Rudyard Lake and Talk:Jean-Luc Picard: Difference between pages

This page was nominated for deletion, the consensus was an overwhelming "keep", see Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/Jean-Luc Picard

All the "STNG" & "DS9" pages need changes to the intro section. The "info box" is interfering with the character's name. --trekphiler, 16/11/05

Bilingualism

He is bilingual in English & French, n'est pas? --Menchi, 29 Jul 2003

Well, presumably, but then maybe France in the future has been taken over by the English, which explains his accent :) Adam Bishop 03:43, 30 Jul 2003 (UTC)

I cannot recall him speaking even a complete sentence in French, but Q often say things like, "Mon capitaine!". And Picard did sing that French song to those kids he was trapped with in the turbolift, "Frère Jacques", I think, a popular song even to the English speakers. --Menchi 04:03, Jul 30, 2003 (UTC)

I can't recall that either, now that I think of it. Maybe the Universal Translator translated it for us :) I remember Data speaking French (in Time's Arrow, I think), but not Picard. Adam Bishop 05:13, 30 Jul 2003 (UTC)

I am quite sure, that there is one episode where Picard speaks fluent French. I have all STNG-DVDs, I will have a look ;-) Fantasy 08:02, 29 Aug 2003 (UTC)

One place to look is the episode with the binary number title in the first season. The Bynars create a woman, Minuet, in the holodeck to entice Picard and Riker. She speaks French to Picard and he is amazed by this. In another episode, Data remarks that French is an extinct language, but Riker cuts him off before saying anything further, and Picard looks vexed.

He only speaks a word of french though

Federation Standard is the language used by those in Starfleet.

I always presumed he was bilingual. As to his accent, we may argue he was educated at Oxbridge, and it rubbed off, or the translator matrix renders his cultured and educated French into cultured and educated English. (I've never been quite clear about how that works.) (Or we may all agree we're full of shat, but I don't expect that to happen...) --trekphiler, 16/11/05

As Captain and Locutus

The latest edit (as of the time when I post this) says "As captain of the Enterprise, he was captured and assimilated as Locutus by the Borg". As captain, then as Locutus? Is this the best that can be done? I'll try to fix it, but it's hard to choose the right words. Tjdw

I would say, you found them ;-) Fantasy 08:02, 29 Aug 2003 (UTC)

PS: Don't forget to sign with ~~~~

Thanks. Tjdw 13:59, 29 Aug 2003 (UTC)

Could someone upload a picture of locutus so we can make a locutus page?

We don't need a picture of Locutus to make a Locutus page. We could make the Locutus page and just upload the picture later. -Branddobbe 23:49, Mar 13, 2004 (UTC)

Well make the page then if you want to...--Timo 23:50, Mar 13, 2004 (UTC)

If this is a request that I make the page, I think you should find someone else. I haven't seen the Locutus episodes since they originally aired when I was a little kid. -Branddobbe 23:52, Mar 13, 2004 (UTC)

I would think that Locutus wouldn't really require a separate page, just a separate section within this article at most. ==Locutus==, and then the Locutus-specific stuff. Bryan 23:53, 13 Mar 2004 (UTC)

There is a link to a locutus page now though... --Timo 23:55, Mar 13, 2004 (UTC)

We also need to think about the movies with Enterprise E, ie, First Contact, Insurection and Nemesis.

Anon problem

Sigh.. some anon keeps changing the initial paragraph (and removing any indication that this is a fictional character), and adding a timeline of Picard's life in rather poor English... Can somebody do something about him? Ausir 15:12, 14 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Bad EDit

Dunno who did it, but someone has but in a huge timeline (half of which I've already deleted), with loads of erroneous info. Five year missions? There was never any evidence of Picard doing five year missions, it wasnt mentioned anywhere in any episode. Do we even need the timeline anyway? Some of it has nothing to do with Picard himself.

Also, the films. Should they be there or in separate articleS?

--Tim 17:54, May 1, 2004 (UTC)

Edits by user 66.99.2.147 should be simply reverted as vandalism, as has been done in the past. Niteowlneils 18:08, 1 May 2004 (UTC)

Alternate timeline?

What is this -A stuff? Where do you see the timelines diverging? Is this some sort of perverted wish on your part that the 1701-D was never destroyed?

--- Deleted previous comment. I should learn to read. 193.167.132.66 12:47, 23 Feb 2005 (UTC)

I must say, editing startrek entries in wiki is really nerdy

yeah oh yeah, i don't tell my friends i do this stuff.

Heh. Hanging out in an enyclopedia is pretty nerdy in general. But I have no problems with my nerdiness; all my friends know about both my love for Star Trek and my obsession with Wikipedia. — Knowledge Seeker দ 23:29, 10 May 2005 (UTC)

Nerdy? I altered "armada" to "flotilla". My sense of naval language is offended at the thought of 39 ships being called an "armada". --trekphiler, 16/11/05

That's OK: it needs to be described accurately (though 'flotilla' is less known as a word). The DS9 waves of ships can acccurately be called armadas. E Pluribus Anthony 09:05, 16 November 2005 (UTC)

The waves of ships in "DS9" can be called ridiculous; you already know my opinion of those numbers.... (And that's beside the absurdity of battles on planets and the slighting of convoy duty, which would be critical. I'm waiting for some novelist to recognize a Ferengi would be the perfect senior logistics planner.) --trekphiler, 16/11/05

He he; agreed ... on both counts! :) E Pluribus Anthony 17:07, 16 November 2005 (UTC)

Hair Color: Gray !?

Jean-Luc Picard doesn't have hair. How is it gray then? MessedRocker 22:20, May 10, 2005 (UTC)

He actually does have some hair; he's not completely bald. If you look at the pictue in the article, you'll see some hair behind his left ear. — Knowledge Seeker দ 23:26, 10 May 2005 (UTC)

In the Star Trek: New Frontier novels, Picard accuses Mackenzie Calhoun of splitting hairs. Calhoun replies that at least he still has hairs to split. — JIP | Talk 09:04, 26 August 2005 (UTC)

Birthday

I'm not entirely sure where I'm getting the info, but I had always believed Picard's Birthday was the 14th of July, not the 13th. The reasons I remember this is 1- It's the same as my own and 2- It's the french Bastille Day, which I'd thought was an 'added tie' to being French?

I could be wrong, but I'm pretty positive it is.

Close but – supposedly – the characters' birthdays were derived from the actors who portrayed them (and appear in some on-screen bios in "Conundrum"): thus, Patrick Stewart was born on 13 July (1940); thus, Liberté, égalité, fraternité! E Pluribus Anthony 08:56, 16 November 2005 (UTC)

Merci beaucoup, mon ami. I had no idea. (Check out a young Patrick in BBC-TV's "I, Claudius"....) --trekphiler, 16/11/05

I have the complete set of "I, C" on VHS, and books too. :) E Pluribus Anthony 17:08, 16 November 2005 (UTC)

You got me beat. I've seen "I, C" 3-4x, & I've got the first book--never managed to read it.... --trekphiler, 16/11/05

Birthplace

Captain Picard WAS NOT born in Lesbos, Greece! He was born in La Barre, France. I don't know who keeps changing it back, but plase don;t.

Taken from startrek.com:

Place of birth: Labarre, France, Earth Tim 12:51, August 12, 2005 (UTC)

Events of "First Contact"

In the section about "First Contact," the Picard article states, "After defeating the Borg cube, a Borg sphere ship was released from that ship. This sphere created a temporal anomaly and went into Earth's past to try to assimilate the human race. Their plan to do this was to prevent first contact, a historic event in which Zefram Cochrane tested the first warp drive and in doing so made contact with another alien race for the first time. Due to Captain Picard's and the Enterprise's efforts, this was not allowed to happen. Earth was not assimilated and the Enterprise returned to the year 2374."

Actually, Earth was assimilated. After the Borg sphere left the 24th century but before the E-E did, Worf noticed that Earth's continents were all metallic-looking, and Data said the Earth's population consisted of 9 billion beings, all Borg. Call it an alternate timeline or whatever you want, but it appears that the Borg did travel back to the 21st century, prevent first contact with the Vulcans, and assimilate Earth. The Enterprise-E arrived in the 21st century at a point after the Borg arrived there but before they could carry out their plan and prevented those events from taking place.

Also, "After defeating the Borg cube, a Borg sphere ship was released from that ship" is a dangling or misplaced modifier -- it reads as if the Borg sphere ship defeated the Borg cube.

True: I think it is safe to say that Picard and co. averted one cataclysmic outcome, or facilitating a reality in which most future events in the Star Trek universe take place in. E Pluribus Anthony 06:50, 16 November 2005 (UTC)

Baldness, in the 24th century?

Just a bone for Trek fans (like me) to chew up on. Anyway, it surprises me that there's no apparent cure for baldness in the 24th century. Weren't there times when Picard (though slightly & briefly) seemed to lament about when he once had a full head of hair? Mightberight/wrong 22:39, 30 October 2005 (UTC).

Hi! Yes: you'd think that a cure for alopecia would exist in the far future; then again, for a society as open as the Federation, I presume any stigmas about baldness would be little to none. As well, take a peek at the Quotes section, where he humorously warns his supposed "son" about the issue. :) E Pluribus Anthony 04:40, 31 October 2005 (UTC)

Court Martial

Not a criminal proceeding? It most certainly is. Non-criminal is a Court of Inquiry. While I admit I'm not conversant with RN law (upon which Starfleet's is presumably based), UCMJ calls a non-criminal inquiriy an Article 32 (as I recall, after years of "JAG"). That he was cleared in a court martial is not news. Recall, after WW2, an RN sub commander and former POW, Commander Rupert Lonsdale, was court martialed for surrendering his ship, Seal--and cleared. We may compare Picard's situation. --squadfifteen, 15/11/05

Makes sense to me: even 'idols' are human. :) E Pluribus Anthony 06:28, 16 November 2005 (UTC)

Career

I altered the court martial section to remove "not criminal". I also altered "service aboard a space station" to "got a new ship". Given no wrongdoing or culpable error in the court martial, Picard would have gotten a new ship. (It is possible he would have gotten a JO slot, say 2d Lt or XO, aboard a bigger ship, such as a Constellation -class.) Starbase service seems ruled out, since he has commanded a ship 22 years, and "ST: The Original Series" (...) established Starbase officers were not line qualified. --trekphiler, 16/11/05

Again, nicely put. However, I would probably remove any speculation about him being assigned to command a ship comparable to the Stargazer: this may be reasonable to you and me, but if it can't be cited, it should probably be left out. Who knows: perhaps he went on a looong horseback ride? :) E Pluribus Anthony 06:32, 16 November 2005 (UTC)

lol That explains why he was so stiff: still saddle sore. Seriously, though, I think a reference to him getting a new ship (deleted, I see) is appropriate, if not strictly necessary; as it is, it seems a bit bare. I'd also say we have to ignore the recent book Valiant, which has him 2d Lt of Stargazer & LtCdr (as I recall); I always pictured him more junior then, and a LtCdr would have about 20yrs in service already. More than that, a small scout like that would be commanded by a jaygee or Lt, not a full Captain (contrary to the book). (I really do wish writers would do elementary research on organization before starting...) On a side note, I would have liked to see a mention of the Stardate J-L got Enterprise. (And I just saw "All Good Things..." a few days ago. Ah, well.) --trekphiler, 16/11/05

I hear ya; the piles have it. :) I applaud recent edits/discussions to enhance the article/text: I've tried (trying to edit so-so text rather than adding a plethora of new text), and have also added some images, but there's always room for improvement and need to step back somewhat.

As well, I don't disagree with the logical assumption that Picard was assigned to command a comparable ship: just cite a (canon-esque) source and we can include it. It's equally likely he took a sabbatical after Jack's death, sought treatment for his baldness, engaged in more 'horseplay', or developed some bigger piles. ;)

As for research: no argument here. :) Take care! E Pluribus Anthony 07:35, 16 November 2005 (UTC)

OK, my bad. I was complaining about no Stardate for assumption of command. I hadn't read that far yet when I posted that.... --trekphiler, 16/11/05

One dumb question: is it canon Jack Crusher met Picard aboard Stargazer? My impression from fuzzy memory is he was one of the three Ensigns when the Nausicaans did shish kabob practise. --trekphiler, 16/11/05

Nope: he, Ensigns Corey Zweller and (chic) Marty Batanides were the ménage à trois at Starbase Earhart. It is canon that Picard later met Jack (and Bev) while serving aboard the Stargazer and that J died in an away mission; P returned J-kabob to Bev for ... roasting (i.e., burial). I wonder if J was ionised? E Pluribus Anthony 09:01, 16 November 2005 (UTC)

Merci again, mon ami. That whole episode was Nausicaating. Old Picard was so dumb he couldn't divert his friend by being devious? He learned nothing in 30-some years of ship command? Old Picard might not have been so brash as Young (or Riker, or Kirk), but subtle he certainly was--and frankly, I don't believe he'd have ended up an elderly science officer. He had an adventurous soul, crazy- brash kid or no. (If you can't guess J-L was the main reason I watched "STNG", turn in your commbadge.) --trekphiler, 16/11/05

I think that 'near-death' experiences like P's (and by this I mean visits to the river Styx, not tunnel vision) can and do have life-changing effects. I've so far had three of them (ask me privately), so I speak with some experience about Charon and the boat. ;) And I would never turn in my commbadge. E Pluribus Anthony 17:11, 16 November 2005 (UTC)

I don't disagree. He's not only had a Nausicaating experience, he's since seen good friends turned to crispy critters. Evidently I wasn't clear. I meant to say, our J-L (as I presume he was, as transplanted by Q) should have been able to outwit a green cadet, & the writer couldn't figure it out. Even after what he's seen, our J-L is still eager to be on the frontier: adventurous soul, I submit, not dampened; Picard would not, could not, turn into "boring science guy". Would he be youngest Captain in Fleet history to that time? Not anymore. Would he be Captain? Oh, yeh. Not to be would be death on him. --trekphiler, 16/11/05

Hi! Perhaps bald P tried to re-enact events as much as possible (as the follicled P did) prior to his kebabing to see where things would lead: what they lead to (by him not getting stabbed) eventually/alternatively made him as much a (lowly) officer of ability as of circumstance. And as Q was the intervenor, he might have done so with his perpetual fortitude in mind ... going out on a colloquial limb and charting new frontiers. To employ another national motto: liberty or death! Anyhow, that's it for me ... take care! E Pluribus Anthony 20:40, 16 November 2005 (UTC)

Hmmm. "Minimum change" Picard is an intriguing notion. My own bias in favor of the character is, I confess, too strong to give it fair treatment. It occurs to me Ol' Baldy might feel bound by the Temporal Prime Directive (presuming it existed; given V/A Janeway {ex-Voyager?}, whose Captainess quoted it, I'm guessing it does), unable to change much before. And I'm back to defending him: "BSG" Picard, by not becoming Captain, changes more, and Baldy's bound to recognize that--regardless the direct effect on his own life. As I said, I'm too biased to be fair. I wish I'd created Picard. --trekphiler, 16/11/05

Given P's knowledge of Q's ability to mute time easily, and given the fact that he was 'dead,' I don't think P was too concerned about this. He was also assured by Q that his actions would not undo anything. I'm just posing options: in all respects, P is a role model whose commbadge I would gladly trade with mine. ;) Ta! E Pluribus Anthony 23:01, 16 November 2005 (UTC)

Pet Peeves

Am I the only one who thinks the replicators were stunningly stupid? Picard is famed for "Tea, Earl Grey, hot", yet you'd think the blasted replicator would know to make it hot, by recognizing his voice.... Also, while I recognize why it was done, the registry numbers are nonsense. The so-called "Enterprise-B" would never be identified 1701B, nor referred to as "B", any more than CVN-65 is "Enterprise-B", when she is the second aircraft carrier by that name. And I flat refuse to believe the Federation has built over 74000 ships, which Voyager's NCC-74656 demands. (Picture building 74000 supertankers and you have an idea of the industrial effort required.) And doesn't the Federation have spies? I find it fantastic Fleet officers keep being detailed to covert missions... (What happened to Section 31? Or is that reserved for insane assassins that escaped from "X-Files"?) --trekphiler, 16/11/05

Fuzzy logic notwithstanding, I guess there's a possibility of Picard or someone ordering Earl Grey iced tea? Perhaps he should've brewed "Alopecia-specific-CO-polymath blend number 666, hot"?

