unique warp in ship

[Tyler]

posted on May 23rd, 2010, 5:56 pm

Last edited by Tyler on May 23rd, 2010, 5:57 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Who designed it doesn't matter, since the novel series use the name. Official isn't canon, you can't seem to understand that part.

Memory Alpha uses Luna Class in the background section, which is for accepted, official but non-canon onformation. Which also claims the name was chosed before the contest:

The contest rules established that within the novels' continuity, the Luna class has a crew complement of 350

As for the Akira designer, opinions on what they say are too varied. People are free to pick and choose. So you agree that the Akira Class has 15 torpedo launchers?

posted on May 23rd, 2010, 6:10 pm

of course official isnt canon, stop making that irrelevant point. 

akira was named by someone actually working on star trek canon, one person (alex jaeger, who also made the norway and sabre for first contact).

"luna" was thought up by somebody writing a book. which is a lot further from canon. if luna was really acceptable as a name then it would be the title of a memory alpha article.

about whether it has all those torps or not, if you examine the original design, it indeed does have all those launchers 
but we can pretend it doesn't for fleet ops, we can have our own akira for fleet ops, because including the ship in its original design in fleet ops would be way op.

the whole question of official is irrelevant, clearly neither name is canon. but when the designer of a ship says its called something i accept it.

nobody involved in star trek canon ever designed the titan, it was a name, no ship design was ever attributed to it. as it was only ever going to be a throwaway name for a line or two nobody had to think about what it would look like.

therefore i choose not to accept "luna class" as valid. im not offended by it, its as good as any other name, but its not real, its made by a writer of a book who is probably just a fan with a typewriter (word processor ).

posted on May 23rd, 2010, 6:12 pm

fixed the link for the memory beta page    and please people lets not get into a war over whats cannon and whats not.  from my understanding all of the TNG relaunch DS9 relaunch, Voyager relaunch, Titan, Destiny and the upcoming Typhon pact novels are Cannon unless contradicted in a new TV series or movie.  and I wouldn't mind seeing the luna class as a normal warp in or even a buildable ship just not as an experimental.  

posted on May 23rd, 2010, 6:18 pm

from my understanding all of the TNG relaunch DS9 relaunch, Voyager relaunch, Titan, Destiny and the upcoming Typhon pact novels are Cannon unless contradicted in a new TV series or movie.

your understanding is flawed.

canon is anything that appeared either in a star trek film or tv episode, including the animated series. nothing else is canon, no exceptions, the star trek encyclopaedia is often quoted as canon, it isnt, it has terrible mistakes as well.

[Tyler]

posted on May 23rd, 2010, 6:23 pm

Last edited by Tyler on May 23rd, 2010, 6:30 pm, edited 1 time in total.

The Akira name was made by a person in the show, though which designer notes are useful depends on who you ask and not onscreen, which is why they are often ignored. I like it and accept the name, though it's still only official.

The Titan series is mentioned on MA and even has its own article, so it can't be just a glorified fanfic. Offical Novel (are Pocket Books novels official? MA doesn't say, though it has an article on them and all their projects) and Designers notes are in a similar place between canon and fanon, not one and not the other.

Some of the animated series, a lot hasn't been put into canon. Probably for the best, with what they have in there.

From my understanding all of the TNG relaunch DS9 relaunch, Voyager relaunch, Titan, Destiny and the upcoming Typhon pact novels are Cannon unless contradicted in a new TV series or movie.

Onscreen is canon, the others are 'official'.

posted on May 23rd, 2010, 6:44 pm

Personally I'd like to see more Fleet Ops designs in the Warp-In as well. There are plenty of other canon Federation designs, so why not use them for other special features, such as map-objects, pirate ships, etc?

posted on May 23rd, 2010, 6:46 pm

to me the distinction comes from:

akira: comes from alex jaeger, ship seen on screen

luna: comes from someone whose name i dont know , ship never seen on screen.

neither are canon, but alex jaeger is a lot closer than the author of a book.

TAS was so bad that roddenberry himself asked for it to be expunged.

EDIT: ninjad by dom

posted on May 23rd, 2010, 6:53 pm

Fair enough, though I'd not rely on Roddenberry for quality. He considered every movie except #1 to be utter crap (including The Wrath of Kahn). He almost killed Trek, too.

posted on May 23rd, 2010, 6:58 pm

fixed the link for the memory beta page    and please people lets not get into a war over whats cannon and whats not.  from my understanding all of the TNG relaunch DS9 relaunch, Voyager relaunch, Titan, Destiny and the upcoming Typhon pact novels are Cannon unless contradicted in a new TV series or movie.  and I wouldn't mind seeing the luna class as a normal warp in or even a buildable ship just not as an experimental.  

to keep it simple:
class name mendtioned in movie and seen in movie = canon (glalxy, nebula etc ...)
class seen in movie but only named by a offical statement, not in movie = offical (akira class as example)
class only shown in a book or article = offical (luna class, which is a beatifull ship btw)

[Myles]

posted on May 23rd, 2010, 7:01 pm

Last edited by Myles on May 23rd, 2010, 7:04 pm, edited 1 time in total.

3 and 5 stand out as the worst.

everybody loved 2 and 4, but they had some major issues such as convenient plot devices, bad acting, and going back in time for whales  :blush: but the good points shone through in those movies. the battle between the enterprise and the reliant happened with such primitive vfx but was so much fun. and the line about nuclear wessels made 4 good on its own. that line would have been enough for me  :sweatdrop:

EDIT:

to keep it simple:

this is a discussion about star trek, nothing is simple

luna class, which is a beatifull ship btw

i agree the design which featured in the books for the titan did look nice, its a shame nemesis was the last tng movie and the titan couldnt be expanded on or i would be happy with that design. i like the fact thats its not huge like the galaxy and sovvie. i guess its to minimise the amount of damage riker can do. i mean really they should have made him captain of a runabout, just him and troi flying around in a runabout in the gamma quadrant. that way when they are blown up, starfleet gets rid of two idiots but only loses one runabout.

posted on May 23rd, 2010, 7:05 pm

Fans liked them, but apparently Roddenberry didn't. I can't remember where I read it exactly, but he didn't like any movie except 1 and the series got better when he was removed.

I think it was somewhere on TV Tropes.

posted on May 23rd, 2010, 10:32 pm

http://memory-alpha.org/wiki/USS_Titan

posted on May 24th, 2010, 7:24 am

Getting back on topic, I wonder why we don't see any buildable ships warping in?  Even simply avatar specific?


Quote from mylsewolfers:
and the line about nuclear wessels made 4 good on its own. that line would have been enough for me


"[(Ralph) Winter chimed in on why those San Francisco scenes worked so well, such as when Chekov asked a stone-faced cop where to find "dee nuclear wessels." "We actually put a camera in a van, and just hid, and just did those live, just to see who comes by and talk to them," Winter revealed. "Those are the reactions of real people on the street. And it was pretty funny."]"
STARTREK.COM : Article

If that's really true, awesome.

posted on May 24th, 2010, 7:30 am

Personally I'd like to see more Fleet Ops designs in the Warp-In as well. There are plenty of other canon Federation designs, so why not use them for other special features, such as map-objects, pirate ships, etc?

  Aye.  I likez thiz idea .  There are lots of fun things we have already, and if the devs want a Fleetop-only ship for the experimental, then I'm down .

    Frankly, I'd still love to see the Prometheus have it's place in the Federation lineup.  Granted, I also do not want MVAM on it, but I can see a very easy way around that:  Don't put it on the ship .  MVAM was called an experimental technology even then, so it's entirely possible that it just turned out to be a failed experiment.

    I think it's a very unique design and could have itself a nice home in Flops.   

posted on May 24th, 2010, 7:36 am

Prometheus would be a great Warp-In, and FO habit of ignoring series (mainly Voyager) canon in favor of FO canon should make removing the successful MVAM.