Franz Joseph did. [img]tongue.gif[/img]Originally posted by TheStressPuppy:
No one said the Federation Class's HAD to have a reg in the NCC 2100's
Remember, that was all done in the 80's, based on Greg Jein's interpretation of that damn wall chart from "Court Martial." The people who espouse the Encyclopedia list of registries have yet to answer me on any of the occasions I've asked this question: in a Starfleet where there are only "12 ships like" the Enterprise, how the hell are they ALL AT THE SAME FREAKING STARBASE AT THE SAME FREAKING TIME?!? I just got the old Franz Joseph blueprints off of eBay along with my "new" old copy of the Tech Manual, and according to him Roddenberry signed off on the blueprints (which include the same list of names and registries he later put in the Tech Manual), so as far as I'm concerned that's just as damn "canon" as Greg Jein's list.it is very possible that theres a dreaddy in the 19 18 17 or below if we use the lot number theory. I dont buy that the 1700's were all constitution class's anymore otherwise there wouldnt be a 1017, or a 9something, or a 1364, and a few in the 1600 range. in that respect they really screwed up if they want us to belive that 1700 was the class ship.
As Manticore said, the only Constitution with a canon registry lower than 1700 is Constellation, although 1371 for Republic is fairly generally accepted, even prior to Jein's list. (The Eagle, NCC-956, is a ship that exists on a chart in IIRC Trek VI, but there's nothing that I'm aware to suggest that it has to be a Connie--it could just as easily be the "Phase 2" destroyer Stress made for BTFF...) I don't have a problem with these--as Manticore also pointed out, Constellation has some differences from Enterprise (due to AMT needing to save plastic to keep the model kit's production cost down ), so we can easily speculate that she was originally built as a different class of starship and then refitted to something close to Constitution-class specs later on. The same thing could have happened to Republic, since we've never seen her--she could be identical to Constellation, or have subtle differences of her own.
Hell, even the recent appearance of the Defiant on ENT doesn't invalidate FJ's list, as Defiant isn't even on it! It could be a later build or just an omission...
Yeah, but even in this system, they didn't make CVN-68 Nimitz (Nimitz-class), CVN-69 Eisenhower (Nimitz-class), and then go wild with making Carl Vinson (CVN-70) a completely different class, and then making Theodore Roosevelt (CVN-71) a Nimitz again. Even more to the point, they're not making CVN-70 an Aegis cruiser or Perry frigate, which seems to be the level of chaos inherent in the TNG era and beyond...Im all but totally convinced the reg number is a construction lot number like modern naval vessels are (example: Kitty hawk cv-63, Constellation cv-64, Enterprise: different class cvn-65, john kennedy: different class cv-66 Nimitz: different class cvn-68 etc etc).
I'm of two minds about the Federation registries--on the one hand, if you're going to use the ship, it seems that you should use the registries the creator made up for them; but on the other hand, FJ's registries are so screwed up, I've thought of completely redoing them thusly:
Federation: NCC-1100 (with at least an original nacelle different from anything ever fitted to a Connie)
Ptolemy: NCC-800 (again, with at least the nacelles different from the Connie ones they'll eventually be refitted with. The saucer could even be related to that of whatever the Constellation's original one looks like)
Obviously, this is a major starship design project, probably bigger than even Stress wants to take on.
But you know how much I love pointless debate... [img]graemlins/eviltail.gif[/img]Pointless debate time
[ 30. April 2005, 11:36 PM: Message edited by: Pierce 2: The Sequel ]