I hadn't thought of Picard ordering it iced; voice recognition should still play, I'd argue. Also, wouldn't the ship's mainframe know his ordering habits? --trekphiler, 16/11/05

You'd think, but perhaps he disengaged the replicator input waveguides to practice his orders and golden oratory? E Pluribus Anthony 09:10, 16 November 2005 (UTC)

Dunno bout his golden oratory; maybe he got paid by the line? (Am I sloooow to get the joke, or what?) --trekphiler, 16/11/05

Q noted P's knack for making speeches, so perhaps he was 'practising.' Or perhaps he was paid by the word. Wurd.  ;) E Pluribus Anthony 15:58, 16 November 2005 (UTC)

"All the universe's a stage, and all the Starfleet officers merely players"? (Apologies to Mr. Will. Or Bacon, or whoever's getting credit this week.) --trekphiler, 16/11/05

It's also possible that the Federation has built many thousands of ships since its inception, only a few thousand are in service as of TNG, etc. Use the analogy of human population: even though more than 6 billion people currently live on Earth, this is said to be only less than 1% of the humans that have ever lived.

Not a good analogy, I don't think. All ships in the Federation would not be Starfleet ships (unless I am much mistaken), and shipbuilding would be very much reduced, I'd argue, due to increases of complexity, capability, and cost by orders of magnitude. My supertanker example, I think, stands: in the '30s, dozens of ships would be needed to do the job one VLCC could do. The entire Task Force 58 at Leyte Gulf in 1944 would be overmatched by CVN-65 Enterprise. (Which makes nonsense of the "thousands" of ships in fleet actions of "DS9"...) Picture a ship a thousand or ten thousand times more complex and capable than a modern nuclear aircraft carrier, and multiply it by 74000; do you believe that? I don't. --trekphiler, 16/11/05

As it was the only analogy I could think of (I'm heading off to bed): it perhaps is still appropriate. Federation vessels comprise those of Starfleet, civilians, and others; perhaps they all draw on the same number scheme but retain different letter prefixes (NCC, NAR, NX, etc.)? As well, if Runabouts (as being small crap-casings'starships') have NCC numbers, perhaps a great many of them or similar ships have been constructed and obliterated. (A stretch, I know!) And given the supposed size of the Federation/Starfleet and the multiple number of fabrication facilities mentioned or implied (I can talk about this later), it's possible. E Pluribus Anthony 09:10, 16 November 2005 (UTC)

Don't know about smaller ships; if every spacegoing craft, down to the transport pods, wears a registry number (which I can't believe), it might add up to 74000 at that. I reject your premise civilian ships are included, though; they'd have a Fed registry number (comparable to Lloyd's), but not a Fleet one (which I've always thought equal to the hull number, say CVN-65, or SSN-688 of the attack sub Los Angeles). I still think the greater performace capacity argues for low numbers; Starfleet shouldn't need thousands of ships, when each Constellation, "Galaxy" (a ridiculous class name) or Defiant has more capability than all the navies of 20th Century Earth combined. Even given numerous yards and automation, complexity and cost tell, too; it would take the complete resources of a rich planet to build a ship like J-LP's Enterprise. My impression was, only a handful of yards (Earth, Vulcan, Andoria Prime in "ST", plus Mars in "STNG") built Fleet ships, & I recall reading Gene presumed just 12 Starship-class vessels (an analogy to USN fleet aircraft carriers). Also, wasn't warp capability supposed to be difficult to achieve--comparable to the Manhattan Project? I've always thought of starships as comparable to CVNs or FBMs, rare, expensive, precious, prestigious. Having thousands turns them into kitsch. --trekphiler, 16/11/05

I think we can agree to disagree. I'm not suggesting that every spacecraft had an N-etc registry; however, it was established that the DS9 runabouts, small scout-like ships, did so others could and were (e.g., Data's scout in Star Trek: Erection). Moreover, the distinctions between the various prefixes and numbers was never made clear, and I do not think the numbers for civilian vessels ever exceeded those for 'ships of the line' (NCC), so it's possible they drew on the same number base.

As well, this rationale makes sense if one considers that initial testbeds/prototypes (e.g., the USS Galaxy, NX-70637, whose class moniker has grown on me somewhat, there are other examples in 'semi-canon' too) are reclassified to being active ships sometime afterward (NCC-70637); note on-screen ref in Star Trek: Emesis.

You are right about the original Enterprise class moniker; Picard reindicated C to Scotty in "Relics". This was also intended when

• (a) Gene originally indicated (at least according to the TNG tech manual) only 12 Galaxy class ships were built: 6 were activated, the others were constructed partially, and broken up as a security measure. With the onset of armed hostilities later, though, they most probably were reintegrated, activated, and more built.
• (b) other versions of the titular ships of the various series were intended to appear only sporadically, if at all.

As for fleet size, I think it's completely legit that Starfleet numbers (as of 2375ish) in the many hundreds, perhaps low thousands, of active ships and even more in cumulative totality/storage. I'm not going to get into the map and inferred volume of Federation space, but Starfleet would need to be a significant org to patrol that much space effectively (perhaps it's not patrolled effectively). There are other fabrication facilities: recall the TNG tech manual, and the mutli-Worf ep "Parallels" mentions more. As well, the quality vs. quantity argument is evidenced if you consider the fact that a great many 'older' ship types (Excelsior & Miranda class) still exist in the TNG and later era. Besides: this is all not a matter of fact/dispute in the current article, right? :) E Pluribus Anthony 15:28, 16 November 2005 (UTC)

I looked at Enterprise's spec herein and was surprised at the number of auxiliary craft (shuttles and pods) she operates. It made me think two things: one, Galileo 7 had no independent registry #, and contemporary battleships have boats that serve comparable purposes that don't, either. On the other hand (just to prove I'm intellectually completely dishonest, not even willing to stand up for my argument), how many worlds are there in the Federation? How many are building Fleet ships? And how many small (destroyer or scout) ships are there? You're right, there. I'd suggest civil ships don't draw from the same registry base, any more than they do on Earth, and for much the same reasons. Persistence of older designs figures in; I still do not believe 70000 ships between Kirk's Enterprise and Voyager. (For Gene's pos on it, I was going back to "STTOS": 12x1701-type.) And, no, it bears on nothing in dispute... It has been entertaining, tho. I'm inclined to seek an "ST" site and post the entire exchange onto it. Objection? --trekphiler, 16/11/05

Can you say if the NX and NCC numbers fall in the same series? I recall Defiant on "DS9" was an NX, not NCC, which was contradicted, as I recall, by later appearances of same-spec ships Valiant and Saõ Paolo (? renamed Defiant in a preposterous ceremony). I got the impression Defiant was one of a kind, or at least class ship; Valiant wore an earlier hull number, didn't she? (And how big a Trekker technoweenie am I to be bugged about this?) --trekphiler, 16/11/05

I believe that the Defiant, if produced widely, would've had its NX registry changed to NCC eventually. Head on over to the USS Defiant article; the sh*tfacedwonky reg numbers for the ship(s?) are explained rather succinctly in the article.

There is some overlap of numbers across the later series: rarely were registries mentioned or seen clearly on screen, in any event. An episode of DS9 highlights the USS Bellerephon, an Intrepid class ship dispatched to Romulus, with Bashir on it.

I know, often the writing is shoddy, but what's good for the goose may not be for the gander. I actually intend on writing a manual about all this someday. ;) Anyhow, I think that's it for me, though. Merci! E Pluribus Anthony 15:28, 16 November 2005 (UTC)

Good luck on ya, brudder. If you can straighten out this ball of twine without goin' Section 31, yer a better man den me. --trekphiler, 16/11/05

As for secrecy, it appears to be reserved for the insane. ;) E Pluribus Anthony 08:44, 16 November 2005 (UTC)

lol Well said. --trekphiler

Isn't it possible that they just don't number the ships sequentially? 74656 is not necessarily the 74656th ship, maybe the numbers mean something else, or they are just random. (They don't give out telephone numbers or license plates sequentially either, do they?) Adam Bishop 15:42, 16 November 2005 (UTC)

Yes! :) E Pluribus Anthony 15:57, 16 November 2005 (UTC)

Well, no. Take a look at the Constitution page (& Great Bird help me citing it after all the criticism I've leveled!). Constitution & Enterprise are sequential, as you'd expect, being sister ships (implying from the same yard, too); so are Kongo & Lex (ditto). (See the discussion page, too. It tries to clear up the evident contradiction in Constitutions.) It's less clear class ships would have close registry numbers (whereas hull numbers are closely sequentiel by type in USN, except where large numbers of contracts are let at once, or cancelled, such as during, & at the end of, WW2; large gaps in hull number sequences of submarines were common). I see no reason to conclude the registry numbers, referring entirely to spacefaring ships, would not be sequential, absent information on (type-specific) hull numbers, which need not be. Neither have I seen anything in the canon that suggests the numbers are random; in fact, given Archer's Enterprise is NX-01, I'd say it's implied they are sequential. Of course, it's most probable the model makers or somebody picked the numbers out of thin air because they looked good, paying no mind to what it implied about the Fleet or the Fed...just as they accepted individual stories involving transporter technology, each good in itself, that made it more and more fantastical each time, paying no mind to overall consequences. (Thanks to David Gerrold for pointing out that last point.) As I mention above somewhere, I'm inclined to lift this exchange entire and post it on an "ST" site; objections? --trekphiler, 16/11/05

It is possible: I didn't say it is impossible or 'gold.' I generally agree with you that the ST registry numbers are generally sequential; however, nothing in canon (methinks) can confirm this and there are glaring exceptions (e.g., USS Prometheus in ST:V, with an NX-5xxxx, implying it was conceived of long before TNG, and later reclassified to NCC-7xxxx). To use a modern-day example: the USN Seawolf class submarine (few they are) were christened beginning with SSN-21, even though other recent subs have registries of SSN-7etc. This was again resumed with the following Virginia class subs.

Feel free to place this text elsewhere, but I'd like to edit it slightly before you do (with more authortitative references, as we've been largely chatting in jest). Agreed? Even I have "performance anxiety." :) E Pluribus Anthony 22:54, 16 November 2005 (UTC)

Episodes

I don't recall a transporter accident being involved in turning Picard, Guinan, et al. young in "Rascals". (I do recall the stupid invasion of Ferengi, and juvenile jumping on the bed, which threw away a magnificent opportunity to examine character relationships and reactions to their Captain being turned into a teen...)

An aside, talking of age. I get the impression Trek characters age much as we do. I would have presumed, given 24h Century medical tech, Picard was over 100--yet McCoy's 137 was noted as unusual. --trekphiler, 16/11/05

Yes: the youthful conversion to Picard, Kiki, et al. did take place. As for age, I'd imagine at that time the average age exceeds 100, but perhaps not much beyond that. Remember: Picard is still bald in the 24th century. Perhaps he likes that shiny look, and an aged McCoy that ... bifurcated look in his senescence. ;) E Pluribus Anthony 08:47, 16 November 2005 (UTC)

No argument it took place; I recall a shuttle and a temporal anomaly, not a transporter accident. I wasn't clear, I guess.

As for baldness, I'd guess it's genetic, and after the Eugenics Wars, probably tampering to fix it isn't on. Perhaps there was radiation exposure, or some exotic disease, that makes surgical fixes impossible. --trekphiler, 16/11/05

Yeah, or maybe he just likes having perfect albedo. :) E Pluribus Anthony 09:17, 16 November 2005 (UTC)

Works for me... --trekphiler

Okay, somebody made a mistake. (I'd bet it's my memory...) The Enterprise page calls her Constitution-class; I recall her Constellation -class (which would explain the "Galaxy" nonsense, by ignorant writers who don't know Connie was a ship...) So? --trekphiler, 16/11/05

Starship class in original series; Constitution class later and in TNG. I read somewhere that, in the ep where Picard is returned the Stargazer, La Forge originally said Constitution, but they dubbed in a new class name for that (markedly different) vessel. E Pluribus Anthony 15:28, 16 November 2005 (UTC)

I spotted that, too; the Miranda page, I think, referring to Stargazer (obviously not the same as NCC-1701, so requiring redubbing). I had the sense "Starship" class was more in the way of "battleship" or "cruiser" than a class name, which is what I was getting at. (I confess I'd forgotten; I always think of 1701 as a Constitution.) --trekphiler, 16/11/05

I think your battleship/Starship comparison may be valid. Also remember: the Stargazer is a Constellation class ship (dubbed by La Forge, who referred to it as Constitution), Reliant/kubla Khan in ST:II a Miranda class vessel. E Pluribus Anthony 22:58, 16 November 2005 (UTC)