posted
Actually, the Raven is probably not an Istanbul. The Istanbul class Constantinople was described as a transport carrying over 2,000 colonists. That's twice the crew complement of a Galaxy class starship! The Istanbul class must be a huge ship, and I seriously doubt a ship like the Raven would be able to hold that many people (unless they were packed in like sardines).
------------------ Homer: "I'm not normally a praying man, but if you're up there, please save me, Superman!"
posted
I'd like to do a "maquis" on the Raven. If it could be done with the smaller raiders then this would be a nugget! I see it now! Dual torpies fore and aft, phaser-strips on nacelles, beefed-up hull, mmm...
------------------ Here lies a toppled god, His fall was not a small one. We did but build his pedestal, A narrow and a tall one.
posted
Interestingly, if we assume that the NAR numbers run separately from NCC numbers, then the difference between the ferry in ST6 (NAR-20000 or thereabouts) and the Raven is surprisingly small. In NCC-registered vessels, a difference of just 10000 numbers seldom indicates a major difference in construction and design philosophy.
Yet the ST6 ferry seems "basic" enough, almost TOS-like in its simplicity (save for the miniature Galaxy class nacelles in its belly!), while the Raven has many Voyageresque and Danubesque features: the design of her deflectors is only seen in the Voyager and her type 9 shuttles plus the Delta Flier, while the cargo hold arrangement, the cockpit windows and the overall design are very Danube-like.
Are NAR ships built in such low numbers in comparison to NCC ships that a 2280s-90s design and a 2350s one can get nearly matching NAR registries? Are NARs perhaps allocated so that every number from 1 to n is used, while NCCs regularly skip numbers?
One could use this as an argument against separate NCC and NAR numbers. Then again, one could also argue that a 32000-range registry cannot describe a ship with Intrepid and Danube features, which are usually associated with NCCs in the 72000+ range, so NCC and NAR numbers must be separate!
posted
Designer #1: Yeah, when I was helping with the design of the Danube runabouts I just wasn't feeling very creative, so I dug out the old Starship Design History and came across a class that caught my notice, the Raven. Took a few ideas from that, wow, did the esign team take off at that.
Designer #2: Hey, I did the same thing when I was design the Intrepid class, from the same Raven class no less.
------------------ Well, it's done, yes, the deed is done.
posted
Here's a list of all the NAR ships I have on my list: SS Nenebek NAR-2066 SS Vico NAR-18834 Unknown name NAR-25820 (the shuttle from Star Trek VI) SS Raven NAR-32450
Now, the Nenebek was a small shuttle used on TNG, and she did look very old, but if NAR and NCC registries matched up, that's around the time of Excelsior in the 2290s. It is possible that the Nenebek was in use from the 2290s to the 2360s, seeing as how old and ratty she looked. Didn't her control panels also use movie era design?
SS Vico, an Oberth class starship used in TNG, which we couldn't tell how old she was because she was destroyed. I believe she had TNG-era consoles all over, making it possible she was launched sometime around 2340 - 2360, or that she was merely refitted.
The Sydney-style shuttle used in Star Trek VI seems to be the one that puts the whole kink in things. If NAR registries were seperate from NCC registries, then the shuttle would be launched around 2290, the Vico sometime after that, and the Nenebek's launch would be pushed back into the TOS era. But, we only saw that shuttle for a few seconds. The only way we know that shuttle is from the picture of it with the registry number clearly painted across it. Now, my theory is, that picture of the shuttle is from "Trials and Tribble-ations". The shuttle didn't have nacelles in that episode, did it? Even though the shuttle has the old UFP logo, it's possible to explain it as just an old shuttle that the Federation gave to the Temporal Authorities just as their own personal ship to go wherever they wanted and they just left the logo on it. Now, the shuttle in Star Trek VI would be labelled as SD-103, as she was called to by the dock master in flight. SD-103 is similar to how shuttles are registered on starships, as NCC-1701/7 or something along those lines. This signifies that the shuttle isn't its own indepedent vessel, that it belongs to Spacedock, and that this is shuttle #103 that belongs to Spacedock (which is what SD would stand for). Another way the registry could be read is SD-1/03, signifying that this is Spacedock 1 (the DS9 Tech Manual refers to it as Spacedock 1), and this is shuttle #3 for Spacedock 1.
As for Raven, all we know is that she could come at any time after all these other ships. The only problem is, again, the computer consoles are modern (in fact, more modern then Voyager's, which is a big mistake). Therefore she must have been refit too.
