posted
As everyone who has seen ST:X or read spoilers know by now there's a listing of ship names and registeries. People here have posted the names, but to my knowledge no one managed to get the registeries.
So in order to get that information I went ahead and emailed Mike Okuda and Doug Drexler. Thankfully Doug replied and I can supply the list he gave me.
Hope that sheds some light on the subject. I know I'll add it to my ship list asap... which is back up I'm glad to say at www.StarshipDatalink.net the .com no longer works.
In my attempt to break it down...
USS Intrepid NCC-74600: Clearly the Intrepid-class prototype vessel. USS Valiant NCC-75418: Well at least it wasn't NCC-74210. No telling if this is also a Defiant-class vessel either. USS Galaxy NCC-70637: Still the same ship from "Tears of the Prophets" - DS9 that fought in the Dominion War. USS Aries NCC-45167: The same Renaissance-class starship 'Captain' Riker was offered command of in 2365. USS Nova NCC-73515: This creates a problem because the USS Equinox was NCC-72381 and the USS Rhode Island was NCC-72701. USS Hood NCC-42296: Still Riker's old Excelisor-class ship. USS Archer NCC-44278: It's registry suggests it could be an Excelsior-class ship.
[ January 08, 2003, 23:00: Message edited by: Hobbes ]
-------------------- I'm slightly annoyed at Hobbes' rather rude decision to be much more attractive than me though. That's just rude. - PsyLiam, Oct 27, 2005.
Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged
posted
Let's see, we finally have 74600 for Intrepid which had been floating around for quite some time as conjecture. Valiant 74210 was destroyed DS9's 6th season and the new one looks to have been commissioned a year later, so I'm guessing it was either a ship already under construction without a name, or was ordered and built within a year. Maybe another Defiant class Valiant? Nova's number is a little high if it's supposed to be the prototype, but it could be the prototype's replacement (which would be in the new Valiant's situation). A new Nova class Nova replacing the prototype? And for some reason I keep on picturing the Archer as belonging to the same class as the Centaur.
-------------------- Is it Friday yet?
Registered: Feb 2000
| IP: Logged
posted
Of course, there's no possible way the Nova could be something other than Nova-class, eh?
Also, I'm curious in what way this thread is deemed to be inappropriate for the "Starships" Forum, given that its sole subject is, in fact, starships. I'm thinking relocation might be a good idea...
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
posted
Looks like I was wrong about the Valiant and Archer's regs ending in 6s...
I don't know why so many people are striving to come up with some "explanation" for the Nova's registry. It's just the successor to the Nova-class prototype it was NEVER stated or implied in even the smallest way that it was supposed to be the class ship. In case you didn't notice, there were NO class names on that list. Get a clue, folks.
It should be noted that the Aries was misnamed as Aires on the actual display. You'd think they could have proof-read the thing...
Anyhoo, good work Hobbes! It's good to know the true numbers on the list.
-MMoM
-------------------- The flaws we find most objectionable in others are often those we recognize in ourselves.
Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
quote:I don't know why so many people are striving to come up with some "explanation" for the Nova's registry. It's just the successor to the Nova-class prototype it was NEVER stated or implied in even the smallest way that it was supposed to be the class ship. In case you didn't notice, there were NO class names on that list. Get a clue, folks.
Beilieve it or not, Mim, but I'm actually in agreement with you for once. AFAIAC, if Starfleet can lose a new ship like the Defiant-class Valiant, and have another, even newer Valiant as a replacement within a year, then it's not much of a stretch to think that this U.S.S. Nova is a newer ship than the Nova "class" ship. I mean, there was a war going on not too long ago, with Starfleet losing more ships than in any other war to date. Hell, even Sisko got a new Defiant literally weeks after his old one was destroyed.
Of course, what would have been way cool is if we actually saw these ships in the movie. But alas, that was not to be.
-------------------- "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:Originally posted by Dat: And for some reason I keep on picturing the Archer as belonging to the same class as the Centaur.
Too bad the registry is too low for it to be an Akira-class ship!
-------------------- “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
quote:Originally posted by The Mighty Monkey of Mim: Looks like I was wrong about the Valiant and Archer's regs ending in 6s...
I don't know why so many people are striving to come up with some "explanation" for the Nova's registry. It's just the successor to the Nova-class prototype it was NEVER stated or implied in even the smallest way that it was supposed to be the class ship. In case you didn't notice, there were NO class names on that list. Get a clue, folks.
-MMoM
I beg to differ. I think the Intrepid is most certainly the Intrepid class ship.
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
quote:Originally posted by Dat: And for some reason I keep on picturing the Archer as belonging to the same class as the Centaur.
Too bad the registry is too low for it to be an Akira-class ship!
Except that the Centaur wasn't an Akira class vessel. She was some kind of Excelsior variant, with a couple of Miranda-like bits tacked on for good measure.
Registered: Dec 2000
| IP: Logged
posted
Thank you for the list of ships. I wish there were actual ships shown in the movie too. Paramount should have done that to make the movie more interesting. May be the Archer is a Centaur Class ship?
Registered: Oct 2002
| IP: Logged
quote:Originally posted by The Mighty Monkey of Mim: Looks like I was wrong about the Valiant and Archer's regs ending in 6s...
I don't know why so many people are striving to come up with some "explanation" for the Nova's registry. It's just the successor to the Nova-class prototype it was NEVER stated or implied in even the smallest way that it was supposed to be the class ship. In case you didn't notice, there were NO class names on that list. Get a clue, folks.
-MMoM
I beg to differ. I think the Intrepid is most certainly the Intrepid class ship.
How is that in contradiction to what I said? No one is disputing that the Intrepid is a class ship. I was talking about the Nova, not the Intrepid.
-------------------- The flaws we find most objectionable in others are often those we recognize in ourselves.
Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
posted
MMOM because you said "there were NO class names on that list." I thought you were saying there were no ships which were the 1st of there class on the list. I see now you meant there were no class names to go along with the ship names...my mistake.
Back to the topic:
If folks have a signifcant beef with the Nova having a higher number than other ships of the class, then what do they consider the Galaxy Class Challenger's situation to be? I still think the registry numbers are for the most part chronological, we just have to accept a few things that don't match up.
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
posted
Had to go back and look at that..I was thinking the Challenger was 70199..but its 71099. That does bring up a good point though, something must've happened during the initial build that slipped the schedule to where she was relegated to be one of the six spares.
If the registries are roughly chronological, I wouldn't think you would start a ship and then decide to use it as a spare. Maybe it was more a homage to the real Shuttle Challenger than we think. OV-99 was initially built as a structural test article and was never intended to be a space-capable orbiter. When funds got tight, NASA decided to rework the structural frame into a usuable vehicle, since the loads applied didn't come close to exceeding any of the designed limits. Could be what happened here. Maybe it was a test article....wouldn't have to be an entire ship either...could be just framework sections that were later used as a final Galaxy Class ship.
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
quote:Originally posted by Dat: Let's see, we finally have 74600 for Intrepid which had been floating around for quite some time as conjecture. Valiant 74210 was destroyed DS9's 6th season and the new one looks to have been commissioned a year later, so I'm guessing it was either a ship already under construction without a name, or was ordered and built within a year.
Ships aren't officially given names until they are commissioned. Therefore, while under construction, that ship would most likely just be known as "NCC-75418". After the destruction of the previous Valiant, they probably just decided to stick the name on another ship that would be completed soon. Therefore, this means it could be literally any class.
Same would apply if the Nova was a replacement for the previous Nova.
-------------------- "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
![[Embarrassed]](redface.gif)
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Confused]](confused.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic
