quote:Originally posted by Masao: GREAT STUFF!!! Greg Tyler of www.trekplace.com also has a copy of #27 but refused to post it until he got the ok from Greg Jein.
Yes. His reluctance motivated me to do some more searching online for myself. (It turned out to ba really great deal---I paid a mere $1.00 for this thing!) I'm afraid he's in for a hard time in trying to get into contact with Jein. He seems to be something of a recluse. Neither Okuda nor Sternbach have a contact address (e-mail or otherwise) for him (or at least one they're willing to divulge) and online searches turn up nothing helpful.
quote:Originally posted by MinutiaeMan: (I hope this isn't considered problematic because of copyright; after all, it's been posted online already, and I'm just saving people transcribing work. )
I strongly doubt that Jein would have any objection to the distribution of this article, since it was written nearly 30 years ago and furthermore was intended for the very purpose of dissemination among Star Trek fandom. (That's what the whole fanzine system was about.)
quote:This just occurred to me, but we finally have explanations for the Franz Joseph names of the starships for registries -1712 through -1727. (Or at least, I'd never known where they came from before.)
Yes, FJ's number one source when writing the Tech Manual was Stephen Whitfield and Gene Roddenberry's The Making of Star Trek. That book reproduces several internal memos regarding potential starship names ciculated between Dorothy Fontana, Bob Justman, and Gene Roddenberry during the production of TOS, which contains those names.
quote:USS Constitution NCC-1700 Constitution USS Constellation NCC-1017 Constitution USS Defiant NCC-1764 Constitution USS Eagle NCC-1685 Constitution USS Endeavour NCC-1718 Constitution USS Enterprise NCC-1701 Constitution USS Essex NCC-1697 Constitution USS Excalibur NCC-1664 Constitution USS Exeter NCC-1672 Constitution USS Farragut NCC-1647 Constitution USS Hood NCC-1703 Constitution USS Hornet NCC-1868 Constitution USS Intrepid NCC-1631 Constitution USS Kongo NCC-1732 Constitution USS LaFayette NCC-1866 Constitution USS Lexington NCC-1709 Constitution USS Potemkin NCC-1702 Constitution USS Republic NCC-1371 Constitution USS Tashik-Sotra NCC-1865 Constitution USS Valiant NCC-1623 Constitution USS Yorktown NCC-1717 Constitution
Remember now, this is not Jein's list but rather Ruth Berman's modified one, and includes at least one fandom addition (the Tashik-Sotra) and a lot of seemingly arbitrary numbers. (Although Bjo Trimble later used those of the Yorktown[i], [i]Potemkin, and Farragut in her officially-licensed 1976 Star Trek Concordance and they were later passed on from there to FASA. The Valiant number was used by Maynard and Mandel in Star Trek Maps [1980] and was apparently modified into NCC-1223 by Okuda in the Encyclopedia. Also, the Defiant's registry is from D.C. Fontana, and came out of a third season memo, IIRC.)
quote:STARBASE 10 LIST:
Starbase 11, actually.
quote:Originally posted by The359: if the Intrepid is 1831, then why aren't the others 1894, 1897, and 1885? They certainly look like the same digit as the Intrepid.
No, the others at least do in fact look to be 6s.
quote:I still also do not include the Valiant as a Constitution class, since it doesn't fit the timeline or anything.
Yes, even Jein recognizes this in the article. It's outside of the Connie's timeframe by a decade.
-MMoM
-------------------- The flaws we find most objectionable in others are often those we recognize in ourselves.
Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
quote:Remember now, this is not Jein's list but rather Ruth Berman's modified one
Yeah, I realized that after I posted. I'd been wondering where that unusual Vulcan-sounding name came from...
At any rate, I think that rather than incorporating this info into canon, it should be used to debunk the Encyclopedia's lists of most of the Connies. After all, this article shows all the convoluted (although still quite inspired) logic that would make poor Spock weep. For its time, though, the registry numbers would make pretty good sense -- they just don't fit into the Okudaic system that's taken over since then.
There's not many times I would choose the FJ system over the Encyclopedia, but I think that FJ's list of Constitution-class ships (the first batches, anyway, before he goes off the deep end from NCC-1732 and onwards) makes a better choice as far as ships and registry numbers go. With a couple of exceptions:
1) We never, ever SAW the USS Republic, so it doesn't HAVE to be a Constitution unless that specific designation was placed next to it in some ST:6 display. And even then, I'd be inclined to toss that out to explain the registry number.
(Aside: I'm wondering if the ship's number from "Court Martial" -- NCC-1371 -- was actually a typo during the writing of the script, and was supposed to be NCC-1731 instead. After all, no one would've guessed back then that a bunch of fanboys who had never been born would be conversing over a computer-powered information network with people on the other side of the world about the design and origins of starships that were never even seen on the show, and so they never cared about getting a "correct" number. However, since that number was actually SPOKEN on screen and not just seen, I wouldn't propose decanonizing that.)
2) As I indicated in another thread, my personal belief is that some strange gravitational distortions caused by the Doomsday Machine distorted light waves in a peculiar way, and the Constellation's true registry number is actually NCC-1710.
-------------------- “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
I think it just fits nicely that the Court Martial chart is just Reverse-alphabetical.
What's wrong with that?
Oh and reguards the front cover picture - I thought it was a watermark too! I thought the person coming through the door was Kirk - which would have made sense in-light of fan slash-fic! LOL!
McCoy has dropped his PADD in that picture!
-------------------- "Bears. Beets. Battlestar Galactica." - Jim Halpert. (The Office)
quote:Originally posted by MinutiaeMan: At any rate, I think that rather than incorporating this info into canon, it should be used to debunk the Encyclopedia's lists of most of the Connies. After all, this article shows all the convoluted (although still quite inspired) logic that would make poor Spock weep. For its time, though, the registry numbers would make pretty good sense -- they just don't fit into the Okudaic system that's taken over since then.
I could *almost* be in favor of this, but the fact remains that if there's ever anything more about the Connies established, Paramount is likely to use these numbers rather than any other set.
quote:1) We never, ever SAW the USS Republic, so it doesn't HAVE to be a Constitution unless that specific designation was placed next to it in some ST:6 display. And even then, I'd be inclined to toss that out to explain the registry number.
Well, the ship was called a "Starship" in "Court Martial," which in TOS terms is a strong indicator that it was a Connie.
quote:2) As I indicated in another thread, my personal belief is that some strange gravitational distortions caused by the Doomsday Machine distorted light waves in a peculiar way, and the Constellation's true registry number is actually NCC-1710.
Of course that rather messes with the NCC-1710 Kongo, which appeared on the TUC Operation Retrieve chart.
-MMoM
-------------------- The flaws we find most objectionable in others are often those we recognize in ourselves.
Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
posted
The useage of "Mk" indicates the existence of a wide variety of starship classes with the Constitution Class (aka Enterprise Class) being the best known example from the 2260's.
Classification system, based on latest information c. 2266:
MK IX Starship --->MX I Heavy Cruiser ------>Constitution Class --------->Enterprise Class ------------>U.S.S. Enterprise NCC-1701
Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged
posted
I've always believed in the use of sub-classes within a class, however I would prefer to keep Constitution as the basic general class name, not Starship.
And apparently a lot of Constitutions were listed in Star Trek VI (either Operation Retrieve or the Ship Status Chart). If I remember correctly, some of them were the ones with 16xx registries, so it'd be hard to adapt the FJ registries.
Really, I have no problem with the way the registries are now. If we move Eagle and Endeavour to their new numbers, then the registries are more closely grouped together, except Constellation and Republic, and we can explain those two off.
-------------------- "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
quote:Originally posted by Futurama Guy: I still think it is quite odd that such a large percentage of Star Fleets' core are all under repair at the same time at the same place....
...one fast and furious attack from a hostile force and there goes the meat and potatoes of the Federation....
Maybe it's the control point for several repair depots? Like a central control - maybe a few are at UP, San Fran, Luna, Vulcan, Rigel etc.
Also, I don't get what the problem is with the Connies - like what's the issue? Are people trying to rationalise 16xx's as Connies? or even the Constellation?
Maybe the basic space-frame design is quite old - but it's the guts of the ship that is quite different. Maybe the shillouttes from Op: Retrieve are not all CONNIES - but of that shape?
-------------------- "Bears. Beets. Battlestar Galactica." - Jim Halpert. (The Office)
posted
Canon says in the era of Captain Kirk that Starship Class was the general classifier for ships bearing a starship configuration. This is supported by the dedication plaque and the illustration.
From the illustration, are we able to draw any conclusions on how phasers of this era worked and what comparisons can be created between these phasers and phasers of a hundred years later?
Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged
posted
Wasn't it considered unprecedented -- or at least very unusual -- to have so many starships (or Starships ) at the same place and time?
-------------------- “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 Futurama Guy: I still think it is quite odd that such a large percentage of Star Fleets' core are all under repair at the same time at the same place....
I thought we decided that it wasn't necessarily a repair schedule but could be something else, like a mission readout or fleet operations overview.
quote:Originally posted by The359: ...If we move Eagle and Endeavour to their new numbers, then the registries are more closely grouped together...
But I don't think this is warranted. What would it be based on, besides Jein's conjecture? It would be fine if there weren't the Operation Retrieve chart to contradict it. But that's just the issue.
Besides, the Eagle's NCC-956 is the only one of those two that's a problem. The Endeavour is NCC-1895, which just means it's a later build.
NCC-1685 and NCC-1718 are just two additional unknown ships.
quote:Originally posted by AndrewR: Also, I don't get what the problem is with the Connies - like what's the issue? Are people trying to rationalise 16xx's as Connies? or even the Constellation?
The problem is that it doesn't really make sense that nearly ALL of them should have registries lower than the class prototype, NCC-1700.
-MMoM
-------------------- The flaws we find most objectionable in others are often those we recognize in ourselves.
Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
quote:Originally posted by newark: From the illustration, are we able to draw any conclusions on how phasers of this era worked and what comparisons can be created between these phasers and phasers of a hundred years later?
Our understanding of the modern internals of a phaser emitter came exclusively from Sternbach's TNGTM... And the DS9TM, to a lesser extent. So that's my only point of reference.
So, from what I know of phasers, I'm looking at a prefire chamber, with the power feed from the bottom, and the emitter assembly that clutter on the top and to the right of the blob.
If we could actually read what the labels say (the texts are too faded in the box!), we wouldn't need to guess!
-------------------- "God's in his heaven. All's right with the world."
Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged
posted
Well, there's always been the alternate theories of two Constitutions. 1700 being the newer one replacing the older, destroyed one.
-------------------- "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
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
)![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
I thought the person coming through the door was Kirk - which would have made sense in-light of fan slash-fic! LOL!![[Frown]](frown.gif)
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
) at the same place and time?
Printer-friendly view of this topic
