Remove ads

Starfleet Design Bureau

Linked contents
Starship Design Bureau Starfleet Design Bureau
Reader mode
Mechanis said:
[ABSOLUTELY NOT] Constitution Class.
(I honestly care more that we don't call it the Constitution class than I do about what we actually do end up calling it, though I will obviously be chuffed if either of my own suggestions pulls out a win.)
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Given the divisiveness of the whole thing, Sayle would be well within their rights to just say 'You know what? We just aren't going to have an Enterprise.' And I would understand completely. This thread just devolves at the mere mention of the ship, so I'd be fine just having the Enterprise be a historical vessel alone.
 
Skippy said:
Then the moment when this misconception about the ship violently collides with reality is going to rub in even more salt, to put it bluntly.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
I mean, Sayle outright stated that even if it does get called "Constitution", the chosen namespace isn't going to include "Enterprise" in the update. presumably because of the rather vehement reactions from some parties.

I just don't want to call it "Constitution" because I don't think the name fits.
 
[X] Constitution-class.
[X] Excalibur-class.
[X] Constellation-class

Nope, don't like "Exigence" at all, it's just edgy in a way that doesn't suit Starfleet or the Federation - Even in out last existential war before we were the Federation proper we still chose aspirational or at lest inoffensive names for even our dedicated crash-build warships.
 
[X] Constitution-class

This is the TTL Connie, based on word of god we followed the same design brief that Starfleet had OTL, whether or not thats true to canon its true to what we managed to achieve with it and I want the name to be given to a proud ship. Its faster, longer ranged, better equipped than anything we have atm, and it also makes me nod since its designed for same purpose the Connie was in the Axanar prelude.
 
I am, however, 100% on board with calling whatever our next explorer project is "Enterprise class" specifically for NX-01, to evoke that specific spirit and in universe legendium entirely aforethought. Whenever we get around to doing that.
 
Mechanis said:
I mean, Sayle outright stated that even if it does get called "Constitution", the chosen namespace isn't going to include "Enterprise" in the update. presumably because of the rather vehement reactions from some parties.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

This must be a misunderstanding or the result of some miscommunication.

Also more broadly, people can honestly just chill out and go touch grass for a bit. No one is being forced to read the quest.
 
[X] Lightning class
[X] Dragon class
[X] Halberd class

The points in favour of constitution are: project name, cannon name, spite, maybe you just like it?
The points against constitution are: some other names fit better, not having to deal with quite so much whining about it (hopefully), maybe you just don't like it?

Tough choice.

"Thunderchild" works as a ship name in the Lightning class.
 
Last edited:
Skippy said:
This must be a misunderstanding or the result of some miscommunication.

Also more broadly, people can honestly just chill out and go touch grass for a bit. No one is being forced to read the quest.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
The quote is: "But the ship is not complete without a name. There are three immediate candidates: first is Constitution, for the name of the project. Names reflecting the history of constitutions and guarantors of civil law are in ready supply."

Which doesn't imply Enterprise will be a contender if Constitution wins.
 
Skippy said:
This must be a misunderstanding on your part or the result of some miscommunication.

Also more broadly, people can honestly just chill out and go touch grass for a bit. No one is being forced to read the quest.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
nope. Sayle said outright the Constitution namespace isn't going to include "Enterprise"
Sayle said:
first is Constitution, for the name of the project. Names reflecting the history of constitutions and guarantors of civil law are in ready supply.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
So we aren't going to get an Enterprise on this design, but we might well see a Washington or Lincoln. edit: or perhaps a Tubman. (given the design's purpose a Martin Luther King would be crass, of course, given the man's stance on the use of violence, but the "No, you move." energy of the lady would be appropriate to invoke methinks.)
 
Last edited:
Tank man said:
The quote is: "But the ship is not complete without a name. There are three immediate candidates: first is Constitution, for the name of the project. Names reflecting the history of constitutions and guarantors of civil law are in ready supply."

Which doesn't imply Enterprise will be a contender if Constitution wins.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

I mean I feel that is not a very strong reading of the sentence being quoted. Like "the history of constitutions and guarantors of civil war" is an extremely broad space which undoubtedly includes Enterprise. Both our Enterprise from its pivotal role in the history of the UFP's constitution and as a guarantor of United Earth's civil law, as well as the WW2 one.
 
In all honesty, I'm to the point where I don't even want to hear the name Enterprise. Enough of the thread is so up in arms over the damn name that I'd just prefer it stay in the 2150s, because we can't seem to be civil about a name that's been applied to both warships and exploration vessels.
 
Reader mode
You must login or register to reply here.
Remove ads
Back
Top