Constitution Class

frostytheplebe

frostytheplebe

Seventh Part of the Seal
This class' history has always been somewhat of an enigma to me. Initially I believe ships under this class were called "Starship Class." Which was then changed to Constitution class. The things I'm curious about... The Original Enterprise after about 20 years of service was being retired (ST III) Was this due to her Battle Damage or her age?

After which, they commission a new ship Enterprise Alpha for Kirk and crew. Why would they commission a new Constitution class if they were on the way out the door, or was this a recommission of a mothballed cruiser. Why not just commission the next Excelsior class enterprise.

Finally, there is some evidence of the Constitution class being around as long as Picard's time aboard the Stargazer. Yet they should all have been retired at this point... question is why? The Miranda and Excelsior classes lasted well over 100 years in service with the Constellation and Ambassador classes not far behind.
 
From the top of my head partially both. However there is no point to mothballing if you can still find a use for it(training ship for cadets, or possible a museum(TCS victory in WC4, or the galactica in modernized BSG series)
 
This is one of those messy corners where overly literal fans run headfirst - for the lack of a better word - art. The basic story decisions from which you're trying to derive all this backstory aren't ones made from a careful consideration of long range naval design needs, and we should accept and understand that instead of pretending otherwise.

The crew can't be given an Excelsior at the end of Star Trek IV because the whole point of the Excelsior in the first place was that it was an obnoxious upstart. The new kid that thought it was better than the Enterprise. It wouldn't be a reward, dramatically speaking -- you have to establish that the old Enterprise is still the best.

(Similarly, the "retirement" at the end of Star Trek VI was a symbolic gesture towards ST:TNG, then airing... the action, and the speech that accompanies it, don't make sense in some sort of direct timeline manner, but it's clearly why they're there in the first place.)
 
Mace said:
From the top of my head partially both. However there is no point to mothballing if you can still find a use for it(training ship for cadets, or possible a museum(TCS victory in WC4, or the galactica in modernized BSG series)
Click to expand...

My bad, i meant why were they going to retire the original after only 20 years of service.
 
My bad, i meant why were they going to retire the original after only 20 years of service.
Click to expand...

As opposed to the age at which we *normally* retire our giant spaceships :)?

I say, as Discovery enters her 25th year of service. But even putting aside what I'm about to explain, these things don't happen in a linear fashion. Ships aren't comissioned, serve for a specific number of years and then retire. It sounds nice on paper, but it doesn't happen. The decision to decomission them is based on all sorts of factors that accumulate over the years -- how they're aging, necessity, money, comparative upgrades, etc. Pull up Wikipedia's list of Essex-class carriers (the successor to the Yorktown-class, upon which Star Trek's Enterprise was based) and look at when they were retired. It's not a straight line - at all (for a group of ships built at the same time, their decomissioning dates range from the late 1940s to the early 1990s.

.... that noted, the quote you're referring to is generally considered something of a continuity error. The script writer apparently chose the line because that's how much time had passed since Kirk started his original five year mission... but didn't realize that there had been previous captains (Spock previously has a line about serving under Pike for eleven years). The 'accepted' age for the original Enterprise in Star Trek III is actually forty rather than twenty, allowing the missions of Captains April and Pike.
 
frostytheplebe said:
Why would they commission a new Constitution class if they were on the way out the door, or was this a recommission of a mothballed cruiser. Why not just commission the next Excelsior class enterprise.
Click to expand...

I'm sure Kirk had enough pull within Starfleet to make that happen if he wanted.
 
Bandit LOAF said:
The crew can't be given an Excelsior at the end of Star Trek IV because the whole point of the Excelsior in the first place was that it was an obnoxious upstart. The new kid that thought it was better than the Enterprise. It wouldn't be a reward, dramatically speaking -- you have to establish that the old Enterprise is still the best.
Click to expand...

Yeah at first, I'll admit that the original crew seemed to have some animosity towards the Excelsior, and rightfully so... All except Sulu that is, he was starry eyed from the moment he saw her.

But they all seemed to be a little more appreciative of the ship at the end of TUC.

Plus even Scotty had to admit that the Enterprise B was a "Damn fine ship."

Personally I didnt see the attitude that she was better then the Enterprise anywhere other than Cpt. Stiles who was later replaced... still I see your point.
 
Yeah, but the Excelsior love didn't happen until AFTER Star Trek IV. Before then you might remember the quote...

Sulu: She's supposed to have transwarp drive.
Scotty: Aye, and if my grandmother had wheels, she'd be a wagon!

Take a look around the net and you'll find hundreds if not thousands of conflicting theories about the Constitution class and especially the Enterprises and their decommissioning schedules. Basically it all comes down to what loaf said though, everything was done for dramatic purpose.

And about the Excelsior and Miranda class ships still hanging around, the answer is simply money. Those are the models that they had sitting around in the studio as it was too expensive to just produce new models except for ones made out of spare parts like the Nebula and the Best of Both Worlds graveyard. You can explain it by saying the ships themselves aren't that old, considering most of them have high NCC numbers you can assume that for whatever reason the designs were successful enough to continue producing for almost a century while for whatever other reason the Constitution Class became unnecessary.
 
I think they made it pretty clear, in ST3, that the Enterprise was being retired because of here age and damage and not the entire class.

Also, current US naval ships are designed with a fifty year (I could be wrong) lifespan, but the designers have built in enough adaptability that they could go on for much longer, much like the Air Force has done with the A-10 and B-52. So, in the twenty-third century, I wouldn't be at all surprised if Starfleet built ships that were designed to last for two hundred years.
 
Captain Obvious said:
Take a look around the net and you'll find hundreds if not thousands of conflicting theories about the Constitution class and especially the Enterprises and their decommissioning schedules. Basically it all comes down to what loaf said though, everything was done for dramatic purpose.
Click to expand...

Sadly that is very true... there is some evidence that a Constitution class starship was even present at Wolf 359. You can see the remains of the star drive section of one to the right of the enterprise.
 
With proper upgrades and refits, the Galaxy Class was to have a service life of no less than 100 years before retirement. It was stated in the Galaxy Class Technical Manual. Its possible that depending on the service role of the ship could easily pass that mark.
 
matthew954 said:
With proper upgrades and refits, the Galaxy Class was to have a service life of no less than 100 years before retirement. It was stated in the Galaxy Class Technical Manual. Its possible that depending on the service role of the ship could easily pass that mark.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I read that and laughed. I don't know it always seems like almost every Galaxy class we see is getting blasted: Yamoto, Enterprise, Odyssey, Cortez, etc. They're huge ships, but thier defenses always seemed a little... thin?
 
Yeah, I read that and laughed. I don't know it always seems like almost every Galaxy class we see is getting blasted: Yamoto, Enterprise, Odyssey, Cortez, etc. They're huge ships, but thier defenses always seemed a little... thin?
Click to expand...

I'm willing to bet some giant percent of starships that aren't the Enterprise(/Defiant/Voyager) are destroyed within 44 minutes of their introduction.
 
UHURA: I'm reading a distress signal Captain.

KIRK: On main screen. (I don't know what exact phrasing he'd use, so sue me.)

OTHER CAPTAIN: Mayday, mayday, this is the Federation starship Upchuk, the Enterprise is in out vicinity! I repeat, we are in extreme danger of destruction because we are in close proximity to the Enterprise!


Might as well happen at this rate... :p
 
Max Gene said:
UHURA: I'm reading a distress signal Captain.

KIRK: On main screen. (I don't know what exact phrasing he'd use, so sue me.)

OTHER CAPTAIN: Mayday, mayday, this is the Federation starship Upchuk, the Enterprise is in out vicinity! I repeat, we are in extreme danger of destruction because we are in close proximity to the Enterprise!


Might as well happen at this rate... :p
Click to expand...

Its way too true... Exeter, Excalibur, Potempkin, Hood, Constellation, Intrepid, Lexington, Grissom, Saratoga, Yamoto, Tsiokofsky, Yosemite, Hera, Biko, Britain, Tulstoy, Kyushu, Melbourne, Saratoga, T'Pau... did I miss any?
 
matthew954 said:
With proper upgrades and refits, the Galaxy Class was to have a service life of no less than 100 years before retirement. It was stated in the Galaxy Class Technical Manual. Its possible that depending on the service role of the ship could easily pass that mark.
Click to expand...

Yes but that having been said, in "All Good Things" the Enterprise was only about 42 years old and they tried to retire her. The only reason they didn't is because Riker took the ship as his flag.

frostytheplebe said:
Its way too true... Exeter, Excalibur, Potempkin, Hood, Constellation, Intrepid, Lexington, Grissom, Saratoga, Yamoto, Tsiokofsky, Yosemite, Hera, Biko, Britain, Tulstoy, Kyushu, Melbourne, Saratoga, T'Pau... did I miss any?
Click to expand...

Pegasus, Aurora... Columbia
 
Yes but that having been said, in "All Good Things" the Enterprise was only about 42 years old and they tried to retire her. The only reason they didn't is because Riker took the ship as his flag.
Click to expand...

Oh no, an artificial reality/dream which could never have existed vaguely contradicts a single non-specific notation in some licensed material that the show's writers don't consider canonical. Star Trek is exploding all around us!
 
Bandit LOAF said:
Oh no, an artificial reality/dream which could never have existed vaguely contradicts a single non-specific notation in some licensed material that the show's writers don't consider canonical. Star Trek is exploding all around us!
Click to expand...

Haha, that exclamation came about 10 years too late... :D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top