posted
<< I wrote to Mike Okuda about the registries on Starfleet vessels, are they chronological or semi-chronological? >>
Semichronological, to my way of thinking, at least. I've always assumed that whoever is in charge of registry numbers tends to issue them chronologically, but does not always do so. There are some numbers that have been reserved, others that were assigned to projects that were cancelled, but might later be reassigned. And other oddities that invariably occur whenever you have a big organization with many individual operating units. One reason for this assumption is the fact that the registry numbers for the Constitution-class ships in the original Star Trek series ranged from 1017 to 1371 to 1701, so they could not have been assigned in a sequential block of twelve. Further, if the Constitution was 1700, the numbers could not even have been chronological. Naturally, of course, there are others who have equally ingenious theories about these matters.
------------------ Elim Garak: "Oh, it's just Garak. Plain, simple Garak. Now, good day to you, Doctor. I'm so glad to have made such an... interesting new friend today." (DS9: "Past Prologue")
posted
Hm... Well, when he talks about the other "ingenious" theories, I think we all know he's talking about me... *LOL*
------------------ "Now you're the only one here who can tell me if it's true, That you love me, and I love me..." -They Might Be Giants, "Kiss Me, Son of God"
Printer-friendly view of this topic
