posted
NCC-1710 was on the Ship Status Chart in "Court Martial" and the USS Kongo NCC-1710 was indeed somewhere in Star Trek VI.
Also, the Status Screen can be best seen over Uhura's shoulder. The best look at it I can remember is when Uhura announces that Kirk and McCoy have been arrested. The screen is upper right, right next to Scotty's face.
[ June 11, 2002, 13:21: Message edited by: The359 ]
-------------------- "Lotta people go through life doing things badly. Racing's important to men who do it well. When you're racing, it's life. Anything that happens before or after is just waiting."
-Steve McQueen as Michael Delaney, LeMans
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
It's possible you thought the "1718" might read 1710 because of the blocky numbering, but it is 1718.
quote:Since "Danube-class" was mentioned onscreen, would'nt it be logical to assume that a USS Danube exists?
If it was mentioned onscreen, then yes. But its registry number isn't canon.
-------------------- "A film made in 2008 isn't going to look like a TV series from 1966 if it wants to make any money. As long as the characters act the same way, and the spirit of the story remains the same then it's "real" Star Trek. Everything else is window dressing." -StCoop
Registered: Jun 2000
| IP: Logged
Amasov Prime
lensfare-induced epileptic shock
Member # 742
posted
quote:Originally posted by Dukhat: If it was mentioned onscreen, then yes. But its registry number isn't canon.
'Hippocratic Oath', fourth season. The Jem'Hadar identified the crashed Runabout as 'Danube-class'.
-------------------- "This is great. Usually it's just cardboard walls in a garage."
Registered: Nov 2001
| IP: Logged
quote:Originally posted by The359: Also, the Status Screen can be best seen over Uhura's shoulder. The best look at it I can remember is when Uhura announces that Kirk and McCoy have been arrested. The screen is upper right, right next to Scotty's face.
If you mean this, I'm afraid it's useless. It's the only thing vaguely near Scotty's face that looks like a ship list.
posted
Getting back to the Operation: Retrieve chart, the 3rd page shows a total of six ships, as Dat stated. Three are flying toward the symbol for Rura Penthe, and three are shown on the side of the chart (possibly to be used as replacements or reinforcements). Anyway, these six ships match the six known vessels used in OR, namely:
Looking at the chart, we have one Excelsior silhouette, two Constitution silhouettes, and three smaller vessel silhouettes of unknown type. If we are to believe that these six ships are an exact match for the names given, and that the silhouettes correspond to the class of ship used, then there's no way that the Eagle is a Constitution. Two of the three small vessels have the shortest names (Eagle & Scovil), and the top Constitution has the longest name (Springfield). The other Constitution looks like "Ahwahnee" to me, which leaves the Endeavour & the Challenger. Since the Endeavor's rego is 1895, while the Challenger's is 2032, then I would guess that the Excelsior silhouette is the Challenger, and the last small ship is the Endeavor.
All of this, of course, is just speculation on my part, based on the information presented.
-------------------- "A film made in 2008 isn't going to look like a TV series from 1966 if it wants to make any money. As long as the characters act the same way, and the spirit of the story remains the same then it's "real" Star Trek. Everything else is window dressing." -StCoop
Registered: Jun 2000
| IP: Logged
quote:Getting back to the Operation: Retrieve chart, the 3rd page shows a total of six ships, as Dat stated.
I said what? I don't remember making any statement concerning the Operation: Retrieve chart. The only thing I said in this thread was concerning the Whorfin class/USS Whorfin NCC-1024
-------------------- Is it Friday yet?
Registered: Feb 2000
| IP: Logged
posted
I was the one talking about Operation Retrieve.
And how do you know those 6 ships were the ones on the chart?
And yes, that is the ship status screen on the Enterprise, but maybe it's from later on in the movie that you can see it better. Check where they are translating Klingon.
-------------------- "Lotta people go through life doing things badly. Racing's important to men who do it well. When you're racing, it's life. Anything that happens before or after is just waiting."
-Steve McQueen as Michael Delaney, LeMans
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
posted
Dukhat's scheme has three shortcomings at the moment:
1) The connection between the six names and Operation Retrieve remains vague. Why couldn't one of those ships be, say, USS Oberth or USS John Muir? Which source connects just these six with OR? Trimble herself?
2) Six ships are not sufficient to account for three Constitution silhouettes, three small silhouettes and one Excelsior silhouette. (But is the Excelsior an Excelsior? It could be another Connie, at the resolution of those 'caps.)
3) The Endeavour is "generally considered" to be a Constitution, and this has a longer fan history than the idea that the Eagle is a Constitution. Okuda himself says the Endeavour is a Connie.
I would very much like the Eagle to be a non-Constitution. However, I fear that the connection does come from this very chart that shows a silhouette coupled with a registry and a name. I hope it's just a mistake by Okuda - Dukhat's arguments about name and registry length seem to prove that the Eagle=Connie thing isn't from the second page of the charts. But it could still be from the first page...
And no, I don't really believe in the placeholder idea here when it's clear that there are at least two and possibly three types of silhouettes in use on these charts. Sure, it's possible that a Constitution stands for all ships from Miranda to Constellation, an Oberth for all small ships, and an Excelsior for all vessels larger than the Constitutions. But it's also possible that the chart indeed shows the true classes in detail: it doesn't sound logical to have different symbols for the roughly similar Constitution-sized and Excelsior-sized ships, and then not differentiate more carefully between the small ship types.
posted
Trimble also lists the Potemkin, NCC-1657, as being on the OR chart. Thus giving seven ships in total.
Now the Potemkin was a Connie in TOS 'The Ultimate Computer'.
All seven ships also appear on the Status Chart where they're missions are given as follows:
Ahwahnee NCC-2048 (deep space exploration) Challenger NCC-2032 (deep space exploration) Eagle NCC-956 (colony resupply mission) Endeavor NCC-1895 (deep space exploration) Potemkin NCC-1657 (scientific survey) Scovil NCC-1598 (astronomical research) Springfield NCC-1963 (neutral zone patrol)
-------------------- "My theories appal you, my heresies outrage you, I never answer letters and you don't like my tie." - The Doctor
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
posted
Whee! Curious, that. If those "deep space exploration" missions are for real, and not just euphenisms for anti-Klingon saber-rattling at the borders, then how could those ships be available for OR? What sort of explorable deep space would there be at or near the Klingon border?
None of the missions seems to betray the class of the ship in question. Colony resupply isn't the monopoly of freighters only, nor is scientific survey (as opposed to commercial or military survey?) forbidden from big warships, as NCC-2000 proves in the very same movie.
I still very much doubt the Endeavour would be a non-Connie, given that Okuda probably controlled every aspect of the creation of that chart, and would have insisted on a Connie identity...
posted
I dunno if ppl have discussed this but, why is that OR plan/chart on printed paper....wouldnt they have computer screens or something??? ..i'm not saying its a bad move (i actually prefer that to a comp. display) just interesting to note. On a relevant point, i liked the use of a 'real' galley rather than food repicators (if they had food replicators in this era - i'm not too great on this tech stuff).
if it means anything, i have (from ages ago) a TOS type Constitution-class model [i dont remember which kit is was) but on the decal sheet one of the ship names was 'Kongo'.
..i am also interested to know if the word 'Kongo' means anything or refers to someone - if anyone knows please let me know.
Buzz
-------------------- "Tom is Canadian. He thereby uses advanced humour tecniques, such as 'irony', 'sarcasm', and werid shit'. If you are not qualified in any of these, it will be risky for you to attempt to decipher what he means. Just smile and carry on." - PsyLiam; 16th June
Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged
quote: I said what? I don't remember making any statement concerning the Operation: Retrieve chart.
Oops. My bad.
quote: And how do you know those 6 ships were the ones on the chart?
I don�t know that for a fact. Perhaps you guys missed it when I said �All of this, of course, is just speculation on my part, based on the information presented.�
quote: The connection between the six names and Operation Retrieve remains vague. Why couldn't one of those ships be, say, USS Oberth or USS John Muir? Which source connects just these six with OR? Trimble herself?
As stated above, I was going by the information so far presented to me. And as far as I know, all of it might be wrong. My information stated that the six ships used in Operation Retrieve were the Scovil, the Endeavor, the Springfield, the Challenger, the Ahwahnee, and the Eagle. I got that information from Reverend�s original shiplist, which I�ve heretofore modified. I don�t know where he got his information from. And I didn�t know about the Potemkin.
quote: Six ships are not sufficient to account for three Constitution silhouettes, three small silhouettes and one Excelsior silhouette. (But is the Excelsior an Excelsior? It could be another Connie, at the resolution of those 'caps.)
Whoa, hold on. Let�s get the numbers right. On page two of the chart, three Constitution silhouettes are shown. However, as far as I can see, no names or registry numbers appear next to them, so these probably don�t represent any specific ships. It�s the third page that�s interesting, because at least three distinctly different silhouettes are shown. We have two Connies, an Excelsior (or at least that�s what it looks like to me), and three smaller silhouettes whose saucer circles are much smaller than the others. SIX ships total, with six names & registry numbers to match.
quote: The Endeavour is "generally considered" to be a Constitution, and this has a longer fan history than the idea that the Eagle is a Constitution. Okuda himself says the Endeavour is a Connie.
Well, Okuda also says that the Biko is an Olympic when it's very clearly an Oberth. But you�re probably right about this.
quote: I would very much like the Eagle to be a non-Constitution. However, I fear that the connection does come from this very chart that shows a silhouette coupled with a registry and a name.
But that�s what I�ve been saying. IF the Eagle is one of the ships involved in OR, and IF it is represented on this chart, then my argument was that it COULDN�T be a Connie, because its short name doesn�t jibe with the names of the larger ships on the chart.
Keep in mind that all I�m doing is speculating. Until we see the actual chart up close, no one will have a definitive answer. The only thing I�m reasonably sure of is that �John Muir� probably wasn�t one of the ships, if only because I don�t see any break in any of the ship names.
[ June 13, 2002, 11:21: Message edited by: Dukhat ]
-------------------- "A film made in 2008 isn't going to look like a TV series from 1966 if it wants to make any money. As long as the characters act the same way, and the spirit of the story remains the same then it's "real" Star Trek. Everything else is window dressing." -StCoop
Registered: Jun 2000
| IP: Logged
posted
How about blackmailing Okuda to give us better pictures of this chart?
[ June 13, 2002, 11:22: Message edited by: Spike ]
-------------------- "Never give up. And never, under any circumstances, no matter what - never face the facts." - Ruth Gordon
Registered: Mar 2000
| IP: Logged
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic
