Topic: constitution class question

[Pestalence_XC]

Hull Registries were never in order from 1700 up... Here is the listing as officiated by Canon onscreen and cross confirmation by Paramount where we neve got to see the actual ship.. these are the only ones confirmed to be a Starship Class vessel..

U.S.S. Constellation NCC-1017 TOS "The Doomsday Machine"

U.S.S. Constitution NCC-1700 (identified by wall status display) TOS "Court Martial", Seen on Computer display TNG "DataLore", Seen on Computer display Star Trek III: The Search for Spock, TOS "Space Seed" (Medical Display panel in the infirmiry).

U.S.S. Defiant NCC-1764 TOS "The Tholian Web"

U.S.S. Enterprise NCC-1701 TOS All Episodes

U.S.S. Essex NCC-1697 (identified by wall status display) TOS "Court Martial" Crossed with Paramount Studios

U.S.S. Excalibur NCC-1664 TOS "The Ultimate Computer", (identified by wall status display) TOS "Court Martial"

U.S.S. Excelsior NCC-1718 (identified by wall status display) TOS "Court Martial" Crossed with Paramount Studios

U.S.S. Exeter NCC-1672 TOS "The Omega Glory", (identified by wall status display) TOS "Court Martial"

U.S.S. Farragut NCC-1647 TOS "Obsession"

U.S.S. Hood NCC-1703 TOS "The Ultimate Computer", (identified by wall status display) TOS "Court Martial"

U.S.S. Intrepid NCC-1631 TOS "Court Martial", TOS "The Immunity Syndrome"

U.S.S. Kongo NCC-1710 Star Trek VI: The Undiscovered Country (Identified on a computer display panel and crossed with Paramount Studios).

U.S.S. Lexington NCC-1709 TOS "The Ultimate Computer", (identified by wall status display) TOS "Court Martial", DS9 "Trials and Tribble-ations"

U.S.S. Potemkin NCC-1657 TOS "The Ultimate Computer", TOS "Turnabout Intruder"

U.S.S. Republic NCC-1371 (identified by wall status display) TOS "Court Martial" Crossed with Paramount Studios

U.S.S. Yorktown NCC-1717 TOS "Obsession"

Given this listing, It is easy to extrapolate that the ships were registered in build order of all ships and not just ship class... which means according to this listing, the U.S.S. Republic was built years before the Constitution...

As such, how could the class of ship be Constitution off of Design build when several ships have pre-1700 registries....

Again in TOS the ships were classed by Duty Roll and not First of Line.. as such the TOS Enterprise Hull Design is Starship Class for her Duty roll... in St V, she was classed as a Constitution Class under the hull registry of NCC-1701-A.. She had already gone through Enterprise Class (referenced TWOK).. so the first Constitution Class was the hull desigh with the onboard equipment matching that of the NCC-1701-A.. not the NCC-1701 designs (First Starship Class, then Enterprise Class).. the NCC-1700 Constitution was the first assigned to the 5 year deep sapce mission, as such, the Starship Class was honorarialy nicknamed Constitution Class.. however it is not the True class name.

[Pestalence_XC]

Check out startrek.com for registries based on the show and manuals. The ship class numbers were not confined to the 1700s and that idea of them all being 17-something should be eliminated. In the TOS episode court martial, there is a graphic on the wall that is somewhat ledgible showing the varied numbers of the"starships" Including the republic and Intrepid below.

At any rate, from the paramount liscenced sources:


1672- Exeter

When the hell did the Exeter become NCC-1672?!?!?!?

The USS Exeter will always be NCC-1706 to me.

Screw the inconsistencies of Paramount 'canon'.

Not to mention that some of these ships are now commisioned BEFORE the lead ship of the class?!?!?!?

U.S.S. Exeter NCC-1672 TOS "The Omega Glory", (identified by wall status display) TOS "Court Martial"

The canon was never changed.. just the book you got the registry from was wrong.

[Chris Johnson]

Pest, your definition of canon never truely specified if Enterprise was the first to return from a five-year mission or if she was the only of the "original twelve" Constitution-class Starships to survive in a five-year mission between 2264 and 2269.  We're uncertain of her true age other than possibly the early-2250s (if we make sense of the years)... Your definition of canon also never specified what the registry numbers of the starships truely belong to in "Court Martial" [TOS].  You're using non-canon references and tie-ins as to what the registry numbers of other Constitution-class Starships are.  We're uncertain if all of those ships on that chart are really Constitution-class Starships (other than three or four).

Here's the aforementioned chart:


Unless that chart had names beside the registry numbers, we can only identify a few ships: Mainly the Enterprise, Constitution, and Constellation.  We've seen the Constellation and her registry number, the Constitution from schematics seen on-screen, and the Enterprise frequently-seen on-screen in TOS and the first three movies.

Also, consider what Bearslayer stated:

Screw the inconsistencies of Paramount 'canon'.

Not to mention that some of these ships are now commisioned BEFORE the lead ship of the class?!?!?!?

I believe this implies that, like myself, Bearslayer doesn't subscribe to your canon nor Paramount's canon. *shrug* Despite the fact that we're in this conversation about canon.

[FPF-Wanderer]

From EAS...

"The registry of the class ship U.S.S. Constitution was NCC-1700, according to a computer monitor in TOS: "Space Seed" and it should be the lowest of the class if registries are chronological. The U.S.S. Constellation, however, was seen on screen as a Constitution-class ship with the lower registry NCC-1017. The "Operation Retrieve" chart in the extended version of "Star Trek VI" shows the U.S.S. Eagle NCC-956, another Constitution-class ship according to the Encyclopedia. Furthermore, the Encyclopedia lists the following five Constitution-class ships whose registries are apparently too low: U.S.S. Essex NCC-1697, U.S.S. Excalibur NCC-1664, U.S.S. Exeter NCC-1672, U.S.S. Potemkin NCC-1657, U.S.S. Republic NCC-1371. The latter ships were taken from the wall display in TOS: "Court Martial" and the ship list in Stephen Whitfield, The Making of Star Trek. Their names, registries and classes were never seen together. Anyway, at least the problem of the Constellation registry remains, and there are several approaches to explain it.

• 1. Some theories suggest that several of the ships were originally of a different, older class and later converted to Constitutions. Read about one of them, the conjectural Declaration class, on Joshua Bell's website.
• 2. The class name might change with each upgrade of the class, so the U.S.S. Constitution could have been the first ship of a later, improved batch of the class which was named after her. The theory is popular among fans who also use to call the Constitution upgrade of 2271 "Enterprise class".
• 3. There is no evidence that registries are assigned strictly chronologically. Maybe the Constitution class ships with lower registries were just given numbers which were unoccupied at the time they were commissioned. It is also possible that new ships were given the same names and registries as destroyed or retired vessels. Thus, the U.S.S. Constellation NCC-1017 might replace a ship of a different class, but with the same name and registry.
• 4. The U.S.S. Constitution NCC-1700 was not the class ship of the Constitution class. The actual namesake was an earlier ship of the same name and a registry below NCC-956 which had been destroyed some time prior to 2245, when probably both the NCC-1700 and NCC-1701 were commissioned.

Theory #1 is quite complicated, since it extends a simple registry problem to a matter of ship designs. It would raise the problem that the basic construction of the Constitution and eventually the Miranda likewise would be much older, and therefore aggravate the problems of ship building periods. There is no reason to refute the theory, though. The idea #2 of changing class names is popular in fandom, but there is no evidence for it in canon Trek. It is still another question why the class name that should have been "Constitution class" actually seemed to be "Starship class" during the 2260's. There are some more facts to support theory #3 that registries are not always chronological, but a definite proof is missing. Theory #4 is quite simple and obvious, but like theory #1 it raises the problem of the Constitution class being much older. Considering that the upgraded class might have been still around as late as 2366, everything should be done to render the basic class as new as possible."[/i]

...and from the Encyclopedia itself...

"About the starship chart:  This is a compilation of (almost) all the Federation starships seen or mentioned in the Star Trek episodes and movies.  As such, this is not a definitive list of all of Starfleet's ships, merely a list of the ships that have been on the show in one form or another.  May of the class designations and registry numbers are somewhat conjectural, although most of them have been used in various background charts and readouts (such as Starfleet status displays seen in the Enterprise-D observation lounge, the "Operation Retrieve" chart in Star Trek VI, Commodore Stone's office chart in "Court Martial" [TOS], and the ship listings in bridge graphic displays on the Enterprise-A, Enterprise-C, and Enterprise-D).

...personally, I don't believe in "canon"...

-Wanderer

[Pestalence_XC]

OK.. let me ask this then..

After 3 years of TOS.. 78 episodes plus "The Cage" where the Dedication Plaque was on the set stating "Starship Class Spaceship" is all of a sudden NON CANON because of 1 TNG episode and an unaired episode of Enterprise????

Man, Because 1 person makes a book and people forget what is shown on screen for 3 years, all this carp happens.

[Age]

  I guess SFB got it right right.Will I earn good Karma for this I wonder maybe not.Then agian I would say we hijacked Dons thread.

[FPF-Tobin Dax]

Check out startrek.com for registries based on the show and manuals. The ship class numbers were not confined to the 1700s and that idea of them all being 17-something should be eliminated. In the TOS episode court martial, there is a graphic on the wall that is somewhat ledgible showing the varied numbers of the"starships" Including the republic and Intrepid below.

At any rate, from the paramount liscenced sources:


1672- Exeter

When the hell did the Exeter become NCC-1672?!?!?!?

The USS Exeter will always be NCC-1706 to me.

Screw the inconsistencies of Paramount 'canon'.

Not to mention that some of these ships are now commisioned BEFORE the lead ship of the class?!?!?!?

SFB having it's own take doesn't make it official at all...and I'll give you +1 Karma anyway Age.  thanks for wading in Wanderer, I enjoyed  reading your post and appreciate your effort and thoughts. Perhaps with the 4 theories we should put this baby to sleep. Hey Karma for all.

[Chris Johnson]

OK.. let me ask this then..

After 3 years of TOS.. 78 episodes plus "The Cage" where the Dedication Plaque was on the set stating "Starship Class Spaceship" is all of a sudden NON CANON because of 1 TNG episode and an unaired episode of Enterprise????

Man, Because 1 person makes a book and people forget what is shown on screen for 3 years, all this carp happens.

Here's a bit of how I view it:

I guess TNG sort-of reimagined the Trek universe in its own way when Gene striked lightning with Trek a second time.  Probably not everything in TOS we saw happened, etc.  Sort-of like a less-drastic way of changing a sci-fi universe, compared to the very-drastic changes of BSG with the new series.  Considering that I'm slightly older than TNG and grew up with it, my ideal trek universe revolves around the majority of TNG canon, meaning I don't care for the plaque that identifies the Enterprise (no bloody A, B, C, or D) a "Starship-class Starship" when it became more-established that a starship class would be named after the first prototype.  Because I was into TNG more as a kid, it grew to me that the original Enterprise (fun as she may seem in TOS) is a Constitution-class Starship.  So forgive me for being young and seeing things differently, Pest.
I tend to think that TOS at the time could be percieved that, as its own sci-fi universe, was taking "baby steps" from concepts of types of starships, how they operate and travel and combat, etc.  From pulse-like proximity phasers to "United Star Ship" to Starship-class to UESPA to hyper drives ("The Cage" [TOS]) to intentional time-traveling ("Assignment: Earth" [TOS]), it's just original unrevised concepts of what it became today in many aspects viewed from fans.

With that said, I stress, stress, stress, stress to you Pest, to read the quote on my signature and follow the link.  I just think that at times you seem to press your idea of Trek on people as if it was the only official Trek or what not.  Of course, I probably did so myself, but is a mistake we shouldn't repeat if we did so.  Everyone has their ideal Trek universe, and we've expressed our own ideal ST universes once again.  I don't know a whole lot on canon anyhow, and I don't care much for it, so I wonder why I continued in discussing it. *sigh*

[Capt_Bearslayer_XC]

Umm... my post had nothing to do with SFB... FASA and the books... oh... and the Exeter guys making TOS episodes too...

[Chris Johnson]

Speaking of that, Bearslayer, the first Starship Exeter episode was sort-of cheesy, in my opinion.  But nice though.  I await their second episode of Starship Exeter, but wished they wouldn't release it one part at a time, feeling as if they should've pushed back the release date from a week after my birthday to next month.  But oh well, you can't rush art!  But I digress... Even though I do so to raise everyone's spirits after some silly debate Pest, I, and a couple others have participated in when posting on this thread.

[Pestalence_XC]

If you noticed in my first posting in this thread, I stated that anything that I post is conjectural.. I go by what Gene stated as canon should be.. as such UESPA was never defigned completely.. It may hyave been a branch of Starfleet.. and if so, then it is still in line with canon...

Anyhow, I stated logically, as I am an avid TOS fan, the best way to depict why there are ships prior to NCC-1700 and why the Constitution name was given as a nickname to the Starship Class, why the ship was a Starship Class because of her duty roll since they did not name after first of Line until TMP, and so forth...

Again it is conjectural.. IE not canon.. but what I posted is logical if you stick with what was shown only on the screen in the order in which it was released ignoring errors made to promote ratings or to ease a plot.

[Don Karnage]

Thank You for all your respond (don't shoot each other for that) 


in a way there no way to know what class they are realy and what name goes with what ship, beside enterprise 1701, constellation 1017, the republic 1371 is a unknow class, kirk serve aboard as a ensigne but he never says what class it was, so we only know what we have see on the original episode, the movies, tng,ds9,voyager are base on startrek, so all we know is that the rest is just what we want it to be, yes there books, there sfb and fasa but there not what we would call "cannon" since the consider the reilant as a reliant class, the reliant is a miranda class, anyway we just have to think that the first constitution was not the 1700 and was never build, the gave it the number 1700 and built it later for some unknow reason, that would explain the lower number, or we can say it was another class and the became constitution class after a refit after the constitution was build like the enterprise 1701 was a enterprise class after the refit, so one way or another no one know about it beside is creator gen rodenbery, unless he ever wright anything about that.

it might have ben the "asia class" that was refit as a constitution class ???

[CaptJosh]

If you want some really bad acting Find the Star Trek: Hidden Frontier fan series online. The "first seaon" acting of all the cast isn't too good, but looks great in comparison to the acting of the guy playing the captain of the Galaxy Class Dreadnought Excelsior.