posted
As some of you may have noticed, I have neglected my expanded shiplist for an inordinately long period of time. I haven't fully updated the Starfleet database and I never did get around to completing the Federation and Pre-Federation sections. I am going to try to revamp it a bit this summer, now that I've got a little time on my hands. ("Riiiight. Here he goes with the PROMISES again..." )
I am revising the format of the list a bit. I am finally giving up my unweildly position on the canonicity of the Encyclopedia, Tech Manuals, Magazine, etc, (Spikey and Dukkie will be immeasurably pleased, I'm sure ) and adopting the McReynolds system---that is to say, reclassifying these materials as "apocryphal" in the ecclesiastical sense of being documents that lie just outside the actual Canon, being of debated or uncertain authorship/authenticity/integrity. (Actually, I think I personally prefer "deuterocanonical," which has a bit of a more sympathetic cannotation to it, so that may end up being a further change at some point, so for now I'll use "apocryphal.")
Anyway, I've begun by sprucing up the Condensed shiplist and I've gotten through the updating of the Starfleet A page, so you can all get a gander at what I'm talking about.
Oh BTW, Creeping Death is in the process of switching servers, so that's why many of my links are down. All will be well again in the none-too-distant future, though, so fear not...
-MMoM
-------------------- The flaws we find most objectionable in others are often those we recognize in ourselves.
Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
I have this ship listed as Excelsior. This is based on the map shown in TUC.
USS ATLANTI(S) NCC-40657
This ship is mentioned on a computer screen seen in "Conspiracy". Even if the name is not 100% certain, the registry is.
USS CHALLENGER NCC-2032
I have this ship listed as Excelsior. This is based on the map shown in TUC.
USS CONCORD (E) NCC-68711
According to StarTrek.Com, Concorde is the correct spelling for this ship.
USS CONSTITUTION NCC-1700
On my ship list, I don't list the registry. My reason is this-the only known and recorded source for the connection between the name 'Constitution' and 'NCC-1700' are works authored by Franz Joseph and later discredited by Gene Roddenberry. There is no recorded connection between the name and registry in the first series. In the post-discredition process, a starship bearing the registry 'NCC-1700' is seen in "Datalore". She bears no name. So, for my records, there are two ships: the USS Constitution with a registry preceding NCC-956 and an unnamed Connie with the registry NCC-1700.
USS COURAGEOUS NCC-1861
I see you are adding information from sketches and scripts. This ship is a sketch of a Soyuz Class starship located either in the Art of Star Trek or TNG: Continuing Missions. I don't see an issue in including her in a ship list and it's nice, I think, to have an additional name to the Soyuz Class.
USS DEFIANT NCC-75633
My opinion is stated on this ship.
USS EAGLE NCC-956
This is the second ship mentioned in the episode "Amok Time", not the 'Excalibur'.
USS ENDEAVOUR NCC-1718
How did you create this connection between name and registry?
USS ESSEX NCC-1697
Is the name supposed to be green? Is the registry supposed to be yellow? Is the class supposed to be gray?
USS FEDERATION NCC-2100
Your selection of yellow for the starships USS Hermes NCC-585, USS Ptolemy NCC-3801, and USS Saladin NCC-500 would seen to indicate your preference for these ships to be canonical. If so, then this ship, too, must be in yellow. She is shown briefly in the TSFS on a computer display.
USS INTREPID NCC-1631
The correct registry for this ship is NCC-1831.
USS LEXINGTON NCC-14427
This ship didn't appear in "Thine Own Self". Her succesor, the Nebula Lexington, did. Wouldn't it be easier to state her as a ship from the Encyclopedia and say she is a predecessor to the Nebula Lexington?
USS MAGELLAN NCC-3069
There appears to be a basic rule in Star Trek: canon overrules all other sources. In the battle plans to retake DS9, there are the 'shadows' of classes of ships engaged in the campaign. The Constellation is not among these classes. Ergo, the Magellan in the episode "Sacrifice of Angels" is not a Constellation. She could be of any one of the classes mentioned, just not a Constellation.
USS MELBOURNE NCC-62043
I happen to think there is only one Melbourne and she is Excelsior. The Nebula Melbourne I see as a nameless casuality in the battle.
USS PROMETHEUS NX-74913
I am of the camp which supports this connection, not the other connection.
USS RELATIVITY NCV-474439
This ship is missing from your list.
USS SCOVIL NCC-1598
I have the Scovil as Oberth Class based on a chart in TUC.
USS SHIKA MARU
In the encyclopedia, this ship, 'Shika Maru', is identified as a starship. Starship = USS.
USS SPRINGFIELD NCC-1963
I have this ship listed as Miranda Class based on a chart in TUC.
SERIES OF SHIPS NAMED AS YAMATO
On my list, I have six ships named USS Yamato. The first ship has registry NCC-1305, the next four have no registries, and the last has NCC-71807. This adheres to the canon facts.
NCC-K7
This is the registry for Deep Space Station K-7. A station is dissimiliar to a starship, so the inclusion of this registry is puzzling.
NCC-70231
On my lists, I have this ship listed. A shuttle bearing a registry similiar to this was seen in "Identity Crisis".
SHIPS IN 'WHISPERS'
You have listed several ships which may not be of Federation origion and may operate for the non-aligned governments. These are: G.S. 12, C.A.R. 54-D, C-57-D, I.T.A. Elmira, C.G.M. Gh'Aster, F.G.M.S. Gyt'Aerat, G.H.D. Per'ot, and G.C.S. Recio.
S.S. BEAGLE
Her class is 4.
KOBAYASHI MARU
Her class is 3.
S.S. MILAN NDT-50863
The official website has this ship listed as U.S.S. Milan.
XHOSA
In the encyclopedia, this ship has 'S.S.' attached to her name.
NCD-31775, YLT-3069
These are the registries of two Toron-type shuttle. They may be Federation registered.
E.C.S. FORTUNATE
On Ex Astra Scientia, the website author noticed this sequence of letters and numbers written on doors and other locations: 'ECS-2801'. He is of the opinion this could be a registry. I agree with him.
TEZRA
In the episode, this ship is identified as the first of her class. Most cases in Star Trek, a class is named after the first ship. This would be a logical inference here.
posted
Sorry about that premature post, and thanks for taking the time to look it all over. I'll take your points one at a time...
quote:Originally posted by newark: My suggestions:
USS AHWAHNEE NCC-2048
I have this ship listed as Excelsior. This is based on the map shown in TUC.
I would tend to agree, but that map has proved to be more trouble than it's worth and I'm not wholly comfortable with finalizing anything from it except the Eagle and Endeavour datapoints until we get a closer look at it. (If that ever happens...) However, the entry in the main body of the shiplist for the Ahwahnee includes this note:
"Based upon close examination of screencaptures from the film, the chart may have shown the ship to be an Excelsior-class vessel (which would make sense given the registry number) and also may have misspelled the name as 'Awahnee,' though until a clearer view of the document is made available, this cannot be verified."
quote:USS ATLANTI(S) NCC-40657
This ship is mentioned on a computer screen seen in "Conspiracy". Even if the name is not 100% certain, the registry is.
I'll have to check on this...
quote:USS CHALLENGER NCC-2032
I have this ship listed as Excelsior. This is based on the map shown in TUC.
Same response as for the Ahwahnee.
quote:USS CONCORD (E) NCC-68711
According to StarTrek.Com, Concorde is the correct spelling for this ship.
According to the script, it's Concord, (for the Revolutionary War battle site) and this is supported by the Encyclopedia and Worf's pronunciation of the name. Not to mention that, as a general rule, people at startrek.com = idiots. (Although, admittedly, the 'e' spelling also appeared in at least one place in the Encyclopedia as well.)
quote:USS CONSTITUTION NCC-1700
On my ship list, I don't list the registry. My reason is this-the only known and recorded source for the connection between the name 'Constitution' and 'NCC-1700' are works authored by Franz Joseph and later discredited by Gene Roddenberry. There is no recorded connection between the name and registry in the first series. In the post-discredition process, a starship bearing the registry 'NCC-1700' is seen in "Datalore". She bears no name. So, for my records, there are two ships: the USS Constitution with a registry preceding NCC-956 and an unnamed Connie with the registry NCC-1700.
Well a monitor in STIII, lifted from FJ's Tech Manual, shows the ship labeled NCC-1700 under the heading "CLASS I HEAVY CRUISER: Constitution-class Starships." That seems to imply that this is the prototype being displayed. And that's the same as the Hermes, Saladin, and Ptolemy screens, too.
quote:USS COURAGEOUS NCC-1861
I see you are adding information from sketches and scripts. This ship is a sketch of a Soyuz Class starship located either in the Art of Star Trek or TNG: Continuing Missions. I don't see an issue in including her in a ship list and it's nice, I think, to have an additional name to the Soyuz Class.
