posted
The high number of registries may have something to do with small craft, like runabouts, having starship registries. There are hundreds of starbases, most of them likely have registered support craft, and stations larger than Deep Space Nine likely have more than three at any given time. Add to that the fact that DS9 lost as many as 10 over 7 years, it seems like these craft must be replaced fairly often.
Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged
quote:Originally posted by Mars Needs Women: And an in-universe explanation as to why the warship Prometheus has a 5xxxx registry. On the other hand, I can't really believe Starfleet has had around 79,000 to 80,000 starships in its history, much less 10,000-20,000 at any one time.
As to the Prommie, I think it's plausible if the ship's registry refers to a secret project- each "NX" prototype made to test new weapons keeps the same older registry to foil spying. A casual look at stolen fleet orders would reflect some ship which has been in constant service since the days when the New Orleans was a new design. Once a design is proven worthy of becoming it's own class, it's given a current registry with the "NX" prefix for the sake of an official shakedown mission- possibly as a means of testing less vital non-combat oriented systems.
It could be the James Bond of starships- and there could be several such registries given to either experimental designs or to starships on covert missions- there could even be unregistered starships which sub in for ships assigned to some sensitive mission- making scheduled stops at this or that starbase while the real deal does whatever. I'd think changing the ship's registry both in computers and on the hull (vial hologram!) would be easily done.
I second the notion taht Starfleet has indeed had or has as many starships as the 7XXXX numbers would indicate- but not only from Runabouts or scouts, but mainly from the incorporation of existing spacefleeets into Starfleet when a spacefaring species with Warp capability joins the UFP. Even a "home fleet" that does not actively engage in exploration or defense (usualy due to lesser technology or incompatible systems) would get registries within Starfleet.
With the entry of a Vulcan like species to the UFP, Starfleet could gain several thousand registries while not really adding anything to the generally available fleet.
Must play hell with the Romulans or whoever is spying though- talk about a fleet build up!
Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
quote:Originally posted by Fabrux: Don't forget about the other, apparently originally intended registry for the Prometheus: 74913.
Yes, this was a miscommunication between the VFX Dept. (who were responsible for creating the ship in CGI), and the Art Dept., specifically Okuda (who was responsible for the ship's registry, dedication plaque, etc.) I truly believe this was also why the FC ships had such low registries when they were clearly supposed to be newer ships.
-------------------- "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
posted
Then again, there is the theory that registry numbers are assigned in blocks to different shipyards. Say there was this little out-of-the-way shipyard deep in the heart of UFP territory that got the contract to build the FC ships right around the time of BoBW. Well-insulated, little-known shipyard starts pumping out these new-build ships but with registries lower than the other shipyards were pumping out.
-------------------- I haul cardboard and cardboard accessories
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
quote:Originally posted by Fabrux: Then again, there is the theory that registry numbers are assigned in blocks to different shipyards.
Oh, that's a perfectly reasonable in-universe, after-the-fact explanation that would explain things like the FC ships and the Prometheus's low registries. There's even evidence that other ships with 5XXXX registries are brand-new as of the start of TNG. I was just speculating above what the real-world explanation was as to why the regs were so low.
-------------------- "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
posted
Maybe the Prometheus is 5xxxx because the art department looked at the FC ships and saw that they were also 5xxxx, and so assumed that was what new ships were?
-------------------- Yes, you're despicable, and... and picable... and... and you're definitely, definitely despicable. How a person can get so despicable in one lifetime is beyond me. It isn't as though I haven't met a lot of people. Goodness knows it isn't that. It isn't just that... it isn't... it's... it's despicable.
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
quote:There was some confusion during the production of "Message in a Bottle" concerning the registry of the Prometheus. According to Michael Okuda, he had used the number NX-74913 on all the internal displays and the ship's dedication plaque. However, the Foundation Imaging FX artists did not get the memo and used the number 59650 instead. Although Okuda's number did appear on screen, the Foundation number was much more visible.
According to Star Trek: Communicator issue 152, the Prometheus was redesignated NX-74913 after stardate 51461, right before the date the Prometheus was hijacked by Romulans. This was probably stated to alleviate the registry confusion mentioned above. If this statement was correct, it would suggest that the crew of the Prometheus modified the interior of the ship to reflect the new registry number before the old one was changed on the hull. It would also suggest that the ship had the old registry removed completely by "Endgame". The Prometheus having such a low registry number was meant to show that the ship had been in development for a long time.
posted
Getting back on topic, I happened to notice something else in regards to another Miranda class ship.
In "Way of the Warrior," the Miranda docked at DS9, which had been previously thought as the U.S.S. Trial model kit, actually has its torpedo pod and rollbar facing the wrong way.
So it's possible that the WOTW ship might in fact be another model kit, and not the Trial.
-------------------- "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
posted
Interesting. Though it's also possible that it's still the same model, the just fixed the roll bar orientation after filming. But you never know.
-------------------- “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 MinutiaeMan: Interesting. Though it's also possible that it's still the same model, the just fixed the roll bar orientation after filming. But you never know.
That's possible, but I'm not sure why they would bother fixing the orientation later if it was just a disposable plastic model kit used for one shot, and especially if it were just one of several Reliant model kits that were built for far background shots.
-------------------- "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
posted
Or maybe the other way around, it was built in the right position, filmed, then damaged and repaired wrong?
Never mind. I got the shots mixed up. Maybe they figured they might use the model again?
-------------------- “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
Or they jst dropped the damn thing and no one caught that some intern or whever stuck the rollbar on backwards, then fixed it later.
Or it's Q having a bit of fun. Or Trelane.
Or the Metrons.
Or the Olivia Dabo Q babe.
But I cant fathom any other in-universe explanation on that.
-------------------- Justice inclines her scales so that wisdom comes at the price of suffering. -Aeschylus, Agamemnon
Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
posted
Occam would think that they're just two different models.
-------------------- "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
posted
It is either, depending on if you open the box to see, or leave it closed.
-------------------- "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
![[Eek!]](eek.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic
