Topic: Question for debate: TOS Starship Excalibur (Read 12447 times)

Rat Boy · « **on:** November 11, 2004, 02:08:18 pm »

Excalibur has become a rather common named in Trek, both on screen and in fandom. It's first appearance was as a sister to the original Enteprise in the episode "The Ultimate Computer," where it was fired upon and lost its entire crew. The last we saw of it was of a stock footage shot of the wrecked U.S.S. Constellation from "The Doomsday Machine." Now, some sources state that the Excalibur was destroyed, others state that it was just heavily damaged. Is there a big consensus on its fate? Is there one source that says that it was destroyed or just rendered crewless?

Don Karnage · « **Reply #1 on:** November 12, 2004, 08:42:19 am »

m not sure what ship crew was dead after the computer fire on them, m still downloading the fist season of tos soi can't answer to that yet but someone else have the tos dvd and can answer to that question.

Lieutenant_Q · « **Reply #2 on:** November 12, 2004, 12:14:17 pm »

Well, I can tell you how I view the incident.

The Excalibur was wrecked, not destroyed. Hence Chekov's line "The Excalibur...looks dead sir."

Now Internal politics of the Federation, since Roddenberry made the parrallel to the United States, would not tolerate the loss of a multi-billion (trillion) credit Starship to a "Wargame". Therefore, the entire Incident would be covered up with a thick layer of red tape, and the Excailbur would be towed to a classified facility to recieve a refit. Possibly when the CC refit was introduced. The dead crew, on all ships, but mostly on the Lexington and the Excailbur, would be shifted around to other borders, where they will officially "die" in a raid, or a border skirmish with the said enemy. Also, since the Lexington was also shot up during the battle, it would probably be the first ship to recieve the CC refit, since there was a lot less work to be done on the Lexington than there was on the Excalibur.

That's my take, I think it explains why the 1703 Lexington and 1705 Excalibur are CCs but why 1707 Hood and 1711 Potemkin are only CAs in SFC I.

Rat Boy · « **Reply #3 on:** November 12, 2004, 02:36:30 pm »

Actually, I'm inclined to believe that the Excalibur was drydocked to repair its bare skeleton and painstakingly rebuilt to the specs of the refit Consitution-class. Given the damage it took in "The Ultimate Computer," it would take a helluva lot longer to refit than the Enterprise.

Lieutenant_Q · « **Reply #4 on:** November 12, 2004, 03:22:35 pm »

Very True...but four years on the side line? (assuming that Enterprise actually finshed her Five-year mission) The Constitution-refit seen in TMP was something new, although Enterprise wasn't the first one completed, she was the first one in which her Warp Drive worked. And that refit took anywhere from 18 months to three years. (depending on the source) Excalibur was wrecked in the second season. (second year of Enterprise's (third five year mission (April, Pike, Kirk)))

I guess the biggest question, is where does "Errand of Mercy" fall into the picture, if "The Ultimate Computer" occurs before, then there is no way Excalibur would be allowed to be sidelined that long, if it occurs afterwards, the enforced peace with the Klingons may prompt Starfleet to doing it, to cut costs.

Rat Boy · « **Reply #5 on:** November 12, 2004, 03:52:01 pm »

Quote from: Lieutenant_Q on November 12, 2004, 03:22:35 pm

Very True...but four years on the side line?

"The Ultimate Computer" was in 2268, TMP was in 2271. Like I said, if the ship is that bad off, it'd take longer than 18 months to refit, if Starfleet didn't spontaneously decide to switch from a repair job to a full rebuild part of the way through.

Don Karnage · « **Reply #6 on:** November 13, 2004, 08:40:34 am »

so in startrek 4 when the crew get the brand new enterprise-A, what ship did the take? the seem to kinda have rush into making it or converting it to the tmp technologies since scotty says the ship was build by monkey because everything in the ship needed adjustment, and how long the crew of the enterprise was on Vulcan and why didn't the federation ask the Vulcan to send kirk and is crew back to heart for the trial?, how long have the Ben working on the new enterprise if the use and old constitution ship to refit it and be ready for kirk?, the original ship take 18 month to refit so kirk have not stay 18 month on Vulcan so the did plan ahead on refitting the ship and where was it? in st3 the excelsior was at the base but there was not other ship (visible) in the drydock so where is this new constitution class coming from? ??? ???

Rat Boy · « **Reply #7 on:** November 13, 2004, 11:19:59 am »

Roddenberry said the Yorktown even though there wasn't anything said on-camera about it, so most people just assume Yorktown.

Don Karnage · « **Reply #8 on:** November 13, 2004, 05:03:46 pm »

so its the Yorktown but that doesn't explain what the where doing with the ship and for who it was and why did the rush to finish it, the can give it to kirk like thewhere planing it for a long time, at the end of st4 kirk was retrograded to captain and give the command of a starship (the enterprise-A), did the decide to give kirk a new ship after he stolen the Enterprise or during the trial or what?, since the give the commission the Enterprise-A that mean it was decide for a long time, must take a certain time to rename a ship, at least a few days.

Rat Boy · « **Reply #9 on:** November 13, 2004, 05:06:10 pm »

No one knows how much time passed between the Probe's departure, Kirk's trial, and the launch of the Enterprise-A. It could have been several months for all we know.

Don Karnage · « **Reply #10 on:** November 14, 2004, 06:17:32 pm »

but the must have decide to refit a old constitution for how long? a few year before the excelsior class MK-II (enterprise-B) is ready it seem a wast of resource to do that.

The_Joker · « **Reply #11 on:** November 14, 2004, 06:47:13 pm »

Quote

"The Ultimate Computer" was in 2268, TMP was in 2271. Like I said, if the ship is that bad off, it'd take longer than 18 months to refit, if Starfleet didn't spontaneously decide to switch from a repair job to a full rebuild part of the way through.

How do you figure this? "The Ultimate Computer was Episode #53, season 2 of TOS(Stardate 4729.4). Considering there were at the very least 2 years and one day left of the five year mission, and Scotty states that the Enterprise refit took 18 months in TMP, it would be highly unlikely these events were only 3 years apart.

Also, along those lines, Khan states in STII:TWOK that Kirk marooned him fifteen years earlier. Since "Space Seed was during the first year of the original five year mission, the above timeline would imply that there were 11 years between TMP and TWOK. I find that highly unlikely.

Rat Boy · « **Reply #12 on:** November 14, 2004, 06:58:58 pm »

Quote from: The_Joker on November 14, 2004, 06:47:13 pm

How do you figure this? "The Ultimate Computer was Episode #53, season 2 of TOS(Stardate 4729.4). Considering there were at the very least 2 years and one day left of the five year mission, and Scotty states that the Enterprise refit took 18 months in TMP, it would be highly unlikely these events were only 3 years apart.

I go by the official chronology's figure, which placed "The Ultimate Computer" (TOS seasons are split along the timeline like the show over a TV season) in 2268, roughly at the beginning of the calendar year. The five year mission ended in 2270, according to an episode of Voyager. If it ended early in 2270 and the film was in mid 2271, that would account for the 18 month figure.

Quote

Also, along those lines, Khan states in STII:TWOK that Kirk marooned him fifteen years earlier. Since "Space Seed was during the first year of the original five year mission, the above timeline would imply that there were 11 years between TMP and TWOK. I find that highly unlikely.

Correction, "Space Seed" occurred in year three of the first five year mission (2267). It may have been the first season of the show, but it was the third year. TMP occurred in 2271, TWOK in 2285, which would add several more years to your figure, but even though you may personally find it unlikely, but it's close to official as we have, since these are the numbers from Paramount. Khan's perception of time is slightly muddied, given the fact that Ceti Alpha V's orbit was drastically altered by the explosion of Ceti Alpha VI. If you have a problem with these figures, take it up with them.

Besides, Joker, we're talking about the Excalibur, not the Enterprise.

The_Joker · « **Reply #13 on:** November 14, 2004, 07:48:54 pm »

Sorry about that, I know the question was about the Excalibur, but I'll have to disagree with "Space Seed" being during the third year of the five year mission. The stardate of "Space Seed" was(will be?) 3141.9 and the stardate of "The Ultimate Computer" was 4729.4.

Back on topic, according to Star Trek.com,

http://www.startrek.com/startrek/view/library/ships/article/71892.html;jsessionid=4C08756BC35C5DD4392021871FEE752A

Quote

Consitution-class Federation starship, registry no. NCC-1664, commanded by Captian Harris. In 2268, the ship was destroyed and its entire crew killed during a disastrous war-game drill with Richard Daystrom's M-5 multitronic computer installed aboard the U.S.S. Enterprise.

Rat Boy · « **Reply #14 on:** November 14, 2004, 08:01:23 pm »

Quote from: The_Joker on November 14, 2004, 07:48:54 pm

but I'll have to disagree with "Space Seed" being during the third year of the five year mission.

Five year mission ended in 2270 according to canon, so five years before would be 2265. "Space Seed" was 2267. It's arguable if it was in year two or year three, but it certainly wasn't in year one.

Quote

Quote
Consitution-class Federation starship, registry no. NCC-1664, commanded by Captian Harris. In 2268, the ship was destroyed and its entire crew killed during a disastrous war-game drill with Richard Daystrom's M-5 multitronic computer installed aboard the U.S.S. Enterprise.

That disagrees with the on-screen evidence. That ship was intact after M-5 killed the crew.

The_Joker · « **Reply #15 on:** November 14, 2004, 08:25:29 pm »

I would count that off to perception. For instance, an insurance company my "total" a car after a wreck due to the cost of repair is greater than the worth of vehicle in they're view, for instance.

Rat Boy · « **Reply #16 on:** November 14, 2004, 08:33:36 pm »

It looked to be about the same level of damage that the Constellation took, since it was a re-use of stock footage. That ship was still operable and probably could have been repaired or rebuilt over time.

The_Joker · « **Reply #17 on:** November 14, 2004, 08:57:07 pm »

Most information I can find depicts the Excalibur as "Destroyed". Problem is, it doesn't exactly say what "destroyed" means....

Startrek.com is the officil Star Trek website listed at Paramount.com, so I'm going to lean toward destroyed and not crippled as the link I posted above says destroyed.

http://www.paramount.com/television/

Heh heh heh.....and just prove what a nerd I truly am, while "The Ultimate Computer" was the first appearance of the Excalibur, itself, it wasn't the first mention. The Excalibur is depicted in a picture on the wall of Commodore Stone's office in "Court Martial".

Rat Boy · « **Reply #18 on:** November 14, 2004, 09:09:52 pm »

That was of the 1664 reg number. Members of the art department assigned all the numbers from Stone's office (which had no names) to the named Consitution-class vessels. Fairly random and arbitrary affair, but it's a step closer to canon than some other sources. Most non-canon sources over the years, including the Franz Joseph book, doesn't list the Excalibur as a total loss based on the dialogue from "The Ultimate Computer." My theory is that all 430 people on board died when M-5 attacked and the ship was reduced to a barely functional skeleton of its former self. It practically had to be rebuilt from scratch, which would have delayed its return to service, especially if Starfleet decided to convert it to a refit Consitution, for several years, since starships aren't built in a day. Plus, one would think that a ship that had lost all its crew would have a bit of a stigma on it, something that would convince officers to keep their distance from it. Heck, with 430 people dying on it rather violently, some people might be convinced that the old crew hasn't left, so to speak...

The_Joker · « **Reply #19 on:** November 14, 2004, 09:18:57 pm »

Sounds plausible to me. I'd personally call your description "destroyed" as it calls for a nearly complete rebuild. You're right about the stigma, also. Hadn't thought about that. I think if I were assigned to a ship where all hands had been lost in a violent manner, I'd almost volunteer for security detail on the Enterprise, instead, LOL.

Lieutenant_Q · « **Reply #20 on:** November 15, 2004, 12:11:13 am »

Quote from: DonKarnage on November 13, 2004, 05:03:46 pm

so its the Yorktown but that doesn't explain what the where doing with the ship and for who it was and why did the rush to finish it, the can give it to kirk like thewhere planing it for a long time, at the end of st4 kirk was retrograded to captain and give the command of a starship (the enterprise-A), did the decide to give kirk a new ship after he stolen the Enterprise or during the trial or what?, since the give the commission the Enterprise-A that mean it was decide for a long time, must take a certain time to rename a ship, at least a few days.

Ok...time for my take on this again.

The Yorktown was a ship that was caught by the whale probe in ST:IV. Cartwright had the Ops officer "Get me the Yorktown." They were attempting to create a Solar Sail, to keep the crew alive. Since Roddenberry hinted that the Yorktown is the Enterprise A, I would say they failed. And that the ship was so screwed up by the Whale probe, that they tried to rebuild most of the systems, and did a rush job so that Kirk would have a ship immediately after his court martial. Which accounts for Scotty's Monkey comment. Also, considering that they probably had to fix a considerable amount of equipment and buildings in San Francisco following the probe encounter, we cannot assume that a month or more did not pass before the Court-Martial.

Don Karnage · « **Reply #21 on:** November 16, 2004, 07:24:26 am »

so the Yorktown was damage by the probe, what about the Saratoga, it was not damage or don't seem to have Ben damage that much by the probe?, why a constitution class would have Ben damage that much and a starbase did not get much or no damage by the probe since after it left the power return to normal?

Lieutenant_Q · « **Reply #22 on:** November 16, 2004, 09:31:35 am »

Well, We never see that Saratoga again. As for the Starbase, it wasn't caught by the probe for nearly as long as the Yorktown was.

hobbesmaster · « **Reply #23 on:** November 19, 2004, 09:13:42 pm »

Quote from: Lieutenant_Q on November 16, 2004, 09:31:35 am

Well, We never see that Saratoga again.

And if the Saratoga wasn't destroyed then, then, uh, lets just say that the Miranda class's on screen combat record makes piloting a Stinger-II look attractable.

Sirgod · « **Reply #24 on:** November 19, 2004, 09:36:00 pm »

Quote from: hobbesmaster on November 19, 2004, 09:13:42 pm

Quote from: Lieutenant_Q on November 16, 2004, 09:31:35 am
Well, We never see that Saratoga again.

And if the Saratoga wasn't destroyed then, then, uh, lets just say that the Miranda class's on screen combat record makes piloting a Stinger-II look attractable.

Slightly Off topic, But where you been Hobbes? I haven't heard from you in forever.

Stephen

Commander La'ra · « **Reply #25 on:** November 26, 2004, 07:08:36 am »

It'd be helpful to know exactly how the Excalibur's crew died. She wasn't a skeletal wreck: There was too much of her left for that description to apply. So, what caused the massive fatalities? Even a catastrophic life support failure wouldn't produce such a result without extensive hull breaches and a complete failure of safety protocols such as the sealing off of areas open to space.

The only think I can come up with is that M-5 cooly and efficiently targetted systems that led to a shutdown of the inertial dampening field (perhaps Excalibur had a record of IDF problems and the supercomputer capitialized). The ship was moving at high warp, as ships in TOS often did in combat, and if there was even a microsecond of delay between the main system failing and the backups kicking in, the crew is paste.

The ship might be relatively okay in that scenario, but some unfortunate soul is going to have to clean the mess up. And serving on the thing would not be popular.

FPF-Wanderer · « **Reply #26 on:** November 28, 2004, 08:14:42 pm »

According to the Star Trek Enclyclopedia, the Excalibur was "severely damaged and all crew personel killed" during the M-5 wargame. So, the question becomes, was she scrapped, or repaired?

As a side note, Lt. Q said above of the Excalibur, "it would probably be the first ship to recieve the CC refit, since there was a lot less work to be done on the Lexington than there was on the Excalibur...I think it explains why the 1703 Lexington and 1705 Excalibur are CCs but why 1707 Hood and 1711 Potemkin are only CAs in SFC I."

Actually, the CC designation comes from the historical footnotes of Star Fleet Battles, the game that SFC1 (as well as EAW and OP) is based on. But it's still a nice way to try and tie in ST "canon" and the "history" of SFB.

Storvick_XC · « **Reply #27 on:** December 11, 2004, 11:47:27 pm »

Quote from: DonKarnage on November 13, 2004, 08:40:34 am

so in startrek 4 when the crew get the brand new enterprise-A, what ship did the take? the seem to kinda have rush into making it or converting it to the tmp technologies since scotty says the ship was build by monkey because everything in the ship needed adjustment, and how long the crew of the enterprise was on Vulcan and why didn't the federation ask the Vulcan to send kirk and is crew back to heart for the trial?, how long have the Ben working on the new enterprise if the use and old constitution ship to refit it and be ready for kirk?, the original ship take 18 month to refit so kirk have not stay 18 month on Vulcan so the did plan ahead on refitting the ship and where was it? in st3 the excelsior was at the base but there was not other ship (visible) in the drydock so where is this new constitution class coming from? ??? ???

The begining of Star Trek IV, Kirk states in his log that the Crew of the Enterprise was on its 3rd year in exlie on Vulcan. So They had to be on Vulcan later then 18 months.

Don Karnage · « **Reply #28 on:** December 12, 2004, 04:26:11 pm »

hmm i will go see that, i don't remember that part. ???

Firehawk · « **Reply #29 on:** December 14, 2004, 07:56:30 am »

Quote from: Storvick on December 11, 2004, 11:47:27 pm

Quote from: DonKarnage on November 13, 2004, 08:40:34 am
so in startrek 4 when the crew get the brand new enterprise-A, what ship did the take? the seem to kinda have rush into making it or converting it to the tmp technologies since scotty says the ship was build by monkey because everything in the ship needed adjustment, and how long the crew of the enterprise was on Vulcan and why didn't the federation ask the Vulcan to send kirk and is crew back to heart for the trial?, how long have the Ben working on the new enterprise if the use and old constitution ship to refit it and be ready for kirk?, the original ship take 18 month to refit so kirk have not stay 18 month on Vulcan so the did plan ahead on refitting the ship and where was it? in st3 the excelsior was at the base but there was not other ship (visible) in the drydock so where is this new constitution class coming from? ??? ???

The begining of Star Trek IV, Kirk states in his log that the Crew of the Enterprise was on its 3rd year in exlie on Vulcan. So They had to be on Vulcan later then 18 months.

I would have to go back and watch the movie again to be positive but I am pretty sure he said 3rd month not year.

FPF-SCM_TraceyG_XC · « **Reply #30 on:** December 21, 2004, 08:05:31 am »

STII:TWOK and STIII TSFS both occurred in 2285 according to the Star Trek Chronology, and STIV:TVH occurred in 2286, so I'd say they were on Vulcan for 3 months.

The Chronology also states that the USS Excalibur along with her crew was destroyed while in combat with the M-5 computer in 2268. However, after reviewing the episode first hand (thanks to DVD), clearly only the crew of the Excalibur were killed and the ship survived. The USS Constellation was also pretty much toast in the Doomsday Machine. Scotty was heard to say it would take him 3 months in space dock to repair the warp drive of the Constellation, and the Constellation was in very bad shape. Its a reasonable assumption to make then that Excalibur could not have been much worse off, otherwise it would not have survived. This tends to suggest that perhaps the Excalibur could have been repaired in a much shorter time, possibly no more than 6 months after the episode.

14G_Tiger · « **Reply #31 on:** December 21, 2004, 09:08:18 am »

Im going to add another question..

Why is the TOS Excalibur 1664, and the SFC Excalibur 1705??

FPF-SCM_TraceyG_XC · « **Reply #32 on:** December 21, 2004, 09:22:25 am »

The Star Trek Starfleet Technical Manual by Franz Joseph designs listed the Excalibur as NCC-1705. This was first printed in 1976 and was the primary source used by ADB to create Starfleet Battles. The other hull registry was mentioned somewhere in this thread, to have originated from the notes of the production crew but I assume never actually used or shown in the show. I would imagine these notes surfaced at a time after the technical manual was printed.

Age · « **Reply #33 on:** December 21, 2004, 09:42:14 am »

That would be warp coil as the First StarShip to come with a Warp Core is in TAS USS Bonaventure .The USS Enterprise 1701-A had come with real warp core the old line in or unrefited came with warp coils/ repair the warp drive of the Constellation.

James Doohan talked about this in a scientific magazine as well.

The Saratoga was eventually destroyed by the Borg in the battle of Wolf 359 with Ben Sisko in Command.

Julin Eurthyr · « **Reply #34 on:** January 07, 2005, 09:00:44 am »

I'd look at it like this:

Starfleet builds their hulls to last. The guts of a starship, on the other hand, aren't nowhere near as durable.

Consider:
Constellation: wrecked on the inside (3 month repair), hull scorched up badly, maybe a twisted warp pylon.
Enterprise: TWOK - TSFS: near-wreck, but on the hull all it had were scorch marks. This from some "unshielded" phaser fire.
All starships: a shot to, say, the secondary hull causes shorts and control panel explosions all over the bridge.

Therefore, The Excalibur, running with low to no shields for the "wargame", when fired upon by M5's full-power phasers did as much, if not more, damage than the Enterprise suffered when she was pegged by Kahn. Warp drive detonation (no warp core at this time), feedback takes out most, if not all, the control systems, and with it most of the rest of the crew, catastrophic system failure, including life support, costs the lives of the rest of the crew, all that's left is really a hollow shell filled with debris and radiation.

That would require pretty much a full rebuild of the Excalibur, as the only part still worthwhile is the hull.

14G_Tiger · « **Reply #35 on:** January 26, 2005, 08:06:06 am »

Quote from: FPF-TraceyG on December 21, 2004, 09:22:25 am

The Star Trek Starfleet Technical Manual by Franz Joseph designs listed the Excalibur as NCC-1705. This was first printed in 1976 and was the primary source used by ADB to create Starfleet Battles. The other hull registry was mentioned somewhere in this thread, to have originated from the notes of the production crew but I assume never actually used or shown in the show. I would imagine these notes surfaced at a time after the technical manual was printed.

I read somewhere that the STSTM was an unauthorized piece of work...why would they base a game on it? (not to mention the best one)

The Postman · « **Reply #36 on:** January 26, 2005, 01:20:16 pm »

Quote from: 14G_Tiger on January 26, 2005, 08:06:06 am

Quote from: FPF-TraceyG on December 21, 2004, 09:22:25 am
The Star Trek Starfleet Technical Manual by Franz Joseph designs listed the Excalibur as NCC-1705. This was first printed in 1976 and was the primary source used by ADB to create Starfleet Battles. The other hull registry was mentioned somewhere in this thread, to have originated from the notes of the production crew but I assume never actually used or shown in the show. I would imagine these notes surfaced at a time after the technical manual was printed.

I read somewhere that the STSTM was an unauthorized piece of work...why would they base a game on it? (not to mention the best one)

Because, at the time, it was endorsed and supported by GR. They even referenced ship registries from the TM in TMP.

News:

Topic: Question for debate: TOS Starship Excalibur (Read 12447 times) var addthis_config = {"data_track_clickback":true};

Topic: Question for debate: TOS Starship Excalibur (Read 12447 times)