It's a maybe...but as I recall the name and number are just from some SOTSF ship that the artist drew over to show what the Soyuz would look like.
quote:USS DEFIANT NCC-75633
My opinion is stated on this ship.
Yeah, I know...BUT THE FOOTAGE!
quote:USS EAGLE NCC-956
This is the second ship mentioned in the episode "Amok Time", not the 'Excalibur'.
No, the Excalibur and Endeavor are the ships from the "Amok Time" first-draft script. The Eagle is from the "Journey to Babel" draft along with the Essex. But you're right in pointing out that I forgot to make note of it either way. Fixed.
quote:USS ENDEAVOUR NCC-1718
How did you create this connection between name and registry?
It's from Greg Jein's T-Negative article where most of the other Connie registries from the Encyclopedia are drawn from. Since we've got that NCC-1718 and the name was in a script, I figured what the hell... (It's all in green anyway...)
quote:USS ESSEX NCC-1697
Is the name supposed to be green? Is the registry supposed to be yellow? Is the class supposed to be gray?
Yes, yes, and yes. Fixed, fixed, and fixed.
quote:USS FEDERATION NCC-2100
Your selection of yellow for the starships USS Hermes NCC-585, USS Ptolemy NCC-3801, and USS Saladin NCC-500 would seen to indicate your preference for these ships to be canonical. If so, then this ship, too, must be in yellow. She is shown briefly in the TSFS on a computer display.
Nope. And believe me, it think it would be SWEET if she were canon. But the display in question is only the dotted-line "under construction" pic and makes no mention of the name Federation or the NCC.
quote:USS INTREPID NCC-1631
The correct registry for this ship is NCC-1831.
No it isn't. The most recent examination of DVD screencaps has yielded the same number that Greg Jein's examination of film cells back in the 70s did: NCC-1631. See the 5th paragraph of this post, et al. I agree with the poster.
quote:USS LEXINGTON NCC-14427
This ship didn't appear in "Thine Own Self". Her succesor, the Nebula Lexington, did. Wouldn't it be easier to state her as a ship from the Encyclopedia and say she is a predecessor to the Nebula Lexington?
Possibly. That's one of the few things that's left me scratching my head about what to do with it. I'm as yet undecided.
quote:USS MAGELLAN NCC-3069
There appears to be a basic rule in Star Trek: canon overrules all other sources. In the battle plans to retake DS9, there are the 'shadows' of classes of ships engaged in the campaign. The Constellation is not among these classes. Ergo, the Magellan in the episode "Sacrifice of Angels" is not a Constellation. She could be of any one of the classes mentioned, just not a Constellation.
Interesting logic... Don't know whether I agree or not.
quote:USS MELBOURNE NCC-62043
I happen to think there is only one Melbourne and she is Excelsior. The Nebula Melbourne I see as a nameless casuality in the battle.
Again, I can't decide on how to best handle this issue. For now (though it's damned unwieldly) I leave them both.
quote:USS PROMETHEUS NX-74913
I am of the camp which supports this connection, not the other connection.
This note from the main body of my shiplist says it all:
"The dedication plaque and master systems display of the ship show a registry of NX-74913, which is inconsistent with the NX-59650 number seen clearly on the vessel�s hull in �Message in a Bottle.� The reason for this is that Mike Okuda of the Art Department created the plaque and display without knowing about the number generated by the Visual Effects Department. All official sources (Star Trek Encyclopedia, Star Trek Fact Files, Starship Spotter, and the official Star Trek website at www.startrek.com) seem to agree that the 59650 number, much more visible to viewers, is the more definitive. Even Rick Sternbach, the designer of the vessel, acknowledges this in an article in the March 2003 issue of Star Trek: The Magazine."
quote:USS RELATIVITY NCV-474439
This ship is missing from your list.
It's intentionally missing because the Relativity's dedication plaque says it was only the seventh ship to bear it's name. Since a change in the alpahbet is ruled out because the letters A, B, C, D, E, F, and G are all present elsewhere on the plaque, I reason that it must be a change in the registry system that's to blame. I guess for some reason SF eventually stops issuing suffix-less regs altogether and starts each ship line off with -A.
[ June 28, 2003, 05:15 AM: Message edited by: The Mighty Monkey of Mim ]
Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
posted
Part II, since the board is not liking me to post so much at once:
quote:USS SCOVIL NCC-1598
I have the Scovil as Oberth Class based on a chart in TUC.
*gives a very heavy sigh* THERE ARE NO OBERTHS ON THE OR CHART!!!!!
quote:USS SHIKA MARU
In the encyclopedia, this ship, 'Shika Maru', is identified as a starship. Starship = USS.
The ship is given no prefix in the Encyclopedia and is merely referred to as a "Federation vessel" in the episode, and this is how it should be. Maru is a Japanese suffix denoting a civilian craft. And it's Shiku Maru, BTW.
quote:USS SPRINGFIELD NCC-1963
I have this ship listed as Miranda Class based on a chart in TUC.
Again, same as with the Ahwahnee.
quote:SERIES OF SHIPS NAMED AS YAMATO
On my list, I have six ships named USS Yamato. The first ship has registry NCC-1305, the next four have no registries, and the last has NCC-71807. This adheres to the canon facts.
Ugh...headache...
quote:NCC-K7
This is the registry for Deep Space Station K-7. A station is dissimiliar to a starship, so the inclusion of this registry is puzzling.
So space stations have NCC registry numbers? You see the problem, I trust.
quote:NCC-70231
On my lists, I have this ship listed. A shuttle bearing a registry similiar to this was seen in "Identity Crisis".
Really? I've never heard that one before. Anyone got a screencap to back it up?
quote:SHIPS IN 'WHISPERS'
You have listed several ships which may not be of Federation origion and may operate for the non-aligned governments. These are: G.S. 12, C.A.R. 54-D, C-57-D, I.T.A. Elmira, C.G.M. Gh'Aster, F.G.M.S. Gyt'Aerat, G.H.D. Per'ot, and G.C.S. Recio.
Yeah, I considered that. But the captains of all of them have human names. (Smith, Adams, Jones, etc.)
quote:S.S. BEAGLE
Her class is 4.
KOBAYASHI MARU
Her class is 3.
I think these are "classes" ("Class III Neutronic Fuel Carrier" and "Class IV Stardrive Vessel") in the same sense that the Constitution is a "Class I Heavy Cruiser," not a specific class name of the design.
quote:S.S. MILAN NDT-50863
The official website has this ship listed as U.S.S. Milan.
Once again, people @ startrek.com = idiots.
quote:XHOSA
In the encyclopedia, this ship has 'S.S.' attached to her name.
No it doesn't.
quote:NCD-31775, YLT-3069
These are the registries of two Toron-type shuttle. They may be Federation registered.
No, one is Klingon-registered and the other is Yridian-registered...
quote:E.C.S. FORTUNATE
On Ex Astra Scientia, the website author noticed this sequence of letters and numbers written on doors and other locations: 'ECS-2801'. He is of the opinion this could be a registry. I agree with him.
I agree it's a possibility, but there are so many letter-number combinations on the interior sets of the Fortunate and Horizon...
quote:TEZRA
In the episode, this ship is identified as the first of her class. Most cases in Star Trek, a class is named after the first ship. This would be a logical inference here.
I don't know if the Tellarites use this system, considering the various other class name schemes we've seen on ENT. (Indeed, the "name of the first ship of the type becomes the class name" seems to be the exception rather than the rule in this era.)
Once again, thanks for the input. Sorry if it seems like I've just brushed aside many of your suggestions. I just have my own view on some things...
-MMoM
-------------------- The flaws we find most objectionable in others are often those we recognize in ourselves.
Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
posted
Does anyone have a screen cap of this chart from ST:VI that's online or they can send me? I've been wanting to see this chart for a while now, but no one ever seems capable of producing screencaps of the chart, tho it gets quoted a lot....
Also, I can't access your site right now - it keeps timing out on me - but why are there no Oberth class ships on the list? Are you getting a bit prejudical in your old age, MMoM?
Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged
"According to the script, it's Concord, (for the Revolutionary War battle site) and this is supported by the Encyclopedia and Worf's pronunciation of the name."
There's a difference in pronunciation between "Concord/concord" and "Concorde"?
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
Shik
Starship database: completed; History of Starfleet: done; website: probably never
Member # 343
posted
"Concord" is pronounced "KONK-erd" (like "conquered") whereas "Concorde" is pronounced "KON-koord."
-------------------- "The French have a saying: 'mise en place'—keep everything in its fucking place!"
Registered: Jun 2000
| IP: Logged
quote:Originally posted by Griffworks: Does anyone have a screen cap of this chart from ST:VI that's online or they can send me? I've been wanting to see this chart for a while now, but no one ever seems capable of producing screencaps of the chart, tho it gets quoted a lot....
Take some time and read through this thread, pretty much everything after the first page is centered on the OR chart. There's screencaps and animated reconstructions and lots of debate and other goodness. I know it gets long-winded, but try to read through the discussion that goes along with the pics, becuase it explains much and new points come to light throughout the thread.
quote:Also, I can't access your site right now - it keeps timing out on me -
That would probably be because of the server-switch I mentioned as being in progress. Do the two pages I linked to above come up?
quote:why are there no Oberth class ships on the list? Are you getting a bit prejudical in your old age, MMoM?
When you get through the thread I cited, you'll see caps of the chart. The third silhouette on the "in reserve" section of the chart is not---and, I repeat, NOT---an Oberth as Akira's animations suggest, but rather another Miranda.
BTW, there is also another graphic from TUC---a starship mission assignment list that gives information for the 7 ships from the OR chart (U.S.S. Ahwahnee NCC-2048, U.S.S. Challenger NCC-2032, U.S.S. Eagle NCC-956, U.S.S. Endeavour NCC-1895, U.S.S. Potemkin NCC-1657, U.S.S. Scovil NCC-1598, and U.S.S. Springfield NCC-1963) as well as 10 additional ships. (U.S.S. Constellation NX-1974, U.S.S. Emden NCC-1856, U.S.S. Helin NCC-1692, U.S.S. John Muir NCC-1732, U.S.S. Kongo NCC-1710, U.S.S. Korolev NCC-2014, U.S.S. Lantree NCC-1837, U.S.S. Oberth NCC-602, [now there's an Oberth for ya ] U.S.S. Republic NCC-1371, and U.S.S. Whorfin NCC-1024.)
Nobody has ever been able to get a halfway decent screencap of this second list because it's too far away from the screen in the film. However, we know the information that was on it because Mike Okuda (who made the display in the first place) had it on record at some point and turned it over to Bjo Trimble for her Star Trek Concordance, where it was reproduced.
-MMoM
-------------------- The flaws we find most objectionable in others are often those we recognize in ourselves.
Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
Amasov Prime
lensfare-induced epileptic shock
Member # 742
posted
Nebula-Lexington was said to be on a deep space mission for the last three years, which would include the time of the TNG episode. I don't like to contradict the encyclopedia either, but Grandmaster Okuda didn't know/remember it. If I had to drop a ship from my list, the Excelsior-Lexington would be my first choice. You know what I mean.
Magellan: The ships on that chart were: Galaxy, Nebula, Excelsior, Defiant, Akira, Miranda, Norway, Sabre. Neither a Norway nor a Nebula was present in that fleet (onscreen), but I did see several Steamrunners, al class not listed on that display. Ergo: There could have been a Constellation because the display did not reflect the actual complement of the fleet. (Hey, maybe it was a scroll-down menu and we just saw the first few classes. )
There. Are. TWO. Melbournes. (see below)
After my final math exams I can just say: --- (Okuda + Sternbach) > CGI-company Prometheus/(NX-59650) = crap [(NX-59650) + Brittain + Jenolin + X] = mistake --- Maybe the 59xxx-number was a fake to hide the ship's true identity (which is, BTW, what I believe happened to the Melbournes and Defiants). There could have been another Prometheus with exactly that number (probably the predecessor of the Nebula-Prometheus from DS9) pulled back into service to fool the Tal'Shiar and Obsidian Order and Ferengi-CIA. Just concider it a possibility.
I always assumed the Yamato did have in fact two registries, NCC-1305-E (honoring the NCC-1305 Yamato) and NCC-71xxx, its 'Product ID'. Of course, I also assume the Enterprise-D and any other Enterprise did have a 'normal' registry before someone decided to name the ship "Enterprise".
-------------------- "This is great. Usually it's just cardboard walls in a garage."
Registered: Nov 2001
| IP: Logged
USS LEXINGTON: From everything said in the conversation between Bashir and Lense, the Lexington (61832) was out in the boonies exploring/cataloging previously unexplored solar systems in deep space for the first time. Its' mission would have started prior to 2369, most likely sometime between New Years 2368 and the time we see Bashir arrive at DS9 in early/mid-2369, as it would seem their assignments coincided, if not, Lenses preceeded Bashirs. All of which takes place a solid year before the Enterprise-D's rendezvous with the other Lexington (14427) which seemed to be conducting an altogether different mission. Why would a Nebbie be ferrying medical supplies for a colony when its out exploring the outer realms of the Federations' sphere of influence?
