NCC-1017?

[FarShot]

So the infamous Constellation, with its NCC-1017.  We all know they just rearranged 1701 for the budget.

But how about a canon explanation?

Refit of an older class of ships?  Like from TOS style to TMP, only from pre TOS to TOS.  Ideas?  Perhaps something that looked like Wiley's Kelvinprise?

[ACES_HIGH]

yeah, a refit's the only reason that makes sense.

[King Class Scout]

the Constellation is usually listed in the Constitution comission piles (non Next G numbers seem to have nothing to do with the ship class).  the consty might just be still a first gen connie from the forties that got eaten before it could drydock for it's upgrade.

[majormagna]

Well, my thoughts are:
1) A re-fit a previous class,
2) A major re-build of a ship almost destroyed in battle (Perhaps the saucer survived?) or
3) A pathfinder that was put into mothballs, and brought back when fully working technologies tested on it were made avaliable.

Personally I prefer number 2, must have been a damned unlucky ship though.

[Joshmaul]

According to the non-canon Ships of the Star Fleet: Volume I (the bit that had all those fold-out schematics of the Belknap-class strike cruiser), the Constellation was refitted from an older class (Horizon-class, if I recall the text correctly) of cruiser to Constitution specs before it was destroyed. There was a lot of that inexplicable stuff - like the 1600 registries when the (generally-accepted) registries for the Constitution class start with the Constitution herself, at 1700.

Edit to add something: After checking shipschematics.net, I found a design for the Horizon-class, which appears to be a refitted Daedalus...the registry is NCC-1000, which would fit the Constellation...the design gives me pause, but given enough tinkering, you could get a Connie out of it. Here is the schematic: http://shipschematics.net/startrek/images/federation/cruiser_horizon.jpg

[King Class Scout]

odd...the Horizon is usually listed WITH the Daedeli rather than as a dade varient.

[FarShot]

Edit to add something: After checking shipschematics.net, I found a design for the Horizon-class, which appears to be a refitted Daedalus...the registry is NCC-1000, which would fit the Constellation...the design gives me pause, but given enough tinkering, you could get a Connie out of it. Here is the schematic: http://shipschematics.net/startrek/images/federation/cruiser_horizon.jpg

That would be quite a change to get it up to Connie level, but it could be done.

[Joshmaul]

odd...the Horizon is usually listed WITH the Daedeli rather than as a dade varient.

I thought that too, but the Starship Schematics Database is chock-full of designs that are largely non-canon, stuff like those old technical manuals and SotSF.

[Lionus]

You think that's bad? You should check theblueprints.com's scifi section.. no matter where you click, Star trek, stargate, BSG and B5 are happily mingled together..

[ACES_HIGH]

According to the non-canon Ships of the Star Fleet: Volume I (the bit that had all those fold-out schematics of the Belknap-class strike cruiser), the Constellation was refitted from an older class (Horizon-class, if I recall the text correctly) of cruiser to Constitution specs before it was destroyed. There was a lot of that inexplicable stuff - like the 1600 registries when the (generally-accepted) registries for the Constitution class start with the Constitution herself, at 1700.

Edit to add something: After checking shipschematics.net, I found a design for the Horizon-class, which appears to be a refitted Daedalus...the registry is NCC-1000, which would fit the Constellation...the design gives me pause, but given enough tinkering, you could get a Connie out of it. Here is the schematic: http://shipschematics.net/startrek/images/federation/cruiser_horizon.jpg

As great as SOTSF is, it isn't even internally consistant, Volume II #1 lists NCC-1017 as an Akyazi class PA, USS Abreus.  But I generally follow SOTSF's theory regarding the Constellation being refit from a Horizon class, it fits a lot better than most other explanations.

As far as the 16xx registries go, such as the Farragut, however, those don't appear on screen until TOS(R), and they were made up by Greg Jein, as far as I'm concerned the Farragut was a Connie class with a registry in the proper 17xx range, as per the SFTM, the SOTSF, Starship Farragut, and a whole ton of other sources.

[mckinneyc]

I've always believed that all the Connies with lower registries than 17XX were a very similar class of ship, perhaps with the same components as the Connie but arranged differently, like the Nebula and Galaxy classes.

They would have been built either slightly before or at the same time as the Connie and when the Connie proved to be the better class they were rebuilt but kept the same name and registry.

[ekbalam]

The most plausible explanation IMO is an homage to a previous vessel. Just like the Sovereign Class Enterprise still carries the 1701 registry, perhaps the convention of adding a letter to the suffix had not yet been introduced. Perhaps an older decommissioned or destroyed ship named Constellation carried this or a similar registry.

[Bren]

Yeah, that one works best for me, Ekbalam.

[mckinneyc]

But what about all the other lower reg Connies?

Rebuilding isn't new look at many railway companies. The GWR in the UK were well known for it as was the LNER. Sometimes after rebuilding the only thing that would match the old desgin was the name and number!

Also it happened quite a lot with ships, the Royal Navy's first aircraft carriers are a good example.

[ACES_HIGH]

yeah, for example when it was refitted in TMP, the enterprise looked completely different from the original configuration, it's got to be an older ship that was refitted to Constitution specs, that also explains the slight differences that IRL were caused by the Constellation model being the AMT model.

[mckinneyc]

Exactly Aces.

I got thinking about the Essex and Intrepid which have 16XX registries so not far of the 17XX used for the Connies. My theory is with them that like the Constellation they were a perhaps a different design being developed and built alongside the Connies but galactic politics meant they were changed during construction perhaps to bolster the fleet due to say a Klingon threat.

[Bren]

Actually, now you mention it, I think I heard once that the REAL USS Enterprise, the US Airforce Carrier Ship, was once cut in two and lengthened. This came from my brother, who is, shall we say, prone to undeclared and knowing exageration...

[ACES_HIGH]

first of all, you mean Navy, right?   and no, I don't think the Enterprise was, although some of the Essex class flattops were lengthened in the late 40s to accommodate the new jet fighters being put in service.  and later, in the 50s and 60s some were even more extensively modified to incorporate the new catapults and angled flight decks required for larger Phantom fighters and stuff.  It's not uncommon for ships to be heavily modified like that, and I'd assume it would be even easier to refit a starship.

[mckinneyc]

True and we have to assume that manufacturing is a lot quicker and more automated in the 23rd Century than today.