View unanswered posts | View active topics It is currently 20 Aug 2017 19:09



Reply to topic  [ 23 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next
It's the Constellation. Look at that. 
Author Message
Site Admin
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: 16 Dec 2008 23:08
Posts: 3117
Location: Star Fleet Publications, Park Presidio Enclave
Quote:
One thought struck me: I don't want to inadvertently suggest that the Constellation was beaten because she was older and less advanced than the Enterprise. The difference should be between Decker and Kirk.


Why? The Enterprise was as much the star of the show as Kirk. It is fair that Kirk made the difference, yes. But it is also fair that Constellation was two or three steps steps removed from Enterprise. Internal evidence hints that way. She is 1017. Republic is 1371. Then there is that group of 1600 ships from the "Court Martial" chart.

I'd do what I wanted Vektor to do with Kiaga- light the domes red but give them the spinning effect. Different shades of red with flashes of orange. Give it the spike. Give it the smooth back but put louvers back there like a venetian blind. Give it as many Cage-era details but "paint over" them so they are there and as visible as the deflector grid but it's obvious- this ship has been worked on and updated but at its core is maybe ten or more years older that Enterprise. 2220s vs 2240s. Arizona vs Missouri

My two quatloos worth. ;)

_________________
"After a time, you may find that having is not so
pleasing a thing, after all, as wanting. It is not logical,
but it is often true."

Mr. Spock is dead. Live long, Mr. Spock.


23 Jan 2017 20:43
Profile WWW
Captain
Captain
User avatar

Joined: 19 Dec 2008 10:01
Posts: 1714
Location: Beyond the Farthest Star
I think the structure of the show indicates that they are comparable if not identical ships. Some of this, naturally, is production expediency. They use the same set. OTOH, if they could have managed it they would have used the same model. It's a happy production accident that gives us some variety where I'm sure they intended none.

I've got a ways to go (especially at this rate). But I'll probably give her Where No Man vents. (Just because I like them.) I won't go with the aft domes just because they are really obviously not there on screen. I don't know what I'll do with the forward domes. I made the Federation class' domes blue to indicate a slightly more advanced power source. But in my head the jump from the red domes and spires to the light show was a significant and sudden one. (A little like TMP.)

My other wiggle is that I picture the "Five Year Mission" ships to be advanced beyond their class. But Spock say the Connie is "by configuration a Starship" which (in my head) puts her ALSO in the 5YC.

It's hard to be a nerd.

_________________
-- Bill "Tallguy" Thomas
All I ask is a tall ship...


24 Jan 2017 11:43
Profile
Site Admin
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: 16 Dec 2008 23:08
Posts: 3117
Location: Star Fleet Publications, Park Presidio Enclave
If you want to stick to what they intended, it likely was intended to be the same type but not same class. That bears heavily on whether the 1017 number was picked purely to differentiate it from 1701, given the fact there are a few other numbers you can make from 1,1,0 and 7. That is the lowest four digit number you can make. We can throw out 1710 as too similar. We can throw out 0711, 0117 and 0171 as not conforming to known practices. But why not 7110 or 7010?

We know the working theory had been that the Enterprise class had been in existence for fifty years, whatever that means. The Eminiar Valiant was a starship from fifty years prior. Horizon was a starship from a hundred years prior, as was Archon. So there is plenty of evidence of older "starships".

We also know the lower NCC equates to the kind of assignment an older ship might get, since Republic is a training vessel with the number 1371.

The internal evidence abounds that 1017 was intended to
a) be a starship
b) be the same type as Enterprise
c) be an older class
d) but be uprated to similar capabilities.

They had a choice between saying "same exact class" and nunbering it 1710, or even 1700 or 1711, newer class with a 7000 range number, or lower number. They chose lower number.

Would they have used the 11-foot model if they could? Of course, since they did in depicting the other starships in "Ultimate Computer". But in that episode, the point being made was different. Those ships were assumedly equal to Enterprise but four of them were defeated. But... we were never shown those ships' numbers. Who really knows what the intent was?

In the case of "Doomsday Machine", that number could have been burned away in the damage. But they didn't do that, either.

So they wanted a ship that was the same, that heightened the possibility this could happen to Enterprise, but they didn't want it so similar as to cause confusion.

I don't know why they didn't number it 1700 or 1711 then.

No, I think they were saying that ship was an older, but uprated starship.

_________________
"After a time, you may find that having is not so
pleasing a thing, after all, as wanting. It is not logical,
but it is often true."

Mr. Spock is dead. Live long, Mr. Spock.


24 Jan 2017 12:40
Profile WWW
Captain
Captain
User avatar

Joined: 19 Dec 2008 10:01
Posts: 1714
Location: Beyond the Farthest Star
I think that we've given it more thought just today than anyone on Star Trek did making this episode. That's not meant as a criticism of them or us.

Do we know who made the model? Was Jefferies involved in the numbering at all? (Not that I think he would have thought about it MUCH more. But maybe a little.)

_________________
-- Bill "Tallguy" Thomas
All I ask is a tall ship...


24 Jan 2017 13:40
Profile
Rear Admiral
Rear Admiral

Joined: 31 Dec 2008 20:59
Posts: 3361
A very serious point has to be made at this time. Something most of us have over looked...

Galaxy travel has been fully perfected as of the USS Enterprise NCC-1701. That means that the design is perfect.

What does this mean? It means that there are no further changes/improvements required. They are all done, with that.

The 1600 class should look therefore to be quite close in design style, so should the 1500 class, and so on, going back some distance in time. Each lesser class should have more and more "problems" despite being workable. The requirement for workable means just that, it must work. Meaning that however unfully perfected the 1200 class is for example, it works, it does its job.

But what would the 100 class look like? Like a cruder form of the 1700 class...

It would be the fine scale details and gross details that would place limits upon it.

This is what perfected means. That there can be no further attempts to perfect.

Such that they knew when building the 100 Class, that there was room for improvement, but didn't have a clue beyond the 400 class as to what was needed to be changed and why. The 800 class? forget about it - too unknown, and too many unkowns.

But why?

Because computer simulations told them this was IT.

So how does Phase II et el going forward fit? Because they worked very hard to get it right, and so now they can afford to expand, in new directions.

The first purpose was to see what was really needed, then they could play around with the individual features - like on the Oberth class, the Excelsior class, and so on. Get the design down pat, then move on.
As for internal technology, that may have changed more than anything else.


24 Jan 2017 14:29
Profile
Site Admin
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: 16 Dec 2008 23:08
Posts: 3117
Location: Star Fleet Publications, Park Presidio Enclave
Tallguy wrote:
I think that we've given it more thought just today than anyone on Star Trek did making this episode. That's not meant as a criticism of them or us.

Do we know who made the model? Was Jefferies involved in the numbering at all? (Not that I think he would have thought about it MUCH more. But maybe a little.)



Jefferies likely picked the number. There was a story circulating that Jefferies actually hand painted the numbers on the model. As far as building, from what we know of how things worked, one of Datin's builders likely built the AMT models.

All the discussion has been about whether there was any thinking put into "1017" beyond "it is clearly different from 1701". My final point was that all thinking aside, all internal evidence aside, if you say there was no thinking, and that the Constellation is supposed to be the same as Enterprise, you have to answer why the number was not 1700 or 1711. That says "same" more clearly while being visually distinct. But they picked 1017.

_________________
"After a time, you may find that having is not so
pleasing a thing, after all, as wanting. It is not logical,
but it is often true."

Mr. Spock is dead. Live long, Mr. Spock.


24 Jan 2017 14:39
Profile WWW
Captain
Captain
User avatar

Joined: 19 Dec 2008 10:01
Posts: 1714
Location: Beyond the Farthest Star
While I think the number lends itself to some history, if that's your thing (and it is which is why we're here), it doesn't run in a necessarily straight line to an Enterprise predecessor. If some indisputable evidence came to light that said it was so, I'd agree. But I'd also agree if they were much closer contemporaries.

But anyway! DOORS!

Image

THAT'S better!

_________________
-- Bill "Tallguy" Thomas
All I ask is a tall ship...


25 Jan 2017 16:34
Profile
Commodore
Commodore
User avatar

Joined: 20 Dec 2008 18:39
Posts: 2377
Location: toltec sector
nice doors... : )


it makes me wonder about the possibility of using a mainly white semi-reflective surface for a finished design... ; )

_________________

All matter originates and exists only by virtue of a force...
We must assume behind this force the existence of a conscious and intelligent Mind.
This Mind is the matrix of all matter.
Max Planck


29 Jan 2017 21:05
Profile
Rear Admiral
Rear Admiral

Joined: 31 Dec 2008 20:59
Posts: 3361
Let us say that the Constellation was of a class seven generations older. What does that tell us?

Now let us bring in the Archon from the Return of the Archons. This goes along wy to explaining why Kirk was impressed with what Landru could do...

Never mind how fast the older ships were, just remember one thing though, that they so called of the SS Columbia didn't know about large ships - a problem to be explained some other time...


Alright, alright; one possible is that any ship class rare. With most ship classes going for colonization purposes. Meaning that the Columbia was looking for planets for colonization... Also with being out of communication's range with their technology... So the didn't have up to date data.

What the design differences between the Constellation nd the Eterprise show, is a slow change in over all design...


30 Jan 2017 11:38
Profile
Rear Admiral
Rear Admiral

Joined: 31 Dec 2008 20:59
Posts: 3361
Morph from 1701 to 1017 to 327. This should give us a very good idea of how the class has evolved...

I am sorry Aridus, but it looks like your Heavy Cruiser Evolution sheets are in reverse.

Seven steps each.


30 Jan 2017 16:12
Profile
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Reply to topic   [ 23 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  

Forum hosting by ProphpBB | Software by phpBB | Report Abuse | Privacy