posted
Remember, though, that the "Redemption" Ahwahnee had a different registry.
------------------ Frank's Home Page "Yes, I routinely run any car with Canadian plates off the road. It makes it easier to yank them out, blind them, and put them to work in my underground salt mine." - Simon Sizer
When you click on this link you'll be taken to a white page telling you this image is hosted by Tripod, blah blah, crap. There will be another link on the page that will finally take you to the image.
Here's the sketches of the Endeavor though.
------------------ "The keyboard, how quaint." Federation Starship Datalink - Yet another site based on the popularity of starships.
posted
Well, pitting a Nebula up against the Borg and surviving isn't any worse than leading a task force against a possible Borg invasion from aboard an Excelsior or from having some vessel escape from Wolf 359.
------------------ 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")
Braga and Menosky's script of "Scorpion, Part I" spells it Amasov. Honest. That's the right spelling this time, all.
------------------ 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
Well, we know that at least one ship had to survive the battle, because there were survivors Wolf 359 that escaped in escape pods, but when the Enterprise got there, she detected no life signs. The only possible conclusion is that they were taken out of sensor range by a surviving ship. Does anyone have a list of ships that were seen at Wolf 359, or said to be there, but that were not seen to have been destroyed?
------------------ For every complex problem, there is a solution that is simple, neat, and wrong. - H. L. Mencken
posted
There's no proof that only 40 ships were at W359. Hanson said that had a 40-ship fleet preparing. That doesn't mean that plans didn't change.
Also, did Capt. Amasov's log explicitly state that the Endeavour had encountered the Borg? Maybe he was just one of SF's "experts" on them, like Hanson or Shelby.
------------------ "Yoink!" -Mel Gibson, The Simpsons
posted
I don't see any real reason to deny the Endeavor having a seperate Borg encounter. We know that their ships have been out there, watching. We know that the transwarp conduit system gives them relatively easy access to Federation space.
On the other hand, TSN does have a point. He need not have directly encountered the Borg to write a report about them. (Though I think Janeway specifically mentioned she was reading from his logbook...)
------------------ I do indeed and shall continue Dispatch the shiftless man to points beyond -- Soul Coughing
posted
To be strictly technical about this: Do we have anything other than Okuda's words that says the Ahwahnee was at 359? We've never actually seen the ship, correct? I mean, it was on the list he gave at one time, and he would obviously know, but if we're going strictly by canon, eg - on film, we never saw it there and since it's never been established visually or by dialogue it doesn't seem as certain as we all seem to be taking it. Just because it appeared in Redemption doesn't mean it surivived Wolf 359, if we're not certain it was ever there to begin with.
I'd have to say that based on the fact that we saw a Nebula at 359 and the log entry Janeway read, we'd have to say the Endeavour was the surivor.
------------------ Proverbs for Paranoids, 3: If they can get you asking the wrong questions, they don't have to worry about answers.
The First One
A lovely little thinker, but a bugger when he's pissed
Member # 35
posted
How far do you want to go before you start ignoring what we've been told? The whole Ahwahnee question is down to hearsay. That there was such a ship at Wolf 359, it was of the Cheyenne class, it looked like so-and-so, a ship is seen in the graveyard looking like so-and-so, and appearing to be intact. . .
Then ethere's the registries of the two ships: 73620 and 71620. That's not a coincidence. They must have been meant to be the same, only one was wrong.
------------------ "Have you seen blood in the moonlight, Will? It appears quite black."
- Dr. Hannibal Lecktor (Brian Cox), Manhunter (Michael Mann, 1986)
posted
Or, the newer Ahwahnee was given a registry similar to the old one, along the lines of the suffixed Enterprise registries.
------------------ Frank's Home Page "I firmly believe that the entire Star Trek universe exists only to make sure we continue to appreciate Star Wars and Babylon 5." - Andy Ihnatko
The First One
A lovely little thinker, but a bugger when he's pissed
Member # 35
posted
Yes, that's what it says on that page of yours. It seems a bit too unlikely, though. Why not just register it as 73620-A, instead of saying "let's call it 71620, it's sort-of close."
------------------ "Have you seen blood in the moonlight, Will? It appears quite black."
- Dr. Hannibal Lecktor (Brian Cox), Manhunter (Michael Mann, 1986)
posted
Are you saying that the supposed newer Ahwahnee was given a similar but lower registry, Frank? That doesn't make sense to me. They're probably meant to be the same ship (and the only survivor of Wolf359).
------------------ "Forgive me if I don't share your euphoria!" (Weyoun to Dukat, Tears of the Prophets) Dax's Ships of STAR TREK
The First One
A lovely little thinker, but a bugger when he's pissed
Member # 35
posted
Yes. Either the first one was correct (but never seen onscreen, note) and the second (seen onscreen) wasn't, or the first one was incorrect and the second was correct - or they just changed their minds about what it should be.
Let's face it, crap writing has left us with TWO survivors of Wolf 359. Either it's as Tim says, that the '40 ships' was only a rough number, while the '39 ships destroyed' is an exact one, or there's another explanation. But to suddenly say after all these years, "oh, the Ahwahnee didn't survive after all, it was the Endeavour all along" is absurd. Especially when the only evidence is two registries with only a one-digit difference.
Printer-friendly view of this topic
