VetteGuy wrote:
> "Unforgiven" <jaapd3000.RemoveThis@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:borptu$1i5u0e$1@ID-136341.news.uni-berlin.de...
>
>>Graham Kennedy wrote:
>>
>>>Christopher L. Estep wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>Picard's Enterprise was also somewhat of a one-off; several changes
>>>>were made to the basic design of the class, but were done only to
>>>>Enterprise (and *not* to the original USS Galaxy; this has been
>>>>suspected as being a partial cause of Galaxy's later loss with all
>>>>hands).
>>>
>>>Not sure where you get all this from, but this at least is
>>>incorrect. Last we heard the Galaxy was alive and well;
>>>she was listed as one of the ships the E-E was going to
>>>meet up with in Nemesis as it left Romulan space.
>>
>>Maybe he's confusing it with the USS Yamato, although the Enterprise
>>surviving the same computer virus had to do with the crew's understanding
>
> of
>
>>what was causing the malfunctions rather than some upgrades the Yamato
>>didn't have.
>>
>>I also distinctly remember that Picard was worried in that very episode
>>(Contagion) that the malfunctions were do to an inherent design flaw in
>
> the
>
>>Galaxy class ships, which seems to suggest that the E-D was just a
>>run-of-the-mill Galaxy (or if it wasn't, it implies that the Yamato at
>
> least
>
>>had the same modifications), at least at that point. We do know that some
>>modifications were made later, as is shown in that episode where Geordie
>>meets the real Leah Brahms, and she comments on him "screwing up her
>
> engine
>
>>design".
>>
>>As for the E-E, we really can't comment whether it's standard or not,
>
> since
>
>>I can't recall ever seeing another Sovereign class ship. In FC, LaForge
>
> does
>
>>say it's "the most advanced ship in the fleet", which sort of implies it's
>>more advanced than the USS Sovereign, that is, assuming such a namegiving
>>ship exists. I've seen the USS Sovereign in the game 'Bridge Commander',
>
> but
>
>>that's not canon. We do know that the Ent-E receives quite the weapons
>>upgrade somewhere between Insurrection and Nemesis.
>>
>>All things considered, I think ship classes in Star Trek are reasonably
>>straight forward. There are usually namegiver ships (USS Excelsior, USS
>>Galaxy), and ships of the same class at least actually look the same.
>
>
> :::::Not Necessarily. as a matter of fact, there is no evidence that
> Starfleet follows the US Navy tradition
> of naming the class after the lead ship
Actually there is some evidence for it, though it's
not totally conclusive.
For instance, we know that the USS Excelsior was the
first of her class. And we know that O'Brien once
referred to an Excelsior as "An Excelsior class ship."
Similarly, we know that the Defiant was the first of
her class and in Valiant they call the Valiant a
Defiant-class ship.
Less strongly, we know that there is a USS Intrepid
and a USS Galaxy in the fleet, and while we don't
know for sure that this is where the Intrepid class
and Galaxy class names come from, it is at least
indicative.
At the very least we can say that Starfleet names
classes after the first ship in the class *sometimes*.
> few other Navies follow this
> procedure
> the RN, for example have theme names for thier ships, the Duke class and
> County class destroyers come to mind
> thier submarines are classed by the beginning letter of thier names
Indeed, and the Type 22 destroyers followed the same trend
in many ships - HMS Broadsword, Battleaxe, Brave, etc,
though they broke the trend for some of the ships so they
could name them after those lost in the Falklands. Whilst
the Type 42s are named for cities - I've actually been on
one of those ships, they're impressive!
I'd be less impressed to have been on one of the "Flower class"
ships in WWII, though!
--
Graham Kennedy
Creator and Author,
Daystrom Institute Technical Library
http://www.ditl.org
FAQ
Search
Profile
Private Messages
Log in
