need some specs on the vesuvious

Napoleon, you need to look up the definition of "circumstantial". The arguments supplied by LOAF and others are not circumstantial -- they are based on direct factual evidence. Conversely, your assumption that the EISEN could be a new class of ship is ENTIRELY circumstantial. There is no evidence to support it...at all. It is dependent upon a set of circumstances that have no known factual basis (re: the definition of "circumstantial").

It seems to me that this entire argument could easily fall under the premise of Occam's Razor:

A rule in science and philosophy stating that entities should not be multiplied needlessly. This rule is interpreted to mean that the simplest of two or more competing theories is preferable and that an explanation for unknown phenomena should first be attempted in terms of what is already known. (Webster's Dictionary)

The last couple of phrases there are the key. Read it closely. We KNOW certain things about the EISEN that clearly support it being a VESUVIUS-class carrier. We know NOTHING that supports your "new class" contention, and in fact have evidence which refutes it.

Can it be any simpler???
 
Actually LOAF, just because the ship is named the Eisen does not mean anything about when it was made because there is a little something called, RECOMMISHIONING, a process which all navies have that allows them to RENAME ships. As such any ship could have been renamed. Your point is valid about the jumping but as I said, maybe right when it was getting rid of the Wolfpack, it was getting a reinforcement wing from a nearby base and or transport. Also I agree that in all likelyhood the Eisen was/is a vesuvius class ship, I just contend that it does not have to be.
 
Originally posted by Napoleon
Actually LOAF, just because the ship is named the Eisen does not mean anything about when it was made because there is a little something called, RECOMMISHIONING, a process which all navies have that allows them to RENAME ships.
Click to expand...
Hmmm. Can you provide an example. Recommissioning is not uncommon, but renaming a vessel at that time...I cannot recall an instance heard of that. At best, it's a very, VERY rare event.
 
Napoleon....
Commission - a brand new ship.
Decomission - send the ship to the junkyard.
Recomission - Get the ship from the junkyard, fix it (if need it) and upgrade it (or not).
 
yes but when you recommission names can be changed, though its not WC here is an example. In the seventh season of ST:DS9 the defiant was destroyed. Later that season a new defiant class ship, the San Palo was assigned to the crew of the defiant/ds9. Sisko was given immediate permission to rename her the defiant, after his lost ship
 
This is utterly rediculous -- there's absolutely no precedence for renaming a ship in the Wing Commander universe. At the *very* least, give us a water-navy example... not *STAR TREK*.

(Of course, we already proved that there's not an old ship capable of being the Eisen...)
 
Actually, ships have been renamed in the Wing Commander universe.

Ships of the Terran Confederation Navy, when purchased by the FRLN were renamed. The best example being the Tarawa, renamed Independence.

TC
 
Originally posted by TC
Actually, ships have been renamed in the Wing Commander universe.

Ships of the Terran Confederation Navy, when purchased by the FRLN were renamed. The best example being the Tarawa, renamed Independence.

TC
Click to expand...

That's because it was purchased by another nation. There's precedence for this in the real world. What LOAF speaks of is a goverment renaming one of its OWN ships.
 
Which has... absolutely nothing to do with this? We're talking about a government re-naming its own ships.
 
Yes, but why sould ConFed Navy do that to one of their own ships?
The FRLN renamed a ship that came from ConFed navy, there could have been another Tarawa in their navy so it gets to be named Independence to avoid confusion.
 
Actually, LOAF, you said there was "absolutely no precedence for renaming a ship in the Wing Commander universe." This seems to say that nowhere in the Wing Commander universe do they rename ships :)

TC
 
Read the rest of the thread, we're not talking about a transfer between two nations (which, of course, you already know -- pick a fight for no reason again and I'll ban you faster than a tachyon).
 
LOAF: Just becuase none of the ships we have served on have been renamed, does not mean that there aren't ships that haven't been renamed. Water navy example, in the late 50's early 60's the US Navy took a standard attack sub (i forgot it's name), equiped it with nuclear missiles and renamed it the USS George Washington. Here is a possiblitiy for a WC ship that could easily have been renamed, the Concordia Super Cruiser from the movie, if it wasn't destroyed probably would have been renamed when the Confederation Dreadnought TCS Concordia was commisioned. Another example USS Texas (BB2), a spanish american war era battleship, was renamed the USS San Jaqunto after a new battleship was created and named the Texas. These are just a few examples that I thought of off the top of my head, I used a ST example earlier to show why a ship may be renamed. The TCS Delphi became the BWS Intrepid (I say this because when the BW aquired it they were still part of the Terran Confederation, so a foriegn gov. did not get it and actually it probably was the TCS Intrepid for a time as well). In non-military examples the France, a cruise ship was renamed the Norway. So there is plenty of precident to rename ships.
 
The Concordia from the movie was probably destroyed. The Confederation seems to like having a Concordia always in service... There have been a few examples of ships named Concordia :) . Why would you rename a ship and then give that name to another? That's just stupid... The only real reasons I can see for a renaming is enough of a refit that it isn't really the same ship anymore or renaming as some sort of monument. Both of these reasons seem odd. First, why would you bother to change the name, even if the ship was heavily refitted... Second, why not build a new ship and then name it after someone/something. I know I'd personally rather have a new ship named after me.

TC
 
Yes but TC if you read my post you will see that the old and reletivly outdated USS Texas was renamed when a newer ship was made and they wanted to name her the Texas, so it does happen. And after the Concordia is destroyed in the Minstral Sea, there are no more connies in confederation service unless their is one that we are unaware of
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top