The new CVNX class which is still being planned is going to be structurally identical to the Nimitz-class, just with different electronics and a smaller crew complement. Some class of carriers are one-of-a-kinds, like the JFK class which is a modified Kitty Hawk. And there were only a handful of the Kitty Hawk-class, which is the Forrestal-class with different tower & elevator configurations, and missiles instead of guns. The Enterprise-class is a one-of a kind too.

By these standards of class differences, a Constitution built simply with a) a different bridge tower b) a different torpedo launcher c) a different type of computer core or d) a different cargo/shuttle arrangement would be of a different class. Certainly a ship with a completely different appearance nacelle configuration etc. would be . The Galaxies built with extra phaser banks might be a different class, or the Ambassadors with the saucer-jut and bussard-covers would be a different class, as would the roll-bar-less Mirandas and the E-B type Excelsiors, and the various Nebul� variants. One situation that would make extreme sense would be the Soyuz.

And while I guess a case could be made that on occasion USN ships change class (or, more accurately, are assigned their own sub-classes) I don't really see that fitting with what we've seen in Trek to date. That's just my personal inclination.

TPTB, and all canon sources, all agree that the refit-Constitution is just that---A refitted version of the Constitution-class. Not a new class, just an upgrade of the existing one. This is supported onscreen by dialog in TNG, by Chekov's screen in STIII, and by Scotty's blueprint in STVI. I think it's quite reasonable to say that this plaque was simply referring to one of two things:

1.) The simulator being used by the class of cadets in training for service aboard the Enterprise.
2.) The class of the simulator. (This could be likely because as we've seen, ships of the same class don't always have the same bridge modules. We've never seen the bridge of another refit-Connie, so this could be an unique bridge for the Enterprise. Thus, an Enterprise-class bridge simulator. I admit it's a bit of a stretch because the Grissom and Reliant both had the same bridge, but at least it's a fairly plausible explanation.)

1966 to 1969 STARSHIP CLASS
1982 ENTERPRISE CLASS
1984 CLASS 1 HEAVY CRUISER
1987 CONSTITUTION CLASS

A Class 1 heavy cruiser might encompass all heavy cruisers of a certain tonnage, energy output, mission profile, etc and encompass a few ship-named classes, in that they all differ from a Class 2 heavy cruiser.

[ November 17, 2001: Message edited by: The359 ]

Or, in simpler language,
1. After we connect these classes together, what can we learned about this second Enterprise?
2. Then, we could attempt to answer the question, why are there four classes for one ship in the Star Trek Universe?

[ November 17, 2001: Message edited by: targetemployee ]

Here goes (these are my own suppositions of definitions that would fit the facts available):

• Starship-class.
  Supposition: A starship is any high warp-capable vessel that can travel to another star system in a reasonable amount of time, without requiring the support of other vessels.
  This definition excludes: Embarked craft such as shuttles, impulse-ships, sleeper ships, low-warp vessels that would take months or years to reach another star.
  This definition would include every starship weve seen so far, including runabouts (thus justifying their status as USS & NCC ships rather than auxiliary vessels)
• Class I Heavy Cruiser.
  Supposition: A Class I Heavy Cruiser is any cruiser armed starship with a tonnage exceeding 150,000mt, with cargo capacity of 3,000mt or more that can support the mission profile of 3 or more years of extended patrols & exploration, response time of speeds higher than warp factor 6.5. (a class II could possibly slower, or have less cargo space, etc...) (or class II could even be used further down the line, where the usage of the word 'class' might be similar to 'mark' i.e. the next major heavy cruiser design would be class II, III after that, etc...)
• Constitution-class.
  Canon: The Constitution-class is a type of Federation starship designed as a heavy cruiser, length 289 meters. First built in 2245, this class features speeds above warp 6, up to warp 8.
  Supposition: The Constitution class has undergone several modifications represented by the sub-classes Bonhomme Richard (new bridge dome & bussard colelctors), Achernar (new deck 2 dome & deflector gridding), Endeavour (variant warp nacelles), Constitution(II)(evolved warp nacelles, sensory, docking ports), Tikopai (new bridge dome, nacelles, torpedo bay), Enterprise (new cargo docking configuration, nacelles, warp core, bridge & weapons and America (new computer core & torpedo bay). These vessels are all still Constitution-class in the Federation naval register, but when referring to design features the more descriptive sub-class name can be used for clarity
• Enterprise-class.
  Supposition: Dock nomenclature for a sub-class of the Constitution class, a variant which originated with the 2270-2271 refit of the USS Enterprise NCC-1701. While not official naval register terminology for the Constitution-variant vessel, this is used to refer to the refit vessels for clarity's sake in Fleet memos and signage.
  

"Class 1 heavy cruiser" would be in the same category. Just, sometime between 2245 and whenever this newer term appeared, the E's classifiaction was changed. Just different terminology.

"Enterprise class" is a the simulator, not the ship.

And "Constitution class" is the actual class name of the ship, as derived per tradition from the prototype ship's name.

quote:

---

Originally posted by The359:
Well, it's possible the Enterprise NX-01 is a modification of an existing class, ya know? It could just be special because of the warp drive and everything...

---

It's based on the wreckage of a starship which crashed on Mars hundreds of years ago. Some say that it came from the future...

[ November 18, 2001: Message edited by: David Templar ]

Besides, it might not be. Since we've already opened the gate of "Non-Federation Starfleet Enterprises", we could get more.

Was Franz Joseph the one who came up with "Constitution-class"? Or was that what Gene & Co (or possibly Jeffries) were calling it back in the 60s, but they used "Starship-class" onscreen because they were already trying to get the whole starship idea across to the viewers, and didn't want to confuse them.