wHat happened to pockets?

posted on November 24th, 2012, 9:04 pm

Since we are going a bit off topic I have decided to switch the discussion to "Why don't renamed starships have pockets anymore?" that way everyone will be happy.

posted on November 25th, 2012, 8:05 pm

The reason you give for the Enterprise D not giving up its name is the same reason it would seem odd that they would rename the B to give the name to the Ambassador class version.

Thing is, the Galaxy class had been in service for less than 10 years when the Sovereign launched. While there is only an apocryphal launch date for the Enterprise-C, 2332 is pretty reasonable (putting the ship at having been in service for 12 years at the time of the Narendra III incident) and would have the Enterprise-B pegged as having been in service for nearly 40 years (established launch date of 2293).

posted on November 25th, 2012, 10:32 pm

The reason you give for the Enterprise D not giving up its name is the same reason it would seem odd that they would rename the B to give the name to the Ambassador class version.

Thing is, the Galaxy class had been in service for less than 10 years when the Sovereign launched. While there is only an apocryphal launch date for the Enterprise-C, 2332 is pretty reasonable (putting the ship at having been in service for 12 years at the time of the Narendra III incident) and would have the Enterprise-B pegged as having been in service for nearly 40 years (established launch date of 2293).

Which may be true, however in reality 40 years sounds like a long time, in truth that really doesnt mean anything as starfleet has shown a a willingness to continually refit ships to keep them current. And still the Excelsior was their 2nd tier ship when the Ambassador came out, so its not like it was all of a sudden rendered completely obsolete with the arrival of the Ambassador. The only way I could see the whole Enterprise being renamed the Lakota would be if the Enterprise were decommissioned, such as with the Enterprise A. Then they would pass the name on to the C, the only thing that doesnt make sense is why decommisson a "uprated" Excelsior class ship when you have so many older style varients in service? Which makes me think that more then likely the ship didnt survive to be decommissioned.

posted on November 26th, 2012, 8:45 am

Perhaps the upgraded variant that was pioneered (as far as we are aware) with the Enterprise-B wasn't as successful as hoped, or was too expensive for the advantages it gave over the regular Excelsior. Perhaps it wasn't very reliable. There are many reasons why a ship that is technically more advanced may be retired.

posted on November 26th, 2012, 7:07 pm

i thought the name "enterprise" was always the flagship of the fleet, so they want the flag ship to be the newest most powerful ship. a lot can be said for how you portray yourself and the flagship should be something to me marveled me thinks

posted on November 26th, 2012, 7:55 pm

Squire James hits some of the points I've been mulling as a reply to you, Equinox1701e.

The Enterprise-B was a production variant of the standard Excelsior, but such a variant wouldn't just come from thin air; the design would have been created to meet specific goals. We don't know what those goals are, but the expanded engineering hull, extra impulse engines and the addition of Bussard ramscoops to the warp nacelles aren't there for decoration.*

We don't need to know why these design modifications were made to the Excelsior class for the B, but we do know that Starfleet reverted from them to the original Excelsior pattern (Excelsior production lasts well into the 24th century, continuing past the Ambassador's production run based on the assumption that NCC numbers are generally chronological). This could be for all sorts of reasons, but the most likely are that it didn't meet expectations, or was difficult to maintain compared to the standard Excelsior. In that case, I would expect the ship to remain in service for a couple of tours, and be quietly decommissioned and mothballed afterwards.

With the post Wolf-359 reconstruction and Dominion War mobilisation, the extra internal volume likely gave Starfleet's shipyard engineers a lot of extra possibilities compared to refitting standard Excelsiors, and hence the reactivated and recommissioned hull enjoying a refit with capabilities beyond that of the regular members of the class.

* I've read some speculation that it may be to do with adding saucer separation to the class as the Enterprise-B's MSD in Generations has a battle bridge. See here.

posted on November 26th, 2012, 10:15 pm

i thought the name "enterprise" was always the flagship of the fleet, so they want the flag ship to be the newest most powerful ship

that only works if the federation goes years without a flagship. the ent c was destroyed before the launch of the ent d. so either another ship served as flagship, or starfleet didn't have one.

posted on November 26th, 2012, 10:45 pm

good point, but perhaps it would seem insensitive if they put a new one out strait away after the other was destroyed? giving another ship the role for a while before returning to enterprise again.

posted on November 26th, 2012, 10:47 pm

good point, but perhaps it would seem insensitive if they put a new one out strait away after the other was destroyed? giving another ship the role for a while before returning to enterprise again.

ent c was destroyed years before ent d launched. there would have been time to have a new ship assigned as flagship. probably another ambas class.

posted on November 26th, 2012, 11:03 pm

One could also speculate that they retired the B and didn't immediately make a new Enterprise also, since the B was the one that arguably the most famous Federation Officer of all time died on, and on it's maiden voyage too. All mariners are superstitious buggers It'd also by that measure be the first Enterprise not to have had said man on the bridge. It was always sort of his icon, he made the Enterprise the name that it is.

Ergo, B is retired and there is a reluctance to "tempt fate" as it were and out respect for Kirk a new Enterprise isn't built for many years. The C is finally commissioned, eventually lost as Narendra, and then again the name is dropped for a while out of remembrance for the dead.

Makes you realise why they made the Galaxy Class so utterly enormous and with so many redundant systems, fail-safes, etc

posted on November 27th, 2012, 12:15 am

Squire James hits some of the points I've been mulling as a reply to you, Equinox1701e.

The Enterprise-B was a production variant of the standard Excelsior, but such a variant wouldn't just come from thin air; the design would have been created to meet specific goals. We don't know what those goals are, but the expanded engineering hull, extra impulse engines and the addition of Bussard ramscoops to the warp nacelles aren't there for decoration.*

We don't need to know why these design modifications were made to the Excelsior class for the B, but we do know that Starfleet reverted from them to the original Excelsior pattern (Excelsior production lasts well into the 24th century, continuing past the Ambassador's production run based on the assumption that NCC numbers are generally chronological). This could be for all sorts of reasons, but the most likely are that it didn't meet expectations, or was difficult to maintain compared to the standard Excelsior. In that case, I would expect the ship to remain in service for a couple of tours, and be quietly decommissioned and mothballed afterwards.

With the post Wolf-359 reconstruction and Dominion War mobilisation, the extra internal volume likely gave Starfleet's shipyard engineers a lot of extra possibilities compared to refitting standard Excelsiors, and hence the reactivated and recommissioned hull enjoying a refit with capabilities beyond that of the regular members of the class.

* I've read some speculation that it may be to do with adding saucer separation to the class as the Enterprise-B's MSD in Generations has a battle bridge. See here.

I totally agree with that, the Enterprise B had many upgrades, or at leas design changes compared with a standard Excelsior, but this doesnt mean that there werent more of those type of Excelsiors flying around. Just becasue we've only seen one in the TNG time period doesnt mean that they didnt make more. And alot of those Excelsior class ships flying around we dont necessarily know if they are as old as the B or newer. And as far as the battle bridge, I have read that as well. I remember reading somewhere that the original Excelsior and in fact also the Constitution had the ability to saucer separate, atho the Constitution didnt have the ability to reintigrate.

posted on November 27th, 2012, 2:49 pm

I think the Constitution Refit model was built with a seperation feature and landing gear in the Saucer incase they decided to use it. MA says the same panels used to hide the landing gear is also on the Reliant and Excelsior, so they might also be capable of landing.

Design sketches of the Sovereign were apparently made showing it seperated and a Battle Bridge is on the MSD. The novel of Generations has Excelsior going through an emergency saucer separation drill and the novel of Encounter at Farpoint mentions seperation on the Hood (Excelsior) and Lexington (Nebula).

While never shown onscreen, emergency separation seems to be a common ability of Starfleet ships.