So, here's my thinking: 2290s - SS Nenebek NAR-2066 is launched 2293 - SD-103 or SD-1/03 transports Kirk and co. to Spacedock 2310s - USS Vico NCC-18834 is launched 2320s - NCC-25820 is launched, later given to Federation Temporal Authorities and given NAR registry 2330s - Freighter USS Raven NCC-32450 is launched 2350s - USS Vico and USS Raven both transfered to civilian status after refit, given NAR registries.
Does that work, or did that make no sense whatsoever?
------------------ 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!"
posted
Well, yeah, we've seen a USS Nash NCC-2010-B labeled on a model, but we don't know when that picture was taken. It was merely assumed by some that the Nash was the ship in "Trials and Tribble-ations".
Maybe it was USS Nash NCC-25820 (since they obviously couldn't use NCC-2010-B), later changed to SS Nash NAR-25820?
I'm really going out on a limb here...
------------------ 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!"
posted
Or you could just go by the numerals like I did, and forgo all this NCC/NAR stuff.
In a similar vein, if you go by the numerals with the "Curry" (the Excelsior/Constitution kitbash from DS9, you might find something surprising. The Curry's rego is NCC-45617. The two conjectural classes with the closest regos are the Rennaissance (45XXX) and the Mediterranean (43XXX). This is also within the realm of many Excelsiors having a 42XXX registry. The design doesn't really match the description of the Rennaissance class Aries in "The Icarus Factor", that of a small scout ship. However, it does match the description of the Mediterranean class Lalo, which was a Federation/Starfleet freighter. It does look like a freighter-like version of the Excelsior. This could also mean that, going by similar Excelsior-family designs, the Centaur could be of the Rennaissance class. Timo's statement about classes tending not to differ within 10000 regos also bears this out. But again, of course, this is just my opinion. I'm just going by screen and official source evidence here, but I would rather have Bernd's ASDB designs for those classes ------------------ Homer: "I'm not normally a praying man, but if you're up there, please save me, Superman!"
[This message has been edited by Dukhat (edited December 12, 2000).]
posted
Don't forget the ship on the list from "Up The Long Ladder". It was launched in the 2100's and had a registry of NAR-9678 or something thereabouts.
------------------ ayr.virtualave.net "C'est la nuit blanche/let's go out all night" -11:30, La Nuit Blanche
posted
The NAR prefix is first introduced by the new United Nations before 2079 and is used by Earth ships to at least 2123. Two ships are known to use this prefix: a.) NAR-7678 S.S. Mariposa b.) NAR-18834 S.S. Seattle.
Between 2123 and 2293, the next recorded instance of the NAR prefix, the NAR prefix seems to have been retired and reinstituted by the agency or agencies in charge of registries. Ships of this second period include: a.) NAR-2066 Nenebek b.) NAR-18834 S.S. Vico c.) NAR-25820 d.) NAR-32450 S.S. Raven.
The technological foundations and registries used by these later ships can be argued to indicate this second period.
NAR-2066 Nenebek uses technology employed by starships in the last two decades of the 2200's.
NAR-18834 S.S. Vico is given the registry of another ship, the S.S. Seattle. The S.S. Seattle, of an unknown class, is given the registry NAR-18834 by the United Nations before 2079.
If the next series is set before Star Trek, the first series, will we see additional examples of ships bearing the NAR- prefix? This is conceivable.
Based on limited information, I place the registrie prefixes in this order: NAR- mid 2000 to mid 2100 NCC- 2161 to present NFT- mid 2200's NX- late 2200's to present NAR- (second phase) late 2200's to present NDT- late 2200's to present NCD- 2300's to present NGL- 2300's to present NSP- 2300's to present BDR- mid 2300's to present YLT- mid 2300's to present NCV- 2400's to 2900's
------------------
takeoffs are optional; landings are mandatorya
[This message has been edited by targetemployee (edited December 13, 2000).]
Shik
Starship database: completed; History of Starfleet: done; website: probably never
Member # 343
posted
Here's another thought: what if numbers are "purchased" en masse by corporations, foundations, etc. & are then reused & reassigned like transferring license plates to a new car? This could allow for the Seattle & the Vico to have the same number; indeed, the Seattle & Vico may be the same ship--renaming is not uncommon (esepcially in the former Soviet bloc).
------------------ "Omigod. Singing meat. This is altogether too much."
Printer-friendly view of this topic
