posted                      

quote:

---

Originally posted by SoundEffect:
Partially because of this thread, I recreated the graphic in Illustrator. Anyone want to see it?

---

I'd like to see it. Could you also make one with the proper class designation for the Trieste?

-MMoM

--------------------
The flaws we find most objectionable in others are often those we recognize in ourselves.

posted                      

quote:

---

Originally posted by SoundEffect:
Spike, the cap you have there may in fact be the same list of ships, but from the trading card pic it's a physically different PADD (details) and the colors on the LCARS screen are vastly different than on the card. I wonder where specifically the trading card PADD made it into the show?

---

No, it looks the same to me. It's just that Picard is holding it upside-down.

--------------------
The flaws we find most objectionable in others are often those we recognize in ourselves.

posted                      

quote:

---

Dear Kristofer:

Thanks for the note and for your thoughtful questions. I'll try to address
some of your points:

Regarding differences in ship assignments, I'd simply assume that these were
due to the fact that each chart was prepared at different times.

Regarding spelling of "Merrimack," it was originally spelled incorrectly in
scripts and on my screens. Someone pointed out the error, and we fixed it in
later versions. In general, I prefer to regard material on screen as
"authoritative," but in this case, since the writer of the episode clearly
intended to honor a real ship and its crew, it seemed appropriate to make it
historically accurate, even if it meant changing something that was
established on screen.

I seem to recall that I changed the class listing of the Trieste because we
did indeed see a U.S.S. yosemite in a TNG episode, and it was clearly a
re-use of the Grissom model. I think you're the first person to catch this
particular change. (Or at least, you're the first to point it out to me!)

Some of the links you mentioned in your msg appear to be broken, but the
images from the Captain's Chair and Interactive Tech Manual CDs were indeed
photographed on the actual set. I'm pretty sure the Starlog stuff was also
provided by the art department, too. Most of the Interactive Tech Manual
images were, if I recall, photographed just a few weeks before the TNG sets
were demolished to make room for Voyager. I believe that the Captain's Chair
images of the Enterprise-D were mostly re-uses of material originally shot
for the Interactive Tech Manual, since the Captain's Chair was made after the
sets were gone.

Regarding the ship chart in the 1997/1999 Encyclopedia: Yes, there are typos
in that chart. I did supervise the person who compiled the chart, but I did
not rigorously check the data, so I allowed an unfortunate number of typos to
slip through. In general, I'd tend to suggest that the data in the
individual encyclopedia entries are more likely to be accurate. On the other
hand, Margaret Clark, our editor at Pocket Books, caught and fixed a fair
number of goofs on her own, so it's entirely possible that there are things
in the chart that are more accurate than some of the individual encyclopedia
entries. (I personally typed the chart in the first edition of the
Encyclopedia, so any typos there are entirely my own.)

The change in the Ahwahnee's registry was my mistake. I was probably working
from handwritten notes and couldn't read my writing. I don't recall the
specific reason that I conjectured that the Endeavour was at Wolf 359. I did
have reasons, however tenuous, for each ship listed to have been in that
battle, but in some cases these reasons were tenuous, indeed.

In some cases, they were listings in scripts that were changed before the
episodes were aired. (I believe the U.S.S. Chekov falls into that category.
It was mentioned in the script, and the line was filmed, but was edited out
of the final episode.) In others, I listed names that were on models that
were filmed in the graveyard scene, but were never legible on screen. This
last was fairly complicated because the graveyard scene was filmed at least
twice (three times, if you count some visual effects re-dos) .

You may recall that "The Best of Both Worlds, Part II" was somewhat ambiguous
as to the exact number and names of ships that survived. Later episodes of
TNG, DS9, and VGR all gave additional clues that may have contradicted
assumptions that I made when I did art for earlier episodes. This sort of
change was fairly common, but was, I hope, seldom noticed, except by
detail-oriented fans like yourself. Still, I did a reasonable amount of
attention to getting these details as consistent as possible, specifically
because I thought fans would enjoy it. Nevertheless, given the perpetual
crunch of TV production, I never really had time to figure things out in
rigrous detail, so these things are inevitable.

Anyway, thanks again for your note, and I hope that this gives some insight
into the nature of the process.

Take care and hope your holidays are happy.

-Mike Okuda

---

So, according to this, the changing of the Ahwahnee's registry was simply a mistake and really had nothing to do with adjusting the registry range to fit the timeframe. For now at least, I'm going back to listing the ship as NCC-73620. (It just happens to be my personal preference that when a studio model and computer display or other graphic are in conflict, the model should take precedence unless it is a case of clear-cut mislabeling like the Brattain.)

I'm not sure whether he's aware that Starfleet would appear to be just continuing an historical trend by calling the ship Merrimac.

Was TNG really "ambiguous" about how many ships survived Wolf 359? I thought it was pretty cut & dried. (BoBW said 40 ships were rallied for the battle, and "The Drumhead" said that 39 of those ships were destroyed, correct?) Did we just mis-interpret a line or something?

Unfortunately, he wasn't able to give me any specifics for when the assignment list display first started being used. (Spike, et al: Any luck examining the DVDs for evidence?)

-MMoM

--------------------
The flaws we find most objectionable in others are often those we recognize in ourselves.