The Official Star Trek Movie Forum

The Official Star Trek Movie Forum > Star Trek > General Star Trek Discussions > TV Shows > The Next Generation > How did Picard feel about the Enterprise-D?
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11  
Old 09-08-2009, 10:43 AM
Commodore's Avatar
Commodore Commodore is offline
Rear Admiral
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Starbase 24
Posts: 2,511
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Roysten View Post
Is interesting how the gap between the C and the D is almost 20 years yet between other known examples (Orig - A, D - E) were on the scale of months after each other.
One possible scenario is that the Enterprise-C may have been the first Enterprise to go down with all hands onboard and out of respect, Starfleet chose not to simply slap the name onto another existing ship.

Both onscreen and non-canonical sources generally list that the Galaxy Class Starship Project didn't really get rocking until several years after the loss of the Enterprise-C, at which time Starfleet announced that one of the new ships would be the Enterprise-D. Years of research and development, trial and error, new yard procedures, etc., likely contributed to the nearly 20-year gap between those ships, IMO.
Quote:
Guess the only info on the B is that it was involved in the 2310 Tomed incident. Leaves a lot of leeway for when it was decomissioned and the C entered service. Reckon the Ambassador class came in the 2330s, so yeah I'd agree Commodore.
It's Star Trek: The Lost Generation all right.
Quote:
I doubt Picard would get the triple distinction of getting the F, though that would probably be beyond his time.
I tend to agree. And even if the Enterprise-F comes about in Picard's lifetime, I don't think Starfleet will let him command her. There are lots of young capable captains coming up through the ranks, and not even Picard's admirable achievements can stand in the way of the changing of the guard. It was certainly that way for Kirk, IMO.
Quote:
Makes you wonder if other starships become (As, Bs) etc and their captains getting the same honor of a new ship of a new name, sort of happened with the Defiant.
As far as canonical stuff goes, only Enterprise NCC-1701 has had the honor of subsequent ships carrying its registry (Yamato NCC-1305 would have been another, but that was later officially reconned).

But we do know that Starfleet does reuse old ship names (Yorktown, Lexington, Intrepid, Farragut, etc.) for new ships and simply give them new hull registries. This appears to be the more common practice in the fleet.

Let's take the Intrepid for example--it's possible that an older Excelsior-class Intrepid was decommissioned and replaced by the Intrepid-class Intrepid. It's plausible that the last man to command the older ship was the first to command the newer one...

In the case of the Defiant, Starfleet had already commissioned the Sao Paulo NCC-75633 to replace it, but then gave special permission to rename the ship as Defiant NX-74205. In some ways, that's more of a special honor than what was given to the Enterprise, IMO, because it has the exact same registry (no suffix to distinguish it from its predecessor).
__________________
Free your mind, and the rest will follow.
--En Vogue
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 09-08-2009, 10:46 AM
Zardoz's Avatar
Zardoz Zardoz is offline
Federation Councillor
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Somewhere In The Future
Posts: 31,432
Default

I would assume that the ENT-D-E designation of NCC-1701 is more of an honor than a common practice, as you seemed to indicate.
__________________
"High Priestesses Of Zardoz" By Eliza's Starbase Of Avatars Copyright 2009."
"Zardoz Speaks To You, His Choosen Trek Fans."
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 09-16-2009, 05:50 PM
Whitestar's Avatar
Whitestar Whitestar is offline
Ensign
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Florida
Posts: 90
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Captain Tom Coughlin View Post
It took me awhile to get used to the Enterprise D when TNG first came out. It's so top heavy, it just looked weird to me. And all the families on board never resonated with me either. I liked the interiors for the most part. I think a cross between the interior sets and the exterior of Enterprise C would have been the way to go.
Agreed. It took me time to get use to the D and when I finally bought the model and completed the assembly, the last part was to connect the saucer section to the secondary hull and once I did, the model tipped over!

Quote:
Originally Posted by jla1987 View Post
Quite true. For whatever reason, it seems that he cares more about the E...perhaps it's because the situations are more dire in the movies. IMO, the E is much cooler and prettier ship.
The E is way more beautiful than the D, hands down. It kind of reminds me of the A, which is the most gorgeous Enterprise of all time.
__________________
Have you ever remembered what life was like before you were born? That's how it will be like after you're dead.
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 09-16-2009, 10:19 PM
kevin's Avatar
kevin kevin is offline
Federation Councillor
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: East Kilbride, Glasgow, UK
Posts: 21,046
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Commodore View Post
Both onscreen and non-canonical sources generally list that the Galaxy Class Starship Project didn't really get rocking until several years after the loss of the Enterprise-C, at which time Starfleet announced that one of the new ships would be the Enterprise-D. Years of research and development, trial and error, new yard procedures, etc., likely contributed to the nearly 20-year gap between those ships, IMO.
Which is actually perfectly consistent with the 20 year construction timeline provided in the old TNG Tech manual.

The Galaxy Class project started in the 2340s but the first ships did not enter service until the 2360s

Obviously given the sudden loss of the Ent-C they decided to name one of the new Galaxies but simply had to wait until it got built.

Quote:
I tend to agree. And even if the Enterprise-F comes about in Picard's lifetime, I don't think Starfleet will let him command her. There are lots of young capable captains coming up through the ranks, and not even Picard's admirable achievements can stand in the way of the changing of the guard. It was certainly that way for Kirk, IMO.

As far as canonical stuff goes, only Enterprise NCC-1701 has had the honor of subsequent ships carrying its registry (Yamato NCC-1305 would have been another, but that was later officially reconned).

But we do know that Starfleet does reuse old ship names (Yorktown, Lexington, Intrepid, Farragut, etc.) for new ships and simply give them new hull registries. This appears to be the more common practice in the fleet.
As in current Earth naval traditions.

Quote:
Let's take the Intrepid for example--it's possible that an older Excelsior-class Intrepid was decommissioned and replaced by the Intrepid-class Intrepid. It's plausible that the last man to command the older ship was the first to command the newer one...
Since it's unlikely the fleet would have two ships of the same name in service, but the fact that the Excelsior Class Intrepid was in service while the Intrepid Class was in development could mean the older ship was scheduled for decomissioning in time for the launch of the new one.

Quote:
In the case of the Defiant, Starfleet had already commissioned the Sao Paulo NCC-75633 to replace it, but then gave special permission to rename the ship as Defiant NX-74205. In some ways, that's more of a special honor than what was given to the Enterprise, IMO, because it has the exact same registry (no suffix to distinguish it from its predecessor).
Indeed, I actually took it that the Sao Paulo had already been built and underwent a last minute renaming after Defiant was lost.
__________________
'If the Apocalypse starts, beep me!' - Buffy Summers
'The sky's the limit.....' Jean-Luc Picard, 'All Good Things'


courtesy of Saquist
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 09-17-2009, 02:09 AM
Commodore's Avatar
Commodore Commodore is offline
Rear Admiral
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Starbase 24
Posts: 2,511
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by kevin View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by Commodore
Let's take the Intrepid for example--it's possible that an older Excelsior-class Intrepid was decommissioned and replaced by the Intrepid-class Intrepid. It's plausible that the last man to command the older ship was the first to command the newer one...
Since it's unlikely the fleet would have two ships of the same name in service, but the fact that the Excelsior Class Intrepid was in service while the Intrepid Class was in development could mean the older ship was scheduled for decomissioning in time for the launch of the new one.
It's a likely outcome. The Excelsior-class Intrepid was a much older starship--Worf's foster father served aboard her as a younger man--and it would have been fitting to retire a ship with such a long service record and then replace her with the first ship of an all-new (and at time revolutionary) starship class.

Quote:
Quote:
In the case of the Defiant, Starfleet had already commissioned the Sao Paulo NCC-75633 to replace it, but then gave special permission to rename the ship as Defiant NX-74205. In some ways, that's more of a special honor than what was given to the Enterprise, IMO, because it has the exact same registry (no suffix to distinguish it from its predecessor).
Indeed, I actually took it that the Sao Paulo had already been built and underwent a last minute renaming after Defiant was lost.
Yep. Starfleet had already decided to send the Sao Paulo to DS9 to replace the Defiant, but Starfleet gave it a "special dispensation" to carry Defiant's name and registry. An "in-universe" explanation could be that it was a morale-building thing on Starfleet's part during the war effort*.


*The real-world reason, of course, was that by keeping the NX-74205 registry on the new Defiant, the show could continue to use old stock footage and save VFX money that way.
__________________
Free your mind, and the rest will follow.
--En Vogue
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 09-17-2009, 09:37 AM
kevin's Avatar
kevin kevin is offline
Federation Councillor
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: East Kilbride, Glasgow, UK
Posts: 21,046
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Commodore View Post
Yep. Starfleet had already decided to send the Sao Paulo to DS9 to replace the Defiant, but Starfleet gave it a "special dispensation" to carry Defiant's name and registry. An "in-universe" explanation could be that it was a morale-building thing on Starfleet's part during the war effort*.


*The real-world reason, of course, was that by keeping the NX-74205 registry on the new Defiant, the show could continue to use old stock footage and save VFX money that way.
Of course, and I'd think it would indeed be morale related since the Defiant had been involved in so many of the major battles of the war, it was a ship at the forefront of events.
__________________
'If the Apocalypse starts, beep me!' - Buffy Summers
'The sky's the limit.....' Jean-Luc Picard, 'All Good Things'


courtesy of Saquist
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 12-08-2009, 09:34 PM
SJM's Avatar
SJM SJM is offline
Ensign
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 50
Default

I wish we knew more about the Enterprise B and C. It would have been even better to have a new series about one of them. Ah well.

Looking at Generations, Harriman was kind of blah. He seemed so unsure of himself all the time.

Do we have a cannon launch date for the Enterprise C?

I would rather think that the Enterprise B was destroyed in some fashon. Soon after the Enterprise C was sent out.
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 12-08-2009, 09:54 PM
SJM's Avatar
SJM SJM is offline
Ensign
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 50
Default

Got off my butt and did some reading.

The Enterprise C was launched in 2332 under Garrett and destroyed in 2344. The launch date in not canon as it is from the Lost Era novels, but it's a start.

This would mean that the Enterprise C was in service for only twelve years. Which isn't bad considering that the Enterprise D was in serive for a grand total of seven and a half years..
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 12-09-2009, 05:16 AM
Commodore's Avatar
Commodore Commodore is offline
Rear Admiral
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Starbase 24
Posts: 2,511
Default

I hate the idea that the Enterprise-B was destroyed, because that would make it four out of the first five Enterprises were lost in action (if I was Starfleet, I would have retired the name by now for being unlucky).

Ideally, I think the Enterprise-B had the longest service record of any of the ships and had multiple captains and crews during her lifetime. I like to imagine that she was decommissioned and the Enterprise-C was launched not too soon afterwards.
__________________
Free your mind, and the rest will follow.
--En Vogue
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 12-09-2009, 07:31 AM
Buckman's Avatar
Buckman Buckman is offline
Lieutenant, Junior Grade
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 182
Default

there were 2 starships with the same name at the same battle the USS Melbourne at the battle of Wolf 359
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 08:52 PM.


Forum theme courtesy of Mark Lambert
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 2009 by Paramount Pictures. STAR TREK and all related
marks and logos are trademarks of CBS Studios Inc. All Rights Reserved.