The First One
A lovely little thinker, but a bugger when he's pissed
Member # 35
posted
Nowhere does he mention 12 wings all headed by Galaxies. And the evidence for the twelve hulls is pretty damn near 'canonical' until proven otherwise - Roddenbery's assertion there were only 6, later qualified in the Tech Manual that there were 6 with a second batch of 6 hulls mothballed.
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
posted
But that is only true at the time of the TNG TM's publication. 1991 = 2368 doesn't it? Since then the six spares have almost certainly been brought into service (possibly not entirely outfitted on the inside as per Sternbach's suggestion), but there might have been more built in addition to that.
We think that we can account for five of the six in service at the time of Wolf 359, or all six if you belive that the Trinculo or the Challenger was in service back then. (The Challenger's dodgy registry number suggests that it was laid down before the Yamato, but possibly it was never finished at that time and became the first of the 'spares'. In which case it was either brought fully into service prior to the Dominion war or survived the war in an semi-finished form and was then fully fitted out.)
posted
First One-If you are going to criticize, then present a solution. Capt Sisko spoke of Galaxy Wings (I believe this is the correct term). How do you explain this reference? Further, you need to read my messages more slowly. I present evidence, then reasoning or inference. This is different than saying I know definitively what the evidence is saying. I don't. I am doing this way since so many people have a difficulty in understanding my thoughts and come to the conclusion I am speaking in a definitive way. For me, canonical is what is available to everyone who doesn't have the money or resources to buy all the publications from Paramount. (If you are poor, twenty-five bucks is a tremendous amount of money to be spent. Unless you have no common sense, you will spend the money on food or housing.) Ergo, canonical is the films or episodes. Do you understand?
IP: Logged
The First One
A lovely little thinker, but a bugger when he's pissed
Member # 35
posted
How do we explain it? We don't. But to just say arbitrarily what you say it means, that's wrong. My suggestion to you is to maybe sound a LOT less definite when you make your pronouncements.
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
posted
Well, I don't know if this is really in dispute but there are also the five ships from TNG "Eye of the Beholder" O-grams. USS Philadelphia, Syracuse, Silversides, Pueblo, and Beaver.
USS Vanguard(formerly USS Hastings, and a newbie for the fourth time)
posted
Before I forget, there's two other things...another phantom Grissom in the original encyclopedia (an Oberth with a 59xxx registry) and the registry of the Fearless (which was supposed to be 14598, but showed up as 4598 in parts of the first encyclopedia, an error which ended up in the second edition).
------------------ http://frankg.dgne.com/ Walter Barnett: "D-Did that thing just shatter an overpass into dust?" Donny Finkleberg: "No, I...I think it was an entrance ramp."
Printer-friendly view of this topic
