. The NCC-8000 from "The Drumhead" and the NCC-59318 from "Emmisary" and "In the Pale Moonlight."

"I told you: It's not 1305-E it's 1305E."

Yes, but you're wrong. If, because Riker didn't say "hyphen", there isn't one, then that means the registry must have actually been "NCC1305E", not "NCC-1305(-)E".

"It's not 'S.S. K.E. Tsiolkovsky' it's U.S.S. Tsiolkovsky. Whatever the dedication plaque says, it's the name and prefix in the encyclopedia that are considered correct."