Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site dartvax.UUCP Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!akgua!mcnc!decvax!dartvax!markv From: markv@dartvax.UUCP (Mark Vita) Newsgroups: net.startrek Subject: Re: ships (The Star Fleet Technical Manual) Message-ID: <1689@dartvax.UUCP> Date: Fri, 25-May-84 13:50:21 EDT Article-I.D.: dartvax.1689 Posted: Fri May 25 13:50:21 1984 Date-Received: Fri, 1-Jun-84 03:14:52 EDT References: <1877@pur-ee.UUCP> <2790@alice.UUCP> <127@tilt.UUCP> Organization: Dartmouth College Lines: 30 Obviously "The Star Fleet Technical Manual" isn't entirely accurate, but it is still a pretty amazing piece of work. Sure the ships drawn in the book aren't exactly elegant-looking, but then again, The Enterprise wasn't very streamlined back then either (compared to the new version). But I like the fact that the book has it's own internal logic--i.e., all the starships have the same basic design (primary hull, warp-engine nacelles) and differ only in configuration and armament. But when it comes right down to it, you have to pick *something* to be your "reference authority" for design of starships. (And everything else, for that matter.) What else is there? I, personally, don't think the Star Trek novels are a valid source for reference. Some of the stories are very good, but a dozen different authors all with his or her own conception of the Star Trek universe in no basis for a unified reference. I've always considered the descriptions and actions in these books to be outside of the "real" history of Star Trek. What I consider the "real" history is solely what appears in the original episodes and the three films. And the films, at least marginally, have seemed to support some of the designs which appear in the Technical Manual. For instance, the Reliant looks similar to a "Transport/Tug", and the new Excelsior-class ship looks vaguely similar to the "Dreadnought". -- Mark Vita Dartmouth College {decvax,cornell,linus}!dartvax!markv