Hobbyist Forums banner

1 - 15 of 15 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,752 Posts
Discussion Starter #1 (Edited)
Hi again guys!

I know this is a long post, but here's an interesting discovery I just made and I'm glad I have all these Star Trek books in my library.:thumbsup: - This info is FYI. I'm not trying to start a flame war.:eek: Anyway.....

Currently, there's a big debate as to the accuracy of Star Trek ship names and numbers for TOS. Seeing as TOS was intently a show to entertain audiences as opposed to being more "Technical" as it's become in modern times, there has been numerous people trying to find an order for these ships.

It is interesting to note that in the 1960's and early 1970's when Star Trek was produced, Ballintine Books had the exclusive rights to publish Star Trek books.

The first book was written by Stephen Whitfield and Gene Roddenburry and contained notes, pictures and the theory behind Star Trek.

When it came to ship names as the show was being produced, people asked Gene Roddenburry for advice:

The Making Of Star Trek ~ Stephen E Whitfield & Gene Roddenberry Copyright 1968
First Printing ~ 1968 - Fifteenth Printing 1975

Starting on Page 163 (these are letters) {my additions are in these brackets}


The Making Of Star Trek said:
To: Gene Roddenberry Date: August 8, 1967
From: DC Fontana Subject: Star Fleet - 12 Starships

Dear Gene:

We have, in the course of a season and a half, established that Starfleet includes 12 ships of the starship class. We are frequently called upon to name one ot the other of them, and no one has kept track of who's where. the following is a list of suggested names and {Page 164} some international alternatives which we may wish to establish as the starships of the Fleet. Would like you and Bob J. to indicate preference for names, put it in The Star Trek Guide {Which was used to inform show writers of the Star Trek Universe} and use it...if this seams feasible.

Enterprise
Exeter
Essex
Excalibur
Lexington
Yorktown
Endeavor
El Dorado
Excelsior
Saratoga
Constellation (destroyed in "Doomsday Machine" Presume she would be replaced by Star Fleet.)

alternates include the names of some famous fighting ships of the past, plus a couple of international variations we might consider, Star Fleet being composed of a united service.

Hornet
Wasp
Farragut (mentioned as destroyed in "Obsession")
Hood
Bonhomme Richard
Monitor or Merrimac, depending upon your loyalties
Tori (bird)
Layfayette
Ari (lion)
Krieger (warrior)

Please consider. ~ D.C. Fontana

cc: Bob Justman


To: Gene Roddenburry Date: August 9, 1967
From: Bob Justman Subject: STAR FLEET - STARSHIPS

(Page 165)

Dear Gene:

I am in receipt of a memo from someone using the pseudonym of D.C. Fontana. This character suggests that we establish the names of 12 ships of the Enterprise starship Class.

Of the names that D.C. Fontana mentions, I prefer the following:

Enterprise
Essex
Excalibur
Lexington
Yorktown
Endeavor
Eagle
Constellation
Hornet
Wasp
Lafayette

I think there would be several other candidates, such as Saratoga and perhaps another English carrier, a French carrier, a Russian Carrier and certainly a Japanese Carrier. In addition, I think a name ought to be made up that would be of Vulcan origin.

Bob

cc: D.C. Fontana



The following names have been established for starships: Enterprise, Exeter, Excalibur, Lexington, Yorktown, Potemkin, Republic, Hood, Constitution, Kongo, Constellation, Farragut, Valiant, and Intrepid. The latter four are listed as destroyed in various episodes.
Also keep in mind that the writers forced in a 13th ship, the U.S.S. Defiant.

After this book was published, Gene Roddenburry was approached by Franz Joseph, an illustrator and author, to write The Star Trek Techincal Manual. FJ used these numbers for the ships following the names given to him by Gene Roddenburry which came from this quote in The Making Of Star Trek book:

The Making Of Star Trek said:
The following names have been established for starships: Enterprise, Exeter, Excalibur, Lexington, Yorktown, Potemkin, Republic, Hood, Constitution, Kongo, Constellation, Farragut, Valiant, and Intrepid. The latter four are listed as destroyed in various episodes.
Since there are only 4 totally cannon ships with numbers attached to them, (Constellation 1017, Republic 1371, Constitution 1700, and Enterprise 1701) these are the only "True Cannon" ships. Therefore, FJ decided that the Constitution Class ships (Established in the Space Seed episode on a viewscreen monitor) would be cronologically numbered.

Here's FJ's names and numbers :

U.S.S. Constellation-------NCC-1017
U.S.S. Republic-----------NCC-1371
U.S.S. Constitution-------NCC-1700
U.S.S. Enterprise---------NCC-1701
U.S.S. Farragut----------NCC-1702
U.S.S. Lexington---------NCC-1703
U.S.S. Yorktown---------NCC-1704
U.S.S. Excalibur----------NCC-1705
U.S.S. Exeter------------NCC-1706
U.S.S. Hood-------------NCC-1707
U.S.S. Intrepid----------NCC-1708
U.S.S. Valiant-----------NCC-1709
U.S.S. Kongo------------NCC-1710
U.S.S. Potempkin--------NCC-1711
*U.S.S. Defiance--------NCC-1717* - I assume Defiance is really Defiant.

Following this, FASA, a gaming company of the 1980's who created Star Trek : The Role Playing Game and Star Trek Battles, wrote a series of books in which a person could play either as a character in their RPG's or with mini metal star ships for the starship battles. Since they didn't have the rights to use FJ's names and numbers, they contacted Paramont and ended up using the 4 cannon names, the remainder of the Gene Roddenburry list and the remaining suggested ships from the letters. Again, the numbers question came into play and they invented their own.

The Federation Ship Recognition Manual, published in 1985 by FASA, contains these names and numbers for the original 13.

This is what they published on P.9:

U.S.S. Constellation-------NCC-1017
U.S.S. Republic-----------NCC-1373
U.S.S. Intrepid-----------NCC-1631
U.S.S. Farragut----------NCC-1647
U.S.S. Excalibur----------NCC-1664
U.S.S. Exeter------------NCC-1672
U.S.S. Constitution-------NCC-1700
U.S.S. Enterprise---------NCC-1701
U.S.S. Potempkin---------NCC-1702
U.S.S. Hood-------------NCC-1703
U.S.S. Lexington---------NCC-1709
U.S.S. Yorktown---------NCC-1717
U.S.S. Defiant-----------NCC-1764

Michael and Denise Okuda's book The Star Trek Encyclpedia, (Which is considered today to be 100% - no questions asked - cannon) published by Pocket Books in 1994, 1997 and 1999, on Page 85 under the Constitution class starship entry, says the following :

The Star Trek Encyclopedea said:
Constitution-class starship.
One of Starfleet's most famous types of vehicle, the Constitution-class starships included the acclaimed original U.S.S. Enterprise. During the time of Captain James T. Kirk's celebrated first five-year mission of exploration only 12 of these ships were in existance. ("Tommorrow is Yesterday"[TOS]) Constitution-class starships comissioned by Starfleet included: Constellation (NCC-1017), Constitution (NCC-1700), Defiant (NCC-1764), Eagle (NCC-956), Endeavour (NCC-1895), Enterprise (NCC-1701), Essex (NCC-1697), Excalibur (NCC-1664), Exeter (NCC-1672), Hood (NCC-1703), Intrepid (NCC-1831), Lexington (NCC-1709), Potempkin (NCC-1657), Republic (NCC-1371) and Yorktown (NCC-1717). Constitution-class ships used duotronic computers, based on designs developed by DR. Richard Daystrom in 2243. ("The Ultimate Computer"[TOS]) {Notice how this is the first suggested list in The Making Of Star Trek.}

In Itallics :

The registry number of the Constitution (NCC-1700) is from one of Scotty's technical manual screens in "Space Seed" (TOS). since the class ship has a 1700 number, it would seem only reasonable that the other ships of the class would have higher, possibly even sequential numbers. Unfortunatly, the U.S.S Constellation ("The Doomsday Machine" [TOS]), bore a much lower number, NCC-1017, (obviously because it was a simple rearrangement of the decal sheet from the AMT Enterprise model kit) and the Republic was designated as NCC-1371. These datda points suggest the Constitution-class ships had registry numbers that not only varied largely in range, but also could not be sequential. Modelmaker Greg Jein (Through an amazingly complex and admittedly only barely logical means) managed to match up the various Constitution ships with the starbase status chart in Commodore Stone's office on Starbase 11, seen in "Court Martial" (TOS). Most of these regestry numbers are from Greg's conjectural list, although several are from various Starfleet charts and readouts in Star Trek VI. A few of the Constitution-class ships listed above are not from any episode or movie, but are from the original Star Trek production office's starship list in Stephen Whitfield's book, the making of Star Trek. {Which they didn't read to the full extent.}
In addition, if you look up all the names in The Star Trek Encyclopedia individually of the ships that were shown on the show, you get the following list :

U.S.S. Constellation-------NCC-1017 - P.85
U.S.S. Republic-----------NCC-1371 - p.407
U.S.S. Intrepid-----------NCC-1631 - p.212
U.S.S. Farragut----------NCC-1647 - P.148
U.S.S. Potempkin---------NCC-1657 - p.382
U.S.S. Excalibur----------NCC-1664 - P.144
U.S.S. Exeter------------NCC-1672 - P.144
U.S.S. Constitution-------NCC-1700 - P.85
U.S.S. Enterprise---------NCC-1701 - P.137
U.S.S. Hood-------------NCC-1703 - p.195
U.S.S. Lexington---------NCC-1709 - p.264
U.S.S. Yorktown---------NCC-1717 - p.572
U.S.S. Defiant-----------NCC-1764 - P.109

These numbers, with exception to Republic and Potempkin, are directly from FASA.

The current AMT kit and Polar Lights reflects the new list as found on the Michael Okuda book. Therefore, the new decal sheet is really a 97% reprint of FASA ship registration numbers.

THAT'S the discovery I made. Greg Jein had a FASA book lying around and he used these numbers directly without consulting any of the other Star Trek books.

Make your own conclusions!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,297 Posts
I have to make just a couple of observations to your list, Trevor-

Greg Jein did NOT use the FASA book numbers, FASA used HIS numbers. Mr. Jein derived the numbers from the "Court Martial" chart and his finding were published in a fanzine at the time (T-Negative, April 1973 "The Case of Jonathan Doe Starship") and those number were later published in the Star Trek Concordance (pub. 1976). FASA came on the scene less than 10 years later and used those numbers. Almost.... how did they screw up the Republic's number?!?

Also, by the time FASA got the rights to make their Star Trek RPG, the FJ system was or had fallen out of favour with Mr. Roddenberry and FASA appeared to deliberately continue to invalidate ANY of FJ's work in ship designs and numbering. However, they weren't above using ("stealing"??) the Enterprise blueprints that FJ did for laying out the ship in the first edition of the game.

Here is the Memory Alpha listing for the Concordance:

http://memory-alpha.org/en/wiki/Star_Trek_Concordance

And the Greg Jein article, also at Memory Alpha:

http://memory-alpha.org/en/wiki/The_Case_of_Jonathan_Doe_Starship
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,752 Posts
Discussion Starter #3
Ok, I have the Concordance. I'll have to look in there too....but still, knowing that FASA and Greg Jein's list are so close is another victory in my quest.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,297 Posts
On a semi-related note, when Star Fleet Battles was being developed, the designer(s) used the ships in the Tech Manual and did so with Mr. Joseph's permission.. but I don't know any details beyond that. SFB did get sued when they tried to incorporate the Refit into the game (as ST:TMP had come out) thinking that they could do so, but some legal clowns somewhere decided that was outside the conditions of the licence they had for the game. The original Refit was pulled out of later editions of the game and they kept their licence.

That licence, apparently only allowed them to use the contents of the Tech Manual and certain elements from the original show. Thus, SFB took off in a totally different direction unrelated to further movies and shows. Whether they wanted to use those ships is now irrelevant; they can't. Plus, their direction pretty much insured that they couldn't go to the movie-and later TV designs -plus the design limitations to the ships keeps the size of the ships fairly small, compared to later ships, especially the Galaxy class. That ship is impossible under current and official SFB design doctrine.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1 Posts
Hi again guys!

I know this is a long post, but here's an interesting discovery I just made and I'm glad I have all these Star Trek books in my library.:thumbsup: - This info is FYI. I'm not trying to start a flame war.:eek: Anyway.....

Currently, there's a big debate as to the accuracy of Star Trek ship names and numbers for TOS. Seeing as TOS was intently a show to entertain audiences as opposed to being more "Technical" as it's become in modern times, there has been numerous people trying to find an order for these ships.

It is interesting to note that in the 1960's and early 1970's when Star Trek was produced, Ballintine Books had the exclusive rights to publish Star Trek books.

The first book was written by Stephen Whitfield and Gene Roddenburry and contained notes, pictures and the theory behind Star Trek.

When it came to ship names as the show was being produced, people asked Gene Roddenburry for advice:

The Making Of Star Trek ~ Stephen E Whitfield & Gene Roddenberry Copyright 1968
First Printing ~ 1968 - Fifteenth Printing 1975

Starting on Page 163 (these are letters) {my additions are in these brackets}




Also keep in mind that the writers forced in a 13th ship, the U.S.S. Defiant.

After this book was published, Gene Roddenburry was approached by Franz Joseph, an illustrator and author, to write The Star Trek Techincal Manual. FJ used these numbers for the ships following the names given to him by Gene Roddenburry which came from this quote in The Making Of Star Trek book:



Since there are only 4 totally cannon ships with numbers attached to them, (Constellation 1017, Republic 1371, Constitution 1700, and Enterprise 1701) these are the only "True Cannon" ships. Therefore, FJ decided that the Constitution Class ships (Established in the Space Seed episode on a viewscreen monitor) would be cronologically numbered.

Here's FJ's names and numbers :

U.S.S. Constellation-------NCC-1017
U.S.S. Republic-----------NCC-1371
U.S.S. Constitution-------NCC-1700
U.S.S. Enterprise---------NCC-1701
U.S.S. Farragut----------NCC-1702
U.S.S. Lexington---------NCC-1703
U.S.S. Yorktown---------NCC-1704
U.S.S. Excalibur----------NCC-1705
U.S.S. Exeter------------NCC-1706
U.S.S. Hood-------------NCC-1707
U.S.S. Intrepid----------NCC-1708
U.S.S. Valiant-----------NCC-1709
U.S.S. Kongo------------NCC-1710
U.S.S. Potempkin--------NCC-1711
*U.S.S. Defiance--------NCC-1717* - I assume Defiance is really Defiant.

Following this, FASA, a gaming company of the 1980's who created Star Trek : The Role Playing Game and Star Trek Battles, wrote a series of books in which a person could play either as a character in their RPG's or with mini metal star ships for the starship battles. Since they didn't have the rights to use FJ's names and numbers, they contacted Paramont and ended up using the 4 cannon names, the remainder of the Gene Roddenburry list and the remaining suggested ships from the letters. Again, the numbers question came into play and they invented their own.

The Federation Ship Recognition Manual, published in 1985 by FASA, contains these names and numbers for the original 13.

This is what they published on P.9:

U.S.S. Constellation-------NCC-1017
U.S.S. Republic-----------NCC-1373
U.S.S. Intrepid-----------NCC-1631
U.S.S. Farragut----------NCC-1647
U.S.S. Excalibur----------NCC-1664
U.S.S. Exeter------------NCC-1672
U.S.S. Constitution-------NCC-1700
U.S.S. Enterprise---------NCC-1701
U.S.S. Potempkin---------NCC-1702
U.S.S. Hood-------------NCC-1703
U.S.S. Lexington---------NCC-1709
U.S.S. Yorktown---------NCC-1717
U.S.S. Defiant-----------NCC-1764

Michael and Denise Okuda's book The Star Trek Encyclpedia, (Which is considered today to be 100% - no questions asked - cannon) published by Pocket Books in 1994, 1997 and 1999, on Page 85 under the Constitution class starship entry, says the following :



In addition, if you look up all the names in The Star Trek Encyclopedia individually of the ships that were shown on the show, you get the following list :

U.S.S. Constellation-------NCC-1017 - P.85
U.S.S. Republic-----------NCC-1371 - p.407
U.S.S. Intrepid-----------NCC-1631 - p.212
U.S.S. Farragut----------NCC-1647 - P.148
U.S.S. Potempkin---------NCC-1657 - p.382
U.S.S. Excalibur----------NCC-1664 - P.144
U.S.S. Exeter------------NCC-1672 - P.144
U.S.S. Constitution-------NCC-1700 - P.85
U.S.S. Enterprise---------NCC-1701 - P.137
U.S.S. Hood-------------NCC-1703 - p.195
U.S.S. Lexington---------NCC-1709 - p.264
U.S.S. Yorktown---------NCC-1717 - p.572
U.S.S. Defiant-----------NCC-1764 - P.109

These numbers, with exception to Republic and Potempkin, are directly from FASA.

The current AMT kit and Polar Lights reflects the new list as found on the Michael Okuda book. Therefore, the new decal sheet is really a 97% reprint of FASA ship registration numbers.

THAT'S the discovery I made. Greg Jein had a FASA book lying around and he used these numbers directly without consulting any of the other Star Trek books.

Make your own conclusions!
I hate to burst everyone's bubble but the original, original Star Trek Fleet had 14 ships and they were numbered very simply NCC-1701 through 1714. But that was before all the hype arose. I guess it just depends on who you talk to. The attached photo is of an original Enterprise AMT model kit from 1968.
 

Attachments

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,752 Posts
Discussion Starter #7
Spock, can you please scan in the instruction sheet where it lists the numbers to name chart? Should be in a box somewhere on the plans.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
983 Posts
I hate to burst everyone's bubble but the original, original Star Trek Fleet had 14 ships and they were numbered very simply NCC-1701 through 1714. But that was before all the hype arose. I guess it just depends on who you talk to. The attached photo is of an original Enterprise AMT model kit from 1968.
Quoted from above: The registry number of the Constitution (NCC-1700) is from one of Scotty's technical manual screens in "Space Seed" (TOS)

Since this was shown on screen, and is established canon, the decals are wrong. They would have to go from 1700 to 1713, not 1714, correct?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,752 Posts
Discussion Starter #9
The kit decals and instruction sheet's suggested names and numbers don't match up. Besides, the font was never right. The best use for these numbers is on 1/25th scale race cars, IMO.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,194 Posts
I hate to burst everyone's bubble but the original, original Star Trek Fleet had 14 ships and they were numbered very simply NCC-1701 through 1714. But that was before all the hype arose. I guess it just depends on who you talk to.
How do you account for Kirk's comment in "Tomorrow is Yesterday"
while talking to Captain Christopher that "there are only twelve like
her in the fleet." ?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,752 Posts
Discussion Starter #11 (Edited)
Also that the Constellation was 1017 on film and the Republic was mentioned as 1371.

AMT goofed on that sheet.

Capt Frank said:
How do you account for Kirk's comment in "Tomorrow is Yesterday"
while talking to Captain Christopher that "there are only twelve like
her in the fleet." ?
Kirk said it in season #1, but at the end of the series, they ended up with 13.



This is the second run sheet, after the original Enterprise model was redone. The original decal sheet only had numbers to make 1701.

Usually somewhere on the latter instruction sheets was a box that said which names went with which numbers. I'd be interested in seeing a scan of that since most of the references in the later model kits followed the Franz Joseph system which was this :

U.S.S. Constellation-------NCC-1017
U.S.S. Republic-----------NCC-1371
U.S.S. Constitution-------NCC-1700
U.S.S. Enterprise---------NCC-1701
U.S.S. Farragut----------NCC-1702
U.S.S. Lexington---------NCC-1703
U.S.S. Yorktown---------NCC-1704
U.S.S. Excalibur----------NCC-1705
U.S.S. Exeter------------NCC-1706
U.S.S. Hood-------------NCC-1707
U.S.S. Intrepid----------NCC-1708
U.S.S. Valiant-----------NCC-1709
U.S.S. Kongo------------NCC-1710
U.S.S. Potempkin--------NCC-1711

I wonder what AMT had intended the numbers/names to be if it went directly off this sheet.
Enterprise would be 1701, but what about the rest? Were they intended to be specific, or just random as the modeler saw fit.

I think the history of AMT's Enterprise kit went something like this :

1966-1967 Original kit with the internal cross brace, no ball in rear nacelle, larger senesor dish and NCC-1701 only decal sheet. This kit is based more on the Pilot film version than Production version.
- Paramont uses one of these kits for the U.S.S. Constellation and cuts 1701 decal into 1017

1968 - Roddenberry and Whitfield release their book "The Making of Star Trek" and list their 14 names on P.165 -
book said:
The following names have been established for starships: Enterprise, Exeter, Excalibur, Lexington, Yorktown, Potemkin, Republic, Hood, Constitution, Kongo, Constellation, Farragut, Valiant, and Intrepid. The latter four are listed as destroyed in various episodes.
AMT changes mold of kit to make it easier to build and more closely match TV model. It replaces the internal cross brace with the box/slot supports, resizes the sensor dish, changes the front of secondary hull, and adds in the above 14 names and uses the 1701-1714 decal sheet for the other ships.

1973 - Franz Joseph draws up his Enterprise Blueprints and links up the original, undisputed 4 film ship names/numbers (Constellation-1017, Republic-1371, Constitution-1700, Enterprise-1701) with his cronological list and the "The Making of Star Trek" names. He then usues this list in his Blueprints and Tech Manual:

U.S.S. Constellation-------NCC-1017
U.S.S. Republic-----------NCC-1371
U.S.S. Constitution-------NCC-1700
U.S.S. Enterprise---------NCC-1701
U.S.S. Farragut----------NCC-1702
U.S.S. Lexington---------NCC-1703
U.S.S. Yorktown---------NCC-1704
U.S.S. Excalibur----------NCC-1705
U.S.S. Exeter------------NCC-1706
U.S.S. Hood-------------NCC-1707
U.S.S. Intrepid----------NCC-1708
U.S.S. Valiant-----------NCC-1709
U.S.S. Kongo------------NCC-1710
U.S.S. Potempkin--------NCC-1711

Amt adds in their "Starship Box" on the instruction sheet and includes the new Franz Joseph list, which was approved by Paramont, at the time. however, they keep their 1701-1714 numbered decal sheet the same. (Why bother changing it?)

This list lasted with the AMT kit from 1973-1991, and is even found on the newer instruction sheet of 1991.

2009 New model - old molds with saucer grid removed. New decal sheet following Michael Okuda's book "The Star Trek Encyclopedea" and uses Greg Jein's list, now approved by Paramont.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
343 Posts
How do you account for Kirk's comment in "Tomorrow is Yesterday"
while talking to Captain Christopher that "there are only twelve like
her in the fleet." ?
To me, that quote means there are 13. I guess it's all how you look at it. I take it to mean, there are twelve *others* like her, meaning 13 in all.

But with some being destroyed and probably replaced, I'm sure it would be hard to get an accurate count when shows changed things over seasons anyway.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,863 Posts
I was wondering when the "Court Martial" list would be mentioned in this thread (quite early, as it should be!). I never knew about Greg using that list until much later but it's another details of the series that I had never paid attention to until I saw the episode in hi-def, where the text on the chart is quite legible. Obviously AMT just took the simplest approach in generating their original decal sheet, and gradually over the years the company and Trek modelers have dug out more and more "canon" details of the ship and its registry.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,297 Posts
The thing about the list shown in "Court Martial" is that the list ONLY showed numbers- no names at all!! Even Greg Jein himself admitted that the method used to determine names from was bizarre, to say the least. It really is no more canonical than the FJ list, the only difference is that one list fell out of favour, the other is the new canon. There is nothing in the original series to actually determine the numbers for mentioned ships, except where they were specifically mentioned and/or shown onscreen.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,752 Posts
Discussion Starter #15
TOS probably needed seasons 4&5 to utilize some of the Star Ship names and numbers. Too bad that we didn't get the 4th and 5th.
 
1 - 15 of 15 Posts
Top