4

In Star Trek Beyond they destroy the Enterprise NCC-1701-A. As such, why is the new ship being built also called the NCC-1701-A instead of -B, as in the original movies?

  • 2
    As far as I know, the designations change when the class changes or has a major overhaul. Also, welcome to SFF! In the future you'll want to include spoiler boxes to reduce any issues with people who haven't seen the movie! – Timpanus Nov 22 '16 at 20:39
  • 2
    @Timpanus - They trash it about ten minutes into the film. Also it was shown in the trailer and even on the billboard advert. It's hardly a spoiler unless you've been living in a cave. – Valorum Nov 22 '16 at 22:38
  • 1
    @Valorum: I'd like to see stats on how many SFF users live in a cave. Probably quite a few :) Point stands, this is a major plot point, and "it was in the trailer and the trailer spoilt it too" is not an excuse. I avoid trailers for this reason! Common courtesy not to give away major plot points in the network sidebars. This question can easily be made not to give away a major plot point to those who have not seen the movie. "Why haven't you seen it already?" is also not a valid counter-argument. – Lightness Races with Monica Nov 22 '16 at 23:03
  • 1
    @LightnessRacesinOrbit - I disagree. The destruction of the Enterprise is neither surprising, nor plot-significant beyond explaining why they're not on the Enterprise for much of the film. – Valorum Nov 22 '16 at 23:10
  • 1
    @LightnessRacesinOrbit - My personal opinion is that a spoiler is something that's intended to surprise. Simple plot points aren't spoilers. – Valorum Nov 23 '16 at 17:57
14

Unfortunately, your original assumption is incorrect.

The ship that was destroyed was NCC-1701 not NCC-1701-A

enter image description here

enter image description here

So, when the new ship is constructed at the end of ST:B IT was designated NCC-1701-A.

  • 1
    @O.R.Mapper : 2011? – Praxis Nov 22 '16 at 20:58
  • 2
    Presumably he means 2009 and his reaction to the design...not an actual ship destroyed. – Paulie_D Nov 22 '16 at 21:01
  • 1
    @Praxis: Sorry, I meant 2009 indeed. One of those recent years. (As I don't want to pay for Abramsverse movies, I waited until they were on some kind of free TV, so 2011 may indeed have been the year when the 2009 film became available for me ;) ) Other than that, to remove any doubt, Paulie's interpretation is exactly what I meant. – O. R. Mapper Nov 22 '16 at 21:02
  • 1
    @Praxis: Ah, no. I was indeed making a very subjective, rather snide remark based upon my personal opinion on the redesigned Enterprise. And given the confusing I am creating here, let me close this by stating that my opinion of calling the 11th film in the franchise simply "Star Trek", without any official subtitle, is equally low. – O. R. Mapper Nov 22 '16 at 21:06
  • 3
    @O.R.Mapper : Well, we certainly agree on all of those points. I don't like the new franchise (although Beyond was a little better than I thought it would be, given that my expectations were essentially zero), I hate the excessive action emphasis, I hate the convoluted nonsensical plots, and I think the ship looks like a brewery with giant blowdryers. – Praxis Nov 22 '16 at 21:09
-5

At least originally, the full letter jump has always accompanied a complete change in the class of starship.

  • 2
    NCC-1701 was a Constitution class ship. NCC-1701-A was a Constitution class ship. Controversial due to the far-reaching nature of the refit, but it was the same class. – Lightness Races with Monica Nov 22 '16 at 22:59
  • 4
    Untrue, both the original NCC-1701 and NCC-1701-A were Constitution class. – Polygnome Nov 22 '16 at 22:59
  • 1
    Point is, you would not give a different ship an identical registry. That's literally contrary to the purpose of a registry. Class has basically nothing to do with it. – Lightness Races with Monica Nov 22 '16 at 23:00
  • @Polygnome right. In the original timeline, here are the Enterprises and their classes: 1701 (no letter) - Constitution, 1701-A - Constitution, 1701-B - Excelsior, 1701-C - Ambassador, 1701-D - Galaxy, 1701-E - Sovereign. The no-letter original as well as C and D were destroyed in battle. A was decommissioned (final fate unknown, but likely scrapped), and the fates of B and E unclear. – Columbia says Reinstate Monica Nov 23 '16 at 0:01
  • @RobertColumbia E is still intact in Nemesis (damaged, but its towed to a dock), so its safe to assume it still exist. Maybe at one time writers decide to make additional main-timeline events after nemesis that further explain what happens to it, but for now i'd say its still intact. – Polygnome Nov 23 '16 at 11:31

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.