Footnotes Style
Kobi, I have honestly no idea why you changed that. It looks very disorganized now. I think it looked more clear in the previous version. Ottens 16:20, 3 Jul 2004 (CEST)
- I'm sorry, but the ** looks better if you ask me, because the single : does not give the same indent as the *; of course I would be happy if there were no discs in front of the "evidence paragraphs", something which could be accomplished with <br/><br/> to force the line break (other than that, you have written an impressive article here) -- Kobi 17:52, 3 Jul 2004 (CEST)
- Now it looks like the paragraphs below "Enterprise class" are three different point. They are not. They are simply three different paragraphs.
Thanks ;) Ottens 18:21, 3 Jul 2004 (CEST)
Thumbnailed Images & Sidebars
I tried to use normal thumbnails for the images, but with quite a lot of images, the page looks very disorganized this way. Therefore, I decided to put them all in two large sidebars... Ottens 15:40, 3 Jul 2004 (CEST)
- Shouldn't the sidebar about "Original Configuration" go with the text about the "Original Configuration", just like the sidebar about the "Refit Configuration" is next to the text about the "Refit Configuration"? Now the sidebar about the "Original Configuration" is next to the intro text, which is about the Constitution class in whole. Ottens 20:56, 3 Jul 2004 (CEST)
- cough* Captainmike? ;) Ottens 17:42, 5 Jul 2004 (CEST)
- Well, I do see your point about that, however the bulk of the article creates a long TOC at the top, so placing the table below that creates a situation where there is no information on the page when loaded. Perhaps the Constitution class refit deserves its own article, since it is making this one unreadable?
- I'll rearrange a little, in case you don't like that option -- Captain Mike K. Bartel 17:46, 5 Jul 2004 (CEST)
- I was thinking about giving the Refit its own page, but I think that is very unpractical. People would look for info about the Constitution class, and it's probably easier to have both the Original and the Refit on the same page... and it's easier linking to it then for writers. Ottens 17:50, 5 Jul 2004 (CEST)
- Creating individual pages for both would, however, solve the problem. Plus the current page is quite long, eh. Ottens 17:52, 5 Jul 2004 (CEST)
- Actually, I see another problem that has been nagging me for a while. How come the Constitution class article is purely about the internal arrangement of the USS Enterprise (NCC-1701) but there is no information about the arrangement in THAT article? since starships classes differ from ship to ship, isn't this information misplaced (similar to all the misplaced information in the Excelsior class article -- notes about the USS Excelsior's internal arrangement belonged in USS Excelsior, not in the Excelsior class article, and i think that is what's happening here. The Enterprise is only one ship OF the Constitution class, so its arrangement may not mean much to other vessels in that series -- Captain Mike K. Bartel 17:53, 5 Jul 2004 (CEST)
- I was under the impression the internal arrangement of the Enterprise was standard among Constitution class starships. Just like the Interior information of the Enterprise-D is on the Galaxy class page, not on the Enterprise-D page. Of course the Enterprise is the only Constitution class vessel we've seen from the inside, but that counts as well for the Excelsior, the Enterprise-D, Voyager... For practically every starship. And I doubt the interior of starships of the same class would be radically different. Of course, there might be slight differences, but overall, I think it's quite the same... Ottens 17:58, 5 Jul 2004 (CEST)
- HOWEVER, it would solve all our problems! The interior info about the original Enterprise would go there, and the interior about the refitted on the Enterprise-A page. The article would be considerably smaller, and we could have just ONE Constitution class article. Ottens 18:04, 5 Jul 2004 (CEST)
- This is also in the interests of brevity, and reducing our IMAGE HEAVY articles. If a reader wished a detailed description of a transporter room, they could click on the link to a separate article... keep Constitution class about the Constitution, and keep a bridge article, transporter room article.. etc.. use the Constitution and Enterprise articles to show how their bridges are different from the others. -- Captain Mike K. Bartel 18:11, 5 Jul 2004 (CEST)
- For a detailed description about a transporter room, they should go the the Transporter page, but for a description about the Constitution class USS Enterprise Transporter Room, they should go to the USS Enterprise page. ;) Anyway, I'll have things rearranged... Ottens 18:13, 5 Jul 2004 (CEST)
USS Republic
Is the USS Republic on the Uncertain Ships list meant to be the ship mentioned in Court Martial? If so then registry is given in dialogue and is NCC-1371. It also appears on the mission assignment graphic from ST VI, though as that's not really visible the canonicity is debatable.
Is there a Constitution Class Merrimack?
In the list of Federation Starships page:
http://www.memory-alpha.org/en/index.php/List_of_Federation_starships
There is a Merrimack listed as a Constitution class ship. It was apparently mentioned in ST:TMP. I doubt it was shown, so unless someone can confirm that it was Constitution class (or not) it should be listed on the Constitution class page as "uncertain".
The website is a beautiful resource! I don't know how (or honestly why :-) you devote the time it must take, but I appreciated finding it!
-- Mickey Rowe (rowe@psych.ucsb.edu)
Final Starship List... Possibly
I was reading "The Making of Star Trek" By Stephen E. Whitfield and Gene Roddenberry, and it lists the following Starship names as the final list of Constitution class vessels for the series:
Enterprise, Exeter, Excalibur, Lexington, Yorktown, Potemkin, Republic, Hood, Constitution, Kongo, Constellation, Farragut, Valient, and Intrepid.
Maybe this will help with what ships are and are not "real".
User:Time Travler 3:01Am CST. 2-15-05 How can the list be erroneous since Roddenberry himself created it. EAnchor 10:42 PM 08 July, 2004.
- Well, considering that it already erroneously lists Valiant and Republic, I'd say its a bad start. --Captain Mike K. Bartel
These ships are confirmed:
- Constitution - NCC-1700. Registry seen on-screen possibly in the original series, and definitely in Franz Joseph drawings on-screen in the movies. The name is confirmed by the dialogue naming the class.
- Enterprise NCC-1701
- Constellation NCC-1017. Seen on-screen in "Doomsday Machine"
- Exeter. Seen as a constitution in "Omega Glory" registry NCC-1672 is only from Jein and Okuda, but is widely accepted
- Excalibur. Seen in "Ultimate Computer" Registry NCC-1664 by Jein
- Lexington. Seen in "Ultimate Computer" Registry by Jein, though
- Potemkin. Seen in "Ultimate Computer" Registry by Jein
- Hood. Seen in "Ultimate Computer" Registry by Jein
- Defiant - seen in "Tholian Web" NCC-1764 Registry by Jein, though
Uncertain
- Intrepid - never seen, but said to have a crew of 430. NCC-1631 registry by Jein
- Farragut - never seen, no evidence it was a constitution. registry from Jein only.
- Yorktown - never seen, no evidence it was a constitution. NCC-1717 registry from Jein & Okuda only.
- Kongo - never seen, never mentioned. listed only is Star Trek VI background art.
- Eagle NCC-956 - never seen, never mentioned. listed only is Star Trek VI background art.
- Merrimack - a Constitution from the Technical Manual, mentioned in TMP comm chatter. its class wasnt mentioned in the movie, but in the manual -- Captain Mike K. Bartel 17:26, 10 Jul 2004 (CEST)
Erroneous
- Valiant - theres no way Valiant could have been a Constitution 50 years prior to TOS. its possible there was another Constitution-class Valiant based on the list, but non-canon speculation is not appropriate
- Republic - no one ever said it was a constitution, who knows where this reference came from (probably that non-canon book you cited). since the ship had "old style" pile circuits and suh, and was a training ship, I'd want to believe it was older. its possible there was another Constitution-class Republic(the DS9 training ship?) , after the NCC-1371 was decommissioned based on the list, but non-canon speculation is not appropriate
- "that non canon book" you speak of was written by Gene Roddenberry himself during the original production run of the Original Series and published towards the end of the third season, and is mostly reprints of the original writers guide and production materials (as well as internal memos). As something written at the time, by Roddenberry himself, it's a little cavalier to dismiss it as "non-canon", it's at least as canon as the semi-canon Technical Manuals and Chronology/Encyclopedia since it was made by the producers of a series, during that series, as a reference to that series --12.210.252.89 22:12, 8 May 2005 (UTC)
There are a few more uncertainties from un-aired dialogue, possibly a couple from "Amok Time" script, and a few more uncertainties from the Star Trek VI art (but I'm hesitant to include the ST:6 ones that aren't listed in the Making of Star Trek lists, its more than likely they are other types, and more believably so also) --Captain Mike K. Bartel 12:00, 9 Jul 2004 (CEST)
- The Essex and Eagle are from an early draft for "Journey to Babel", the Excalibur and Endeavour are from "Amok Time", first draft; Excalibur was then used in "Ultimate Computer" -- Kobi 12:07, 9 Jul 2004 (CEST)
Warp Factor
Maximum Warp on the refit shows "warp 12". This is impossible because the maximum speed attainable is almost warp 10. Warp 10 cannot be reached as it is referred to moving at an infinite speed. This is accepted canon, and also reinforced in more than one novel.
See Warp Factor Chart.
- That speed is in the old-style Cochrane scale, which was used on TOS. It had to have been, considering the number of times Evil Alien Entities caused the ship to reach Warp 15. --Steve 16:34, 9 Jul 2004 (CEST)
- The maximum speed reached by the Enterprise was Warp 14 in "Is There In Truth No Beauty" (and was dragged at warp 20 by Karla's ship ((which went warp 36 itself)) in "The Counter Clock Incident.") However, no cruising or maximum speeds were canonically established for the E-refit, so i removed the speed reference from its chart --Captain Mike K. Bartel 17:26, 10 Jul 2004 (CEST)
- BTW, the speeds listed (if the old scale is truly wf cubed = multiples of c):
- warp 14 = 2744 times the speed of light
- warp 20 = 8000 times the speed of light
- warp 36 = 46,656 times light
- these are all in the high warp 9.xx ranges on the new scale, of course--Captain Mike K. Bartel
Defiant's registry number
It generally thought that the Defiant's registry number is NCC-1764, which I believe originated with D. C. Fontana's Concordance, but this has never been established in any episode or film (though it might soon be established in "In a Mirror, Darkly").
In a Mirror, Darkly CGI Constitution Class
Would anyone like to mention under Background information that a CGI rendering of the Constitution was developed for In A Mirror Darkly, Parts I and II?