posted
Alright, we all know that the USS Prometheus was seen on screen with the registry NX-59650. We also know that on the Dedication Plaque it says NC-74913. Now, apparently this plaque # was partially visible in "MIAB". So therefore, we have an interesting situation. Not much unlike the whole Brittain/Brattain or the Jenol*n issues.
So what I'm getting to is this: We know that the model makers made a mistake with the Brittain model and was spelt with an 'I'. We know this to be wrong, and many of us accept Brattain as the correct spelling, as that's what they meant to put.
Another example is the Type-6 Shuttlecraft Feynman. The model/exterior was labelled Feyman. Now we know they meant Feynman, so that's what we use.
Now with regards to the Prometheus, couldn't we say that the registry actually is NX-74913? It fits better with everything about the ship, and is 100% more suitable that NX-59650.
Now, if that's the case, we must reconsider the Equinox. Janeway said "Nova", that's true. But maybe it's like the Constitution/Constellation thing in that one Episode of TNG. [The name escapes me right now] It could be Noble, it sure is close enough sounding to Nova to create some confusion.
[Note: The Equinox class name is less important to me than the Prometheus registry. I just thought I'd throw it out.]
Now, in the instances where there've been these type of conflicts in the past, we've studied them and taken the best laid path. We've set precedences, and it seems kind of akward that we don't use them here.
------------------ "I've never seen anything this beautiful in the entire galaxy. Alright, give me the bomb" -Ultra Magnus, Fight or Flee
[This message has been edited by Ultra Magnus (edited November 08, 1999).]
posted
Well, which would be more recognisable to those who watch the show? NX-59650 or NX-74714? Nova or Noble? Brattain or Brittain?
------------------ Frank's Home Page "We've got some new songs here that are not even on the MP3 thing. They're not available in any format, except of course the bootlegs that seem to proliferate all through our audience, as we watch people lip-synch along to songs that HAVEN'T BEEN RELEASED! DAMN YOU!" - John Linnell
posted
Is that the question we must ask? Do viewer's care if the Intrepid is NCC-1835 or NCC-1635? Do they care what the Freedom Class looks like?
See, this is for neurotic people like you and me who care. I don't care wether the guy who watches the show for Seven's breasts knows what classes of ships were in the Qualor II Junkyard.
I don't think it's so much a question of Recognizability than one of Reliability.
------------------ "I've never seen anything this beautiful in the entire galaxy. Alright, give me the bomb" -Ultra Magnus, Fight or Flee
posted
Well, with minor issues like the Freedom, there's more room to argue.
------------------ Frank's Home Page "We've got some new songs here that are not even on the MP3 thing. They're not available in any format, except of course the bootlegs that seem to proliferate all through our audience, as we watch people lip-synch along to songs that HAVEN'T BEEN RELEASED! DAMN YOU!" - John Linnell
posted
But there's more Reason to argue with this. It's a big thing, I suppose, and it's an 'either or' answer. Don't think of me as a fool, It's not that important to me, it's just an issue that needs to be settled.
------------------ "I've never seen anything this beautiful in the entire galaxy. Alright, give me the bomb" -Ultra Magnus, Fight or Flee
Jim Phelps
watches Voyager AFTER 51030
Member # 102
posted
The visibility factor -is- an issue here, since the level of seriousness goes down a lot below the visibility line. In-jokes in Okudagrams, senseless 4077 4747 numbers, etc.
Here is the question:
a) Should we derive our theories with an arbitrary visibility line in mind, thereby running the risk that the visibility may be increased by further enhances in digital technology, larger TV screens etc....
OR
b) Should we ignore the visibility line altogether, and instead derive our theories based on what IS onscreen, rather than what can be SEEN onscreen.
One can do both, although b) is certainly much more difficult because of all the joking that goes around, senseless numbers, Admiral Gene Roddenberrys and Rick Sternbachs, and especially little mistakes such as these. One wonders whether we should take the time to rationalize this info at all. On the other hand, much of the invisible info actually makes sense - are we to consider it semi-canon?
And then again, a) will not always be easier. For instance, parts of the Defiant's MSD are visible, while others are not. Is the entire MSD canon, or is it just the deck outlines that are canon? How do I know whether the aft torpedo launcher has ever been seen (I'd have to browse through all the episodes and make sure that there is a camera pass which makes the torpedo launcher visible, and only then be able to prove its canonicity).
Boris
------------------ "Wrong again. Although we want to be scientifically accurate, we've found that selection of [Photon Energy Plasma Scientifically Inaccurate as a major Star Trek format error] usually indicates a preoccupation with science and gadgetry over people and story."
---a Writers' Test from the Original Series Writer's Guide
posted
In "The Die is Cast", Sisko orders aft torpedoes fired, so the existance of one aft launcher is canon...
------------------ 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
Dax ones said that they lost the aft torpedo launcher
------------------ Presenting the NX-59650. It can slice! It can dice! It can seperate into THREE parts!! Now available with THREE FULL warpcores! But wait! Buy now, and get a free number upgrade to NX-74913!
posted
It depends on what you go by. I personally think it would be easier for Starfleet to mess up on the plaque rather then the ship's hull. Also, if you belive the chnological registry theroy, 74 would fit in better then 59. But, it could be that the this was given a registry at the beggining of its development, then when it was launched, other ships' registry exceeded it because thier class was already developed.
About the Prometheus, I think that it is not a stretch to say that the registry is a result of the ship being in the drawing-board-phase a lot longer than anticipated. Perhaps multi-vector assault mode took a lot more designing and planning than what was originally anticipated by Starfleet Engineering. Also, the starship design people may have turned their attention to what were seen as more important projects like the Galaxy-class or Intrepid-class design -at the time-.
About the Equinox: It's Nova-class. As I said elsewhere, I think Noble-class should be put in the same category as the Hope/Olympic class stuff. Noble, like Hope, is simply a trivial detail that can be put in the oh-by-the-way-did-you-know category.
------------------ "Questions, comments, bring them to me. Problems, take them to Kinis."
posted
Again, Canon insist that the number be NX-59650 since it was on the ship's hull. The dedication plaque wasn't clearly visible on screen which means it's not really official but only a spoken quote with the registry would close the debate. Same for the Equinox, it's Nova class since it was said on screen.
Personnaly however, I prefer to think the correct registry is NX-74913 since it fits chronologically and also because I don't really care about registry. That's just a matter of preference. Some will go to extreme lengths to justify both numbers and others don't give a d*mn (like me).
------------------ -If you ask me, I think continuity is highly overrated... *Brannon Braga*
-Give me Good Trek or give me Death! *Me*
-Where were you when the brains were handed out? *Sonic the Hedgehog*
Printer-friendly view of this topic
