posted
A quickie to Mike about the registry numbers on the recognition chart:
Where? How? When? Who? Why?
That is, where are NCC-1427 and NCC-1430 specified, and how? Are they the only ships of that class to remain in service at the time? Does each class have a list of registries attached? What registries are listed for, say, the Constitutions?
posted
The table at the bottom of the chart lists "Navigational Contact Code Numbers Active:", but there's no notation as to where the info comes from. They are:
The registries listed for the previously known ships pretty much match the status given in the various source documents (SOSF, Starship Design, the Federation Reference Series, etc.). However, the list does contain a few quirks:
Although the uprated section of the Enterprise listing is supposed to be post TVH, the 1701 registry lacks the "-A".
The class listing for the Daring class corvettes adds up to 18 ships, but that doesn't agree with the corvette numbers given in the SOSF fleet strength chart (if you factor in the other corvette classes listed in the book and their given registries).
The listing for both Federation classes follows the conceit from the Starship Design magazine that only 12 dreadnoughts were built, although we heard the Entente's name and registry in the Epsilon IX radio chatter.
-------------------- The difference between genius and idiocy? Genius has its limits.
Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged
Although doesn't the list indicate thirteen Federations, not twelve?
If we're assumed to "realize" that there never was a NCC-2105, then all bets are off. We could then say that there were fifteen Darings, as long as we "realize" NCCs 2397, 2399 and 2492 were never built, or were sold to Ktarians at completion, or stolen by Andorian rebels, or whatever.
...Which makes no sense considering how carefully missing individuals of the Avenger family are indicated.
In any case, I'm quite happy with this chart, and intend to make it part of my personal quasisemipseudocanon. With some necessary modifications, of course.
posted
Speaking of the fleet strength chart, I've had hell of a time trying to fit in the known classes in a pseudo-logical manner. Any idea how and why Guenther came up with the Ashanti class heavy cruisers, in a book supposedly listing all the relevant heavy cruisers (plus some pretty irrelevant ones)? I've half decided to consider them a subclass of Baton Rouges or something, with the Nordenskjolds another long-lived subclass. Such antiquities wouldn't be listed alongside the Constitution derivatives, even if they were nominally in "active" service.
The failure to show the Constellation class here is easily excused. Being "reconaissance" cruisers, they'd be so top secret that not even Calon Riel would have heard of them by 2291... Official reports would have the mysterious NX-1974 undergoing "pre-delivery tests" forever and then some.
Most of the "unreal" classes in the building program chart are easy to dismiss by saying that Khitomer treaty cut production in 2293. I'd have liked to dismiss the ugly Menagha/Mitannic battlecruisers the same way, but now I have to accept multiple ships of each class... Oh, well.
Those "exploration cruiser" things with five-digit registries are annoying. Perhaps those are NAR regos (Guenther doesn't give traditional prefices, after all)? And perhaps "exploration cruiser" is similar to "auxiliary cruiser" - a Sydney, an Independence or an Antares fitted with some sensors and dubbed a cruiser? It would be really, really annoying to have to accept these as vaguely Tikopai-type ships.
On the same vein, the perimeter action ships with the overlapping NCCs could have non-NCC regos. At least until I get my hands on SotSF II...
capped
I WAS IN THE FUTURE, IT WAS TOO LATE TO RSVP
Member # 709
posted
hey guys, i have a few more pics, but my USB drivers are doubled up, and i've to wait a few days before i can reboot and get the camera loaded.. any specific questions i can tel lyou until then (now that ive got the chart hanging in my new room.. thanks eBay!)
Registered: Sep 2001
| IP: Logged
quote:Originally posted by Timo: Although doesn't the list indicate thirteen Federations, not twelve?
If we're assumed to "realize" that there never was a NCC-2105,
Look again Timo. NCC-2105 is the class ship of the Balson class command cruisers.
I assume that the USS Balson was started as a Dreadnought and changed to a command cruiser during construction. Hence the out of sequence rehistry.
-------------------- "My theories appal you, my heresies outrage you, I never answer letters and you don't like my tie." - The Doctor
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
quote:Originally posted by Woodside Kid: Renner/Daring: NCC 3250-3270; (Daring) 2394-2411
The class listing for the Daring class corvettes adds up to 18 ships, but that doesn't agree with the corvette numbers given in the SOSF fleet strength chart (if you factor in the other corvette classes listed in the book and their given registries).
Only if you assume that the Lautaro class fills all the registries from the given class ship (NCC-3317) through to the maximum possible (NCC-3339, one less than the class ship of the Riga class). There's no reason why that assumption has to be true. SotSF has many cases of classes being cut short before all the originally planned vessels were built.
BTW the design and names of the Renner and Daring classes come from the USS Renner Booklet of General Plans. This was published by Miami Naval Yards (which seems to be Ralph Gonzalez, hence his credit in the acknowledgements on the big chart). The only difference is that they are called Destroyer Escorts rather than Corvettes.
-------------------- "My theories appal you, my heresies outrage you, I never answer letters and you don't like my tie." - The Doctor
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
quote:Originally posted by Harry: Well... I have to be in the mood for these things. I've started work on refit Connie schematics as a basis for refit kitbashes, but it's a lot more complicated than the simple TOS shapes. I've already done the Coronado. I guess I could do the Detroyat quite quickly if I feel like it
Oh, I remember the Coronado... I still remember that overblown analysis I did of its available flight deck space in an attempt to prove that it's an illogical design.
I would *love* to see a good three-view set of Detroyat Class plans! The only ones I've ever seen online are the pitiful B&W ones on the Starship Schematics Database. The Detroyat is one of the few pre-TNG fandom designs that I honestly and truly love.
As for "in the mood"... I understand perfectly. Not demanding a rush here, just curious since it's been a few months.
-------------------- “Those people who think they know everything are a great annoyance to those of us who do.” — Isaac Asimov Star Trek Minutiae | Memory Alpha
Registered: Nov 2000
| IP: Logged
capped
I WAS IN THE FUTURE, IT WAS TOO LATE TO RSVP
Member # 709
posted
the Balson is a technical error, on the chart its listed as active both as a Balson-class ship and also as a Federation uprated ship. unless it has a removable nacelle.
BTW, has anyone considered the Coronado might have a diagonal warp core, running from the impulse deck down the spine of the connecting dorsal to a point in the secondary hull halfway between the flight decks? this would also be accessible to the nacelle junction. oh well.
Registered: Sep 2001
| IP: Logged
posted
Vertical reactor in the saucer, PTCs to through the neck, the ceiling (or sides) of the hangar, and into the nacelles. You could even use stock Saladin/Hermes saucer hulls (except they don't have those Coronado impulse (?) gizmos).
And damn you, MMoM, you've made me want to draw that Detroyat now!
Edit: I meant MinutiaeMan. You crazy people with all your funky nicknames. It makes my head spin.
[ May 15, 2003, 12:58 AM: Message edited by: Harry ]
posted
I don't believe it. I've been confused with a monkey!
-------------------- “Those people who think they know everything are a great annoyance to those of us who do.” — Isaac Asimov Star Trek Minutiae | Memory Alpha
Registered: Nov 2000
| IP: Logged
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic