Star Trek geeking

JohnnyBoy · Post by **JohnnyBoy** » Mon Jul 14, 2008 10:03 am

Frame wrote:
Selezen wrote:
at least until the Yamato blew up...
Darn!!! I remember that episode, i remember i ran it over and over again at slow speed, to see the hull being burned away. nasty, but liked the effect...

Let's take a look, Frame.... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_1WtRpPG8C0

Frame · Post by **Frame** » Mon Jul 14, 2008 2:00 pm

JohnnyBoy wrote:
Frame wrote:
Selezen wrote:
at least until the Yamato blew up...
Darn!!! I remember that episode, i remember i ran it over and over again at slow speed, to see the hull being burned away. nasty, but liked the effect...
Let's take a look, Frame.... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_1WtRpPG8C0

Darn you just made me spend an hour or two watching the dominion war clips... never saw them before

must have been released while i was... hunting...

Selezen · Post by **Selezen** » Mon Jul 14, 2008 10:16 pm

After all that wondering about what NCC means I thought I would go and find out...

Turns out that Naval Construction Contract is only PARTLY canonical. Well, it's probably now totally non-canon! That particular definition first appeared in a Franz Joseph publication of Enterprise blueprints, based on information and set designs from the original series. The Franz Joseph bloke made up the meaning and included it in his plans which were approved by Paramount and Mr Roddenberry himself. In that aspect they were canonical at the time.

Unfortunately Paramount changed pretty much everything about Trek over the intervening years, and now there are very few official Trek "employees" who would even remember the work people like Franz Joseph did in fleshing out the universe. Now, the official line is:

startrek.com wrote:
The Starfleet starship registry prefix "NCC" doesn't officially mean anything other than it is the standard prefix for starships in service. There have been other prefixes, notably "NX," denoting a prototype, or experimental vessel* (see footnote below).
When Star Trek creator Gene Roddenberry was asked this question, he replied that there was no significance to the letters and numbers comprising the registry of the U.S.S. Enterprise. At the time Star Trek first aired, airplanes commonly had "NC" on them, and adding the extra "C" updated the look.

Original series art director (and avid pilot) Matt Jefferies commented that he chose the "1701" combination of numbers because it was legible from a distance and the numbers wouldn't be confused. Other numbers, like 3, 2 and 5, were not used for this very reason. Also, the extra "C" in "NCC" was a nod to the Russian abbreviation for the old Soviet Union, "CCCP." According to Jefferies, "If we do anything in space, we (Americans and Russians) have to do it together."

*Prior to Star Trek: Enterprise, the two most famous ships with the "NX" prefix were the U.S.S. Excelsior NX-2000 and the U.S.S. Defiant NX-74205. Once the U.S.S. Excelsior was rendered operational, the prefix changed to the standard "NCC."

In Star Trek: Enterprise, however, Captain Archer's Warp 5 flagship was designated the NX-01, and its sister ship, the Columbia, was NX-02. Archer once referred to that style of starship as "NX-class." Whether or not "NX" was intended to indicate prototype status in the 22nd century is unclear.

One thing I do know for certain about the registrations is this: The USS Constellation, NCC-1071, was numbered out of the main sequence for a very simple reason: the shooting model was a bashed up AMT/ERTL model kit (the ones that can now be found on Ebay for extortionate prices) and all they did was use the transfers/decals that came with the kit, cutting up the 1701 decal and rearranging the numbers.

Yeah - I've been a trekkie nearly as long as I've been an Eliteer.

Website · Post by **DaddyHoggy** » Mon Jul 14, 2008 10:23 pm

@Selezen - I think you've covered/backed-up everything I said earlier - I find it odd that they could have equally cut it up and made NCC-1710 (or bought two kits and made 1707, 1711, 1717, 1770, 1771 - pretty much anything except the stupidly numbered 1017!)

Selezen · Post by **Selezen** » Tue Jul 15, 2008 7:13 am

Yeah, they could have been a little more thorough - however it does fit with the original attitude towards continuity - as in not having any.

The NCC codes were just decoration, so why bother making them consistent? It was only when geeks got involved <cough>Okuda</cough> that things started to get a little fleshed out...

JensAyton · Post by **JensAyton** » Tue Jul 15, 2008 3:16 pm

Selezen wrote:
Mind you, STV deserves to be apocryphal... The rocket boot scene was REALLY badly edited...

Not to mention the deadly Invisible Rock Monster…

NCC-1700 was the USS Constitution - the class ship.

Cite?

Post by **Disembodied** » Tue Jul 15, 2008 3:39 pm

Ahruman wrote:
Not to mention the deadly Invisible Rock Monster...

Ah, but at least it finally got its moment in the sun in Galaxy Quest!

Website · Post by **DaddyHoggy** » Tue Jul 15, 2008 5:22 pm

@Ahruman - apparently it's name and designation appear on a wall display in the TOS episode "Court Martial"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constituti ... s_starship although reading citation [7] it may not have actually featured...

Captain Hesperus · Post by **Captain Hesperus** » Tue Jul 15, 2008 8:07 pm

<walks in>
<_<

>_>

0_o

<backs out slowly>

Captain Hesperus

Website · Post by **DaddyHoggy** » Tue Jul 15, 2008 8:51 pm

Selezen · Post by **Selezen** » Thu Jul 17, 2008 7:22 am

Ahruman wrote:
NCC-1700 was the USS Constitution - the class ship.
Cite?

Got it from the Star Trek Encyclopedia - compiled by Mike and Denise Okuda (staffers), so considered canon.

JohnnyBoy · Post by **JohnnyBoy** » Sun Jul 20, 2008 10:52 am

IMHO, I don't think we ever saw enough of the Vulcan ships in Star Trek. They always seemed so elegant....

Star Gazer · Post by **Star Gazer** » Tue Jul 22, 2008 9:03 pm

Anyone up for modelling one of those...???

JensAyton · Post by **JensAyton** » Tue Jul 22, 2008 10:52 pm

Star Gazer wrote:
Anyone up for modelling one of those...???

…or finding out for what mod of what game that one was modelled? :-)

JohnnyBoy · Post by **JohnnyBoy** » Wed Jul 23, 2008 10:16 am

Ahruman wrote:
…or finding out for what mod of what game that one was modelled?

Sorry Ahruman, I should have pasted the link...
http://www.startrek-gamers.com/download ... iew&id=574