That leaves open the possibility of both Lexington's coexisting simultaneously. It goes the same with the Melbourne and the Farragut and their damn Excelsior-Nebula-connectivity curse! Either way the evidence with the Lexington seems to point it in two distinct directions.
Also, for those who do take the "Official Site" for anything close to absolute, keep in mind that is says both:
"Not to be confused with the Excelsior-class ship of the same name, or the Constitution-class vessel of the previous century."
and
"Not to be confused with the Nebula-class ship of the same name, or the Constitution-class vessel of the previous century."
----------------------------
SS XHOSA Im not sure if it really qualifies here. The ship was initially described as a 'Petrarian freighter' (or under Petrarian registry) as that was who she was employed by. Later when she moved to DS9 she it was registered for/by/under a Bajoran registry. Captain Yates may have been a Federation citizen, and she may or maynot own that vessel (or have stock in it), making its' true alignment not-necessarily Federation, as she seems to be somewhat of a freelance freighter captain.
Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged
quote:Originally posted by The Mighty Monkey of Mim:
quote:NCC-70231
On my lists, I have this ship listed. A shuttle bearing a registry similiar to this was seen in "Identity Crisis".
Really? I've never heard that one before. Anyone got a screencap to back it up?
I posted a few screencaps of it in the thread about shuttles a couple of months ago. We couldn't make out the registry properly, but maybe it was easier for newark to see on a TV.
Shik
Starship database: completed; History of Starfleet: done; website: probably never
Member # 343
posted
The Xhosa was "a small freighter owned by Petarian interests." That says nothing about official star-of-registry, homeport, etc. This is akin to something like, say, Carnival Cruise Lines. The ships homeport in Florida, are corporately run from the US, but are registered in the Bahamas. Most commercial shipping lines do this; gods help us all if Liberia or Panama ever decide to do an overseas heavylift invasaion. The trade world would be destroyed.
Furthermore, did we ever see Xhosa again after Kasidy came back from prisan? Because if we didn't there's a possibility that she reused the name for a new ship of her own, or that she ran for the Bajorans.
-------------------- "The French have a saying: 'mise en place'—keep everything in its fucking place!"
Registered: Jun 2000
| IP: Logged
posted
The reasoning behind including the Xhosa in the Federation list involves the fact that it had a TOS-Starfleet-style dedication plaque and computer console screens. I've heard it frequently speculated that the Xhosa may have been an old SF surplus ship that was sold off to Yates or her Petarian employers, and it sounds reasonable to me that it at least originally (long before we saw it on DS9) was a Federation vessel...
-MMoM
-------------------- The flaws we find most objectionable in others are often those we recognize in ourselves.
Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
posted
Adding to the argument against a Constellation being in the operation to retake DS9, there are the pages of starships at the end of the DS9 manual which show the classes of starships used. These include the: Akira, Defiant, Excelsior, Galaxy, Miranda, Norway, Saber, Steamrunner, and the kitbashes. So, that is two sources which don't show the Constellation Class in use for the retaking of DS9.
I am very hesitant to accept visual data. If I did as some are doing, I would have to accept the following:
Ships bearing the registry of previous vessels. The first example I know of this is the USS Hood, an Excelsior Class starship which cerried the registry of NX-2000.
Ships whose class is wrong and yet must be right. Can we say USS Potemkin?
Ships dying a similiar fate twice or more times. The USS Majestic was destroyed twice.
NAR-
As I was compiling my list, I noticed a pattern in the three ships which bear this registry prefix and are registered with the UFP. These three ships are:
(1.) Civilian operated (2.) Bear the markings of Starfleet ships
I think the registry prefix NAR- is used to denote Starfleet ships which have been shipped to the surplus fleet for re-sale. Once re-sold, the ships are given new names and registries.
Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
)![[Wink]](wink.gif)
) and adopting the McReynolds system---that is to say, reclassifying these materials as "apocryphal" in the ecclesiastical sense of being documents that lie just outside the actual Canon, being of debated or uncertain authorship/authenticity/integrity. (Actually, I think I personally prefer "deuterocanonical," which has a bit of a more sympathetic cannotation to it, so that may end up being a further change at some point, so for now I'll use "apocryphal.")![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Confused]](confused.gif)
![[Frown]](frown.gif)
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic
