Was the Federation-class ever refitted?

SuperSaiyaMan12 · Post by **SuperSaiyaMan12** » Tue Apr 29, 2008 9:35 pm

Did it ever get the increase in size and firepower, and new angular Nacelles that the Connies got?

Enkidu · Post by **Enkidu** » Tue Apr 29, 2008 11:46 pm

The class itself is, IIRC, not 100% canon, due to GR fallout with Jefferies. There was a novel Dreadnought with a refitted one on the cover, with a daft looking angular saucer. I've seen plenty of decent fan models of more conventional refitted Federations.

Aaron · Post by **Aaron** » Wed Apr 30, 2008 12:00 am

Enkidu wrote:The class itself is, IIRC, not 100% canon, due to GR fallout with Jefferies. There was a novel Dreadnought with a refitted one on the cover, with a daft looking angular saucer. I've seen plenty of decent fan models of more conventional refitted Federations.

Yes it is. It appears on displays in both TWOK and TSFS as well as being mentioned on the laser disc copy of TMP.

Post by **Teaos** » Wed Apr 30, 2008 12:51 am

Oh I thought it never got canonised. It is an interesting design. Would have been sweet to see more of it.

Duskofdead · Post by **Duskofdead** » Wed Apr 30, 2008 1:07 am

Anyone mind explaining what the Federation class is, and where it came from? I'm aware it has an entry on DITL, but I was not really familiar with it at all prior to browsing around here. I think maybe in a tabletop gaming module handbook I saw a design that looked just like the general image Graham has but that's all.

Post by **Teaos** » Wed Apr 30, 2008 1:10 am

It is part of the EU and I think the TOS tech manual written by FJ.

Duskofdead · Post by **Duskofdead** » Wed Apr 30, 2008 1:11 am

Teaos wrote:It is part of the EU and I think the TOS tech manual written by FJ.

EU..?

Aaron · Post by **Aaron** » Wed Apr 30, 2008 1:15 am

Duskofdead wrote:
EU..?

Extended/Expanded Universe, for Trek that's all media outside the movies/series. The Federation class comes from the Star Fleet Technical Manual written by Franz Joseph Schnaubelt in 1975. I have a copy lying around somewhere, it's quite good for the time. Unfortunately the author had a fallingout with Roddenberry, who did his best to have the concepts within eradicated from Trek.

Post by **Teaos** » Wed Apr 30, 2008 1:18 am

Whats sad is FJ's ideas are a lto more pracitcal than GR's.

Aaron · Post by **Aaron** » Wed Apr 30, 2008 1:22 am

Teaos wrote:Whats sad is FJ's ideas are a lto more pracitcal than GR's.

GR didn't actually design the Constitution class, that honour belongs to Mark Jefferies. Who apparently presented it to Roddenberry as being upside down to what it is now and Roddenberry looked at it the wrong way. He approved it though. And legend has it that he brought in the "two nacelle" requirement to discredit FJ's work.

I agree though, far better designs. Especially the tug.

Captain Picard's Hair · Wed Apr 30, 2008 1:34 am

Maybe I'm too acclimated to two-nacelle ships, but ships with one nacelle, or three look "wrong" to me.

Post by **Teaos** » Wed Apr 30, 2008 1:40 am

I dont like one one nacelles but I like the three nacelle seen on the AGT E-D.

Duskofdead · Post by **Duskofdead** » Wed Apr 30, 2008 1:44 am

Captain Picard's Hair wrote:Maybe I'm too acclimated to two-nacelle ships, but ships with one nacelle, or three look "wrong" to me.

They definitely look very stripped.

Blackstar the Chakat · Wed Apr 30, 2008 1:44 am

I liked the Federation and AGT-Enterprise triple nacelle designs. I never liked the one nacelle designs though.

Captain Picard's Hair · Wed Apr 30, 2008 1:46 am

I'm not in love with the Stargazer-type but I can live with it, the Prometheus is nice looking, and the AGT Enterprise is the best looking of the three-nacelle ships. Plus, she kicks ass 8)