posted
I watched TVH the other day & caught the scene with the Saratoga. Although I don't have any screencaps, I watched the ship very closely when the Probe flew by it. I could clearly see that the ship's registry was NCC-1864, the same as the Reliant's. Probably still had the same name on it as well.
There are other scenes at the end of the movie with another Miranda and an Oberth docked in Spacedock. I have no doubt that they were labeled "Reliant" and "Grissom," respectively, with the same registry numbers.
[ June 30, 2002, 17:31: 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
Amasov Prime
lensfare-induced epileptic shock
Member # 742
posted
Sure it was 1864? Saratoga's is 1867, and I tried figuring out the registry some time ago, too. You can't see it that clear, at least not from the VHS-version. But I'm open for everything DVD-related.
-------------------- "This is great. Usually it's just cardboard walls in a garage."
Registered: Nov 2001
| IP: Logged
According to the Encyclopedia, the Saratoga's registry is 1937. Which is of course not what was printed on the model, as it was just a reuse of the Reliant. I'm guessing that there wasn't a hurrendous call for ship relabeling during the movie period.
-------------------- "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
The Encyclopedia actually says both NCC-1937 and NCC-1867. The later appears to be more likely, to me at least.
-------------------- "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
-------------------- "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
You guys, the number is NCC-1867. That is the number on the model. It's visible on the DVD, which I have seen, I just can't make screencaps. this was all settled LONG, long ago. (Do some old-thread digging.) The NCC-1937 from the Encyclopedia was a typo, (1994 edition gives right number in shiplist, wrong number in entry) and it got carried over into later editions. (Both shiplist and entry.)
Dukkie, you must have read wrong. I guess it could be mistaken for a 4...
posted
Boring Wussy Cunt, I knew you could not keep the same name for more than a month. First you changed it from BWC to something else, then back to BWC, now you need to add "Ed / " right before it.
[ June 30, 2002, 21:09: Message edited by: Dat ]
-------------------- Is it Friday yet?
Registered: Feb 2000
| IP: Logged
Ed / BWC
Ex-Member
posted
If you knew why I changed it you really wouldn't care.
IP: Logged
posted
It looked like 1864 to me. However, I'll take your word for it that it's really 1867. *(Goes & updates shiplist)*
-------------------- "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
It easily can be 1867 or 1937. All they had to do was switch the 4 into 7 or switch from 9 to 8 for Lantree. Though I really believe 1867 would have been easier. Perhaps the unnamed Miranda later in the movie was relabeled as 1937 so it was later easier to switch 9 to 8 for Lantree. (Though in all likelihood, the Saratoga was labeled 1867, the unnamed Miranda was not relabeled at all, and when it came time for Okuda to put the numbers in for the Encyclopedia, the Lantree's number stuck in his mind and he was going to put it down for the Saratoga, but even then when he was actually doing it, he made a typo and put a 9 down instead of 8.)
-------------------- Is it Friday yet?
Registered: Feb 2000
| IP: Logged
As to the Encyclopedia errors, most of them either happen because of a simple typo, or because the numbers actually were given in two different forms in various places. (ie, the Zhukov, etc.)
Who knows, maybe Okuda actually had a display with the Saratoga as NCC-1937 in TVH? That could be where the Copernicus NCC-623 comes from too...
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic
