wanttaja@ssc-vax.UUCP (08/06/84)
< 10 print "NO" < 20 goto 10 Now, I admit I'm an ex-zoomie, not a squid, but there is one thing I do know about ships... You RARELY, if EVER, find a ship (as opposed to a yacht, etc.) named with a sequence number... i.e. Enterprise II. Refering back to ST-TMP, there is a sequence in the crew lounge where Decker shows a set of pictures of "Ships named Enterprise." There are at least three pictures other than the ST ship there... the ST ship isn't called Enterprise IV, is it? There was an aircraft carrier named Enterprise in WWII, which was scrapped in the 50's, and of course, the the completely different nuclear carrier today. For historicl purposes, the ships are differentiated by their numerical designation, such as CV(N)-68 for a nuclear carrier, DD-530 for a destroyer, etc. If Kirk 'n company get a new ship in ST IV, it should be named: ENTERPRISE and have a new NCC number.
ables@ut-ngp.UUCP (King Ables) (08/08/84)
>You RARELY, if EVER, find a ship (as opposed to a yacht, etc.) named with >a sequence number... i.e. Enterprise II. Well, for what it's worth, the Star Trek Technical Manual lists replaced ships for those lost/destroyed as <name> II (I know, I know, the Tech. Man. isn't God's gift to the ST Universe, I'm just making an observation). Actually, I like your suggestion the best: build another one (of the Constitution Class) to replace the Enterprise, give it another registry number, and call it the Enteprise. On official documents and things, they can call it Enterprise II, but then Kirk could still say "These are the voyages of the starship Enterprise.." ---- -King ARPA:ables@ut-ngp UUCP:{ctvax,ihnp4,kpno,seismo}!ut-sally!ut-ngp!ables