posted
What was the line in "Explorers" that caused the problem with the dates for the two Lexingtons? What had the ship been doing, and what was the timeframe quoted?
posted
The idea was that Drs. Lense and Bashir both graduated at the same time, but while Lense got the Lexington, Bashir got DS9. Meaning that they both got their assignments in 2369, before the other Lexington was mentioned on TNG the following year.
posted
Yes, the Lexington was mentioned in "Thine Own Self" as being on a mapping mission or maybe some transport mission.
The problem is that the Encyclopedia insists that there was an Excelsior-class Lexington which was in service for "Thine Own Self" -- but the dialogue in "Explorers" dictates that it must be the Nebula-class... unless Dr. Lense switched ships and forgot to mention that as an aside.
Not that it's definitive proof, but IIRC the Nebula-class Lexington's registry was in the NCC-61xxx range... which would probably mean that the ship was at least five or ten years old. Maybe more.
-------------------- “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
Amasov Prime
lensfare-induced epileptic shock
Member # 742
posted
I think the Nebula was supposed to be on a deep-space mission for the last three years, something like that. But you can say the ship docked at DS9 was not the Lexington but some other Nebula. We were never able to read the name/registry.
-------------------- "This is great. Usually it's just cardboard walls in a garage."
Registered: Nov 2001
| IP: Logged
posted
No, they specifically said that the Lexington was docking at DS9 for crew's shore leave, or whatever. And yes, they were in the middle of a long-duration mission.
-------------------- “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
The way I see it, the TNG Lexington was only referred to by name. It was never stated that it was an Excelsior class vessel, or what registry number it had. Therefore, since the DS9 Lexington was clearly seen to be a Nebula, & that it was in operation even before the TNG reference to it, then I conclude that there never was an Excelsior Lexington (according to my canon list; I still have the Excelsior Lex in my official list).
-------------------- "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
Exactly! The Melbourne conundrum exists because both of the identically-numbered models were seen on screen. But the TNG-Lexington was only mentioned. Therefore, the Excelsior-Lexington is nothing more than an error in the Encyclopedia.
Although I've had a somewhat looser interpretation -- that the Excelsior-Lexington did indeed exist, but it was already decommissioned/destroyed some years before the Nebula-Lexington was launched. It just wasn't seen in an episode is all.
-------------------- “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
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic
