NCC-1864/NCC-1664 and NCC-1831/NCC-1631[]
After I have reviewed this, I am confident that what MA calls NCC-1864 is actually NCC-1664 of the Excalibur. Sadly, both of the 6's are never in the same frame. I would like to purpose removing from Reliant and move to Excalibur. ‐ Yaroze86 (talk) 02:22, 4 October 2024 (UTC)
Next with NCC-1831, with NCC-1864 out, none of the ships in this list are in the 1800's. NCC-1718 is the next highest ship. It seems unlikely and highly improbable we get a jump of 113 ships and somehow its the only ship in the 1800's. Stone clearly looks at the chart, makes a decision on Intrepid and issues a response to the Intrepid. The only ship with a green status is the line for NCC-1831/1631. No ship in TOS had a higher registry than the Defiant NCC-1764. The screen capture used for this chart also seems to indicates its NCC-1631 as well as the original [1]. Michael Okuda even went back and forth on this but settled on NCC-1631 even when asked. At worst NCC-1831 could be moved into a Real World/Retcon article. Propose moving NCC-1831 into NCC-1631. ‐ Yaroze86 (talk) 15:12, 7 October 2024 (UTC)
- What I see is The Dress. You see one set of numbers, I see another. In the end, it comes down to preference. I don't think we will ever know for certain what some of the numbers are.– Memphis77 (talk) 17:39, 7 October 2024 (UTC)
Shouldn't the consistence at that point be go with what is established by factual ships (1664/1631) and bginfo them into those pages as possible errors when reading if its unclear. If not, are we not potentially creating canon by making them 1864/1831 when they are up for interpretation? Even a redirect would, I think, be a better solution then a dedicated page for uncertainties. ‐ Yaroze86 (talk) 18:59, 7 October 2024 (UTC)
- I agree. On the talk page for NCC-1831, Throwback suggested merging NCC-1831 with NCC-1631 and got a sharp rebuke from one of the moderators. If you can make a stronger case than Throwback, then it might be possible to merge the two pages.– Memphis77 (talk) 20:55, 7 October 2024 (UTC)
35mm film[]
I purchased a Lincoln Enterprises 35mm film strip of this scene off eBay. Initially looking at it through my loupes, NCC-1864 is 100% not correct. I am looking at options in trying to get the image blown up on a canvas or something. It's either NCC-1664 or 1654. For 1831/1631, it's much harder to tell. I'll keep MA posted on results. ‐ Yaroze86 (talk) 23:10, 7 May 2025 (UTC)
Here are my findings:
- NCC-1709
- NCC-1631 (My image might not be the best judge for this one but I can't disprove NCC-1831 off what I have currently. This could change when we blow it up/scan it. There are times it looks like both.)
- NCC-1703
- NCC-1672
- NCC-1654
- NCC-1697
- NCC-1701
- NCC-1718
- NCC-1635
- NCC-1700
Most surprised was the NCC-1635 as I was not expecting here are a couplecrude photos [2] ‐ Yaroze86 (talk) 00:32, 9 May 2025 (UTC)