posted
I was thinking today about the Challanger class vessel and I had this thought: Why can't there be 2 Challanger Classes? One could be the one that is based off the Galaxy, and the other could be the one of the original Challanger from ST6. It might also be possible that one challanger was built for a battle scene in ST6 but never used and when they thought about using it for Best of Both Worlds they desided it looked to old. John
posted
If you had more than one class w/ the same name, there wouldn't be any reason to have class names. The point of them is that you can say a ship is such-and-such class, and someone knows exactly what type of ship it is. Not, "Now, is that the 2270s such-and-such class, or the 2370s such-and-such class?".
------------------ "It's like the Star of David or something. But without the whole Judaism thing." -Frank Gerratana, 17-Aug-2000
posted
They reuse class names today, don't they? And it wouldn't be confusing to people in the 2370s about which class they are talking about. Airplane names are resued in the Air Force all the time. Even the numbers. It wouldn't much of a stretch at all if you ask me.
------------------ It doesn't matter if you don't know what you're doing as long as you look good doing it.
posted
The US Defense Department reuses names, usually after all the planes of the original type are out of service. Even then they usually add a number. Examples are the Thunderbolt II, Phantom II, Globemaster II, Corsair II, and Avenger II. Most of the originals were of WWII or early-postwar vintage. As far as numbers, the US military changed it's numbering system for planes in the 1960s. The navy's system used to incorporate both the manufacturer and the plane type, whereas the Air Force used a system similar to the present system. The numbers seemed to go back to 1 for all types with the new system.
I think the British don't reuse plane names. Numbers added usually indicate different models of the same plane, like Spitfire XX. US warships are never given the name of another ship still in service. The original has to be renamed, destroyed, sold, scrapped, retired, or something similar. Numbers aren't added to the names, as far as I know.
Of course, George Foreman named all his sons "George Foreman," without numbers even, but you have to admit that would be pretty confusing.
------------------ When you're in the Sol system, come visit the Starfleet Museum
[This message has been edited by Masao (edited September 04, 2000).]
posted
You can find enough kooky real world examples to justify almost any naming scheme, if that's your goal. But generally, we try to keep the kookiness at a minimum. After all, there appears to be no shortage of the stuff.
posted
Well in the Navy names are used over and even class names. One comes to mind: King George V of World War 1 and King George V of World War II. The earlier onehad I think 10 13" guns and the newer version had the 10 14". These two classes were seperately built ina time frame of 20 years. So thge later is not a improvement over the other.
For the US Navy the first South Dakota class was supposed to be built during the 1920's and to be the ultimate battleship. However due to the Washington treaty, it was scraped. But the used the name again for the "Treaty" battleships of 35,000 tons. Ultimaely this class was the best "Treaty" battleship.
Yes it is possible to have two different Challengers but just in different times that's all.
------------------ Predict the unpredictable, but how do you unpredict the unpredictable?
posted
I actually like the SD-class better than the Iowa, for various reasons. Do you know any good sites, except "Warships Of The World"?
------------------ Ready for the action now, Dangerboy Ready if I'm ready for you, Dangerboy Ready if I want it now, Dangerboy? How dare you, dare you, Dangerboy? How dare you, Dangerboy? I dare you, dare you, Dangerboy...
Alpha Centauri
Usually seen somewhere in the Southern skies
Member # 338
posted
In the first place, Akula, there is zero evidence that the Challenger from the Operation:Retrieve chart was of a seperate class. Just speculation.
------------------ "And as we all know, a mesolytic quantumvector resonator is commonly used to polarize isogravitic plasma-flux manifolds."
Starfleet Academy's Redshirt Guide to the Starfleet, 62nd edition, 2376.
posted
Quote: Battle in Star Trek: VI!?!?!?!?!?!?!
Yeah, I was wondering about that too. Akula, do you mean the battle between Chang's BoP and the Enterprise near the end of the movie? If I recall correctly, the Excelsior came to help. Why would some other ship come in out of the blue to help as well? Furthermore, why would the modelmakers waste time and money building a brand new model just to have it shown for about five seconds?
------------------ Bart: "Hey, Dad, I'll trade you this delicious doorstop for that crummy old danish." Homer: "Done and done...D'oh!"
Printer-friendly view of this topic
