posted
That's not an Enterprise display, since the Excelsior isn't the customized version.
Then again, it isn't a Phoenix display, either, since the Nebula class Phoenix is missing.
Since none of the starships on that display is uniquely identifiable (the Phoenix study model is unique, but it is not identifiable!), this ship lineage could be themed after just about any arbitrary name we choose. Perhaps all these ships were named Invincible?
Or then the ships exemplify Starfleet warp engine development, and it's just a coincidence that a Galaxy and not a Nebula is showcasing the latest model, and a Constitution and not a Miranda sports the LN-64.
quote:Originally posted by Timo: That's not an Enterprise display, since the Excelsior isn't the customized version.
This is a chart done by Keiko - perhaps she isn't as aware of different Excelsior Sub-Classes as we are. Perhaps she just asked the computer for a Connie, a Connie refit/Enterprise, Excelsior, Ambassador and Galaxy.
Although it could be the Challenger lineup - we have a Challenger NCC-2032 (which sounds Excelsior Class) and a Galaxy Class Challenger NCC-71099. It just seems more likely to show the lineage of the flagship.
(P.S. How can you tell? What are the differences?)
Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged
posted
What the heck is above the Galaxy and Ambassador on the wall chart?
As to the second Warp ship from the Chronolgy, That might be the production version Cochrane built ...the one with landing gear.
-------------------- Justice inclines her scales so that wisdom comes at the price of suffering. -Aeschylus, Agamemnon
Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
posted
The Enterprise-B variant is easy to identify from top view, since the additional boxes (engines/shuttlebays/whatever) on the saucer are so prominent.
The Challenger line-up sounds like a good idea - "Challenger" would be a fitting name indeed for mankind's second warp experiment, after the Phoenix! The only minus is that the chart in that case just yells for USS Challenger of Challenger class...
If we want to start from the list of known Constitution class ships, and then assume that they had successors in all the same classes as the Enterprise did, then the following options are available:
Constitution (a bit dubious, since the name was used as a class name once, and would confuse people if reused) Defiant (the Defiant class wouldn't yet be present on that chart) Essex Exeter (the ship mentioned in 2374 would then be a Galaxy and not the supposed alt-universe Ambassador) Excalibur Kongo Potemkin (again, the ship from 2374 would be the Galaxy, not the Excelsior) Republic (although if an "old" vessel still serves the Academy in 2375, then the existence of a Galaxy is dubious) Yorktown
The other Constitution names have been applied to ship classes not in that line-up. And the Enterprise herself has another strike going against her: she has a verified NX-class incarnation!
posted
So, where does the modelpic come from? Okuda�s or Sternbach�s desk? And from which Dvd?
Also, the saucer to the right of little Sisko, what is that?
-------------------- "The Starships of the Federation are the physical, tangible manifestations of Humanity´s stubborn insistence that life does indeed mean something." Spock to Leonard McCoy in "Final Frontier"
Registered: Jan 2000
| IP: Logged
posted
It's from Okuda's desk and comes from one of the hidden Season 2 features.
That's a Miranda-class model.
-------------------- "Never give up. And never, under any circumstances, no matter what - never face the facts." - Ruth Gordon
Registered: Mar 2000
| IP: Logged
posted
I think these 5 top views are meant to represent the different Enterprises. Even the display aboard the E-D is incorrect, so I don't have a problem with an incorrect depiction of the E-B.
-------------------- "Never give up. And never, under any circumstances, no matter what - never face the facts." - Ruth Gordon
Registered: Mar 2000
| IP: Logged
posted
If it is an Enterprise display, it is clearly an "all ships called Enterprise" chart, which would need to have NX-01 on it. Also, the Challenger Class is entirely conjectural, unless I'm very much mistaken, and can be ignored at will.
Perhaps Keiko once served on a Challenger?
Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged
quote:Originally posted by Phoenix: If it is an Enterprise display, it is clearly an "all ships called Enterprise" chart, which would need to have NX-01 on it.
Unless it's an "all Federation Starfleet ships called Enterprise" display.
-------------------- "Never give up. And never, under any circumstances, no matter what - never face the facts." - Ruth Gordon
Registered: Mar 2000
| IP: Logged
quote:Originally posted by Phoenix: If it is an Enterprise display, it is clearly an "all ships called Enterprise" chart, which would need to have NX-01 on it.
Unless it's an "all Federation Starfleet ships called Enterprise" display.
But it has the FHWS one...
Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged
posted
But that's not in a row with the other ships.
Besides, who says that all the things on the chart have to be connected? Maybe it covers 3 different topics: milky way early human warp vessel ships named Enterprise
-------------------- "Never give up. And never, under any circumstances, no matter what - never face the facts." - Ruth Gordon
Registered: Mar 2000
| IP: Logged
quote:Originally posted by Spike: But that's not in a row with the other ships.
Besides, who says that all the things on the chart have to be connected? Maybe it covers 3 different topics: milky way early human warp vessel ships named Enterprise
I'll be proven right when TPTB decide to throw continuity out the window and make NX-01 the first UFP Starfleet ship.
Just you wait and see.
Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic
