posted
Some statements about the ships on the chart:
All of the ships' NCC numbers match their listings in the Encyclopedia III. Therefore, the Cochrane NCC 59318 IS another Oberth; in fact according to the 'pedia, it was the ship that brought Bashir to DS9 in Emissary. Now, with Targetemployee's personal opinions aside, I'm simply using the 'pedia as a reference tool for getting the info because the info is'nt anywhere else. I personally don't think Oberths are any good in a battle either, but the again the chart doesn't say that the ship was actually in battle. It only lists the casualties. Like Timo inferred, the ship could just have been cruising along on it's merry way somewhere and got ambushed.
As for the Tripoli, I think there's some confusion. I recalled from Unification that the ship had been decommissioned and was serving as a "holding ship" (implying that the ship was in a stationary position and parts were just beamed into it for storage). That's why it was removed/stolen/destroyed by the black raider ship: so the raider could come and take the same position that the Tripoli once was when the parts transfer took place, which is exactly what happened in the episode. To make a long story short, the ship WAS decommissioned and was at least missing from the depot. Whether Starfleet eventually found the ship and recommissioned it for the war (hence it's appearance on the chart) is total conjecture.
------------------ Bart: "Hey, Dad, I'll trade you this delicious doorstop for that crummy old danish." Homer: "Done and done...D'oh!"
posted
I'd say that removing an entire cruiser-sized starship from the depot would be a difficult trick indeed. Smuggling out a few components with the help of an operational, specially equipped and camouflaged smuggling vessel... now that is quite possible. But sailing out with a mothballed starship without our alert Zakdorn guard noticing?
I suggest the ship was simply hidden elsewhere within the junkyard, its locator beacons turned off, so that the smuggling ship could take its place. Perhaps the smugglers even towed the Tripoli back between smuggling runs, and Riker happened to be on the spot conveniently when another smuggling run had been catered for.
How did the E-D crew search for the Tripoli, exactly? I think it is possible they just hunted for its locator beacons, and did not consider the possibility that it was merely ten thousand kilometers away, its transmitters altered to identify it as the decommissioned minesweeper USS Utterly Insignificant, while the beacons of the minesweeper were in turn turned off...
posted
Thank you. That's cool. It's from "In the Pale Moonlight", isn't it?
The display says Leslie Wong is the captain of the Akagi. In the German translation of this episode she's captain of the Cairo. What does the English version say?
posted
Yes, it's from "In the pale moonlight". I was a little bit confused, when i read it, so i rewatched the english version and they also say that Leslie Wong is the Skipper from the Cairo! Is it canon that Jellico is an Admiral? I've read so many books and in all of them Jellico is referred as an Admiral.
------------------ This is how i prefer the borg... in pieces!!! -- Janeway in Dark Frontier
posted
Almost all the names are repeated, so I'm not adding them to my ship list. As for the Exeter, I added those two captains, since it's possible a captain was killed, then replaced, and the replacement was killed very soon after (tragic, but possible). The report would list both of them since it would take some time to collect the names of all the losses, therefore allowing time for both to be added.
Another thing. Notice the Akagi has every crew member listed as MIA. Is it possible the Akagi is actually MIA herself, as in the ship never reported back? Also, almost the entire crew of Zapata is killed. Could she have been destroyed, with the MIA's being crew members still lost in escape pods?
------------------ Me: "Why don't you live in Hong Kong?" Rachel Roberts: "Hong Kong? Nah. Oh, but we can live in China! Yeah, China has great Chinese food!"
(discussion with fellow classmate, 9/5/00)
[This message has been edited by The359 (edited September 08, 2000).]
posted
You'll also notice that Capt. Leslie Wong was also on the Zapata. So she's been that captain of the Cairo, the Akagi, and the Zapata all within a short amount of time.
------------------ [Bart's looking for his dog.] Groundskeeper Willy: Yeah, I bought your mutt - and I 'ate 'im! [Bart gasps.] I 'ate 'is little face, I 'ate 'is guts, and I 'ate the way 'e's always barkin'! So I gave 'im to the church. Bart: Ohhh, I see... you HATE him, so you gave him to the church. Groundskeeper Willy: Aye. I also 'ate the mess he left on me rug. [Bart stares.] Ya heard me!
posted
Where is the key to the casuality list? I am reading people's remarks as if they have the key.
This chart raises a question. Which has greater canonicity within an episode, the dialogue or the visual display?
Another question. Are the script writers and the art department working together or separate? And is the art department having separate departments which work together or work separate? This is the second instance in recent Trek where the visual information doesn't match with the dialogue or other visual information. The first is the issue of the USS Prometheus.
Some more question. In "Emissary", the Oberth Class starship has registry of NCC-19002. Many will identify this ship as USS Yosemite. Now, in Star Trek, a physical or CGI model is used for three purposes: 1.) to be the ship mentioned in dialogue or seen with visible name and registry and not contradicted by dialogue or script to be another ship, i.e. U.S.S. Voyager; 2.) to be a ship with known registry and name or characteristics representing another ship, i.e. the USS Defiant II is represented by the USS Defiant I (rf. "What You Leave Behind"); or 3.) to be a ship used as filler for a scene. The scene in "Emissary" where the Oberth Class starship is seen docking with DS9 has a clearly visible registry. Logically, I could argue that this is the USS Yosemite NCC-19002, meeting the criteria for the first purpose. However, the encyclopedia suggested that the ship is the USS Cochrane NCC-59318. This would meet the criteria for the second purpose. Let's resolve this please. For those who have the script for "Emissary" handy, is the Oberth Class starship referred to by name and what is that name?
Another thought-an argument against the Oberth Class starship being used in combat. Ever since TOS, the fans have seen a development in technology by the Starfleet to enhance the defensive and offensive capabilities of their starships. These developments have been for the most part reserved to the frontier ships, i.e. Constitution, Galaxy, and Defiant Classes. Advances have included ablative armor, q. torpodoes, and stronger shields. This would indicate a strong desire by Starfleet to preserve lives and minimize casualities. Why would a space organization that values life use lightly shielded and largely unarmed science ships in battle? The only possible answer I could think of is that the Oberth Class starships would be used as freighters, like the USS Biko. How much cargo could the Oberth Class starships carry and would the amount justify use in a combat situation? Another possible answer for the Oberths. The crews of these science ships were transferred to ships used in combat and kept at those posts until war's end. By that time, the crews were transferred back to their posts aboard the Oberths or given assignments aboard newer science ships.
posted
I had a feeling that if the starships are recycled, than perhaps the starbases are recycled as well. Yep. I checked Joe Creighton's list of locations. I found the following information- Starbase 129 mentioned in "Parallels", TNG Starbase 153 mentioned in "Emissary", TNG
posted
OK wasn't the Captain of the Repulse mentioned in "Unnatural Selection" when Picard was checking up on Pulaski?
Also Starbase 129 being mentioned in Parallels would make sense because that episode took place near the Cardassians/Bajorans and the Remmler array.
It would also make Forcas III where the Bat'leth competition was close by...
That would aslo fit with having a Klingon colony close- by in to the Cardassians/DS9 - in the "Alexander from the future episode" they went to a nearby Klingon colony.
Andrew Andrew
------------------ "I threw bitter tears at the ocean But all that came back was the tide..." 'I Will Not Forget You' Sarah McLachlan
Starbuck "Replicate some marmalade, Commander - helm control is toast!"
Member # 153
posted
Lot of in-jokes on there... names like Dorothy Duder (Doug Drexler's mom), Margaret Clark (Pocket Books' Trek editor), Terry Erdmann (I forger what he does but I think he works on DS9 - either stunts or effects if memory serves), Penny Juday (also a Paramount employee I think), and Alan Kobayashi (Okudagram artist - did the Enterprise-B consoles for GENERATIONS).
IMHO, it was never designed to be "seen"... not close-up anyway, because of the repeated names! A bit like the gags on the TNG panels and the DS9 promenade directory I think!!!
------------------ "Replicate some marmalade, Commander - helm control is toast!"
posted
One thing we should consider about this list: none of the starships is listed as losing more than 21 crew.
Now, we know canonically that some transports or supply ships have crews of just a couple of dozen, so theoretically at least USS Cochrane (assuming she is the same Oberth we saw in "Emissary") might have been lost with all hands. But the other ships aren't of known transport types (the Wyoming is a possible transport of Istanbul class, IIRC, but the Constantinople of that class had thousands of people aboard in "The Schizoid Man" so the crew was probably larger than just six).
The Zapata is another borderline case. We don't know what type of ship she is, so a crew of no more than 21 is a possibility. But the other ships are supposedly of known types, and these types are relatively large combat vessels, implying hundreds of crew.
So apparently none of these other ships was actually destroyed, since only a very small fraction of their crew was declared KIA or MIA, and almost all had WIAs to indicate survivors.
Or could there have been a bias to the chart? Perhaps the ships were lost with nearly all hands, but DS9 only received the names relevant to the people serving aboard that station. But who would make the judgement on a thing like that?
Printer-friendly view of this topic
