Problems and Oddities

This page provides a brief description of some of the snags that you run into when trying to draw up a coherent picture of the ships of Starfleet. Most of them are minor continuity glitches that are perhaps unavoidable when you consider that there are eight films and over five hundred episodes of Star Trek.

Only the largest problems are listed, a one line quibble about a registry or date will be found in the main entry. I'll outline each problem and try to provide some possible answers. I'd be pleased to hear from you if you have any other possible solutions.

Antares class

  1. The Encyclopedia suggests that the U.S.S. Antares from Charlie X in TOS might have been of this class. (BTW, in Charlie X the Antares (with a crew of twenty) was described firstly as a cargo ship, then a transport ship, then when destroyed reported to UESPA as a space probe vessel, then called a survey ship.)
  2. There are two dialogue references to Antares class vessels in TNG. One (from Ensign Ro) refers to a Bajoran vessel of the familiar triangular design, the other is the Corvallen freighter from Face Of The Enemy. So neither reference is to the design commonly associated with the name...
  3. ...which is the Antares class (of probably alien origin?) that is used by many merchant navies and individual traders. Kassidy Yates' ship, the Xhosa, is of this class. The Fact Files (#153) gives a good summary of the various ships that form this class. If all the ships based on the same model are actually members of the Antares class then the class must have entered service in the 2060s or earlier.
  4. The novel Pathways states that Chakotay's vessel was an Antares class by the name of Liberty.
  5. I'm guessing that the authors of the Space Flight Chronology intended their Canopus class to be the vessel to which the TOS U.S.S. Antares belonged.
  6. The Star Trek Concordance includes an artist's impression of the U.S.S. Antares NCC-717. I rather like this picture.
  7. LUG reference two distinct Anatres classes, not giving a picture for either. In the TNG rules there's a Federation freighter, probably intended to be III above. In the TOS rules there's a Starfleet science vessel. The differences in basic stats (size for example) mean that they can not share a space frame. The picture from VI above could serve as the Surveyor. To further complicate matters the Class-B Freighter design in the TOS rules is illustrated with one of the vessels known to belong to III.

I'm inclined to completely ignore I, treat III as a separate civilian class that just happens to have the same name and to hold IV as a possibility. If we ever see those large raiders in Starfleet service then IV becomes much more likely. V, VI and VII could be combined to create a 23rd century surveyor class (possibly called Canopus) which uses the design from VI and the stats from VII.

U.S.S. Crazyhorse

This ship was mentioned but not seen in the TNG season 6/7 cliffhanger "Descent". The Omnipedia listed it as Cheyenne class with the registry NCC-50466. However when we actually saw this vessel in the TNG 7th Season episode "The Pegasus" it was undeniably an Excelsior class.
The solution - Simply ignore the Omnipedia and call it an Excelsior class. The number is problematic being higher than any confirmed Excelsior, for simplicity's sake, just swapping two digits around to make it NCC-40566 is a possible solution.

U.S.S. Intrepid

We know that there was an Excelsior class with this name in service in the 2340s. We also know that the lead ship of the Intrepid class should have been commissioned sometime in late 2370. (Further more some people believe - with no real supporting evidence - in a Galaxy class vessel of this name.) In August 2370 Geordi was in friendly competition with the chief engineer on the Intrepid over the matter of engine efficiency. The question is which Intrepid? It could be either, the old Excelsior on her last mission or the new Intrepid class undergoing pre-commissioning trials. The timing would indicate the Intrepid class, but the reference comes from "Force of Nature", the episode that introduces the destructive side effects of warp drive, the very things that the Intrepid's warp drive was supposed to counter.
The solution - Say that it's the new Intrepid and that this ship's warp drives, designed for efficiency or speed, or something, were happily found to be non-destructive. This also explains how the Federation overcame the problem so quickly: serendipity.

U.S.S. Lexington

A ship of this name rendevouzed with the Enterprise (off screen) in 2370. The Omnipedia said that is was an Excelsior class with the registry NCC-14427. In November 2371 a Nebula class, NCC-61832, of this name docked at Deep Space 9. Dialogue revealed that it had been on a long duration mapping mission for several years. These dates don't fit.
The solution - Ignore the off-screen reference to an Excelsior class vessel.

U.S.S. Melbourne

At Wolf 359, Admiral Hanson made the Melbourne his flagship, Riker had earlier been offered command of this ship. After the battle Commander Shelby pointed to a wrecked Nebula and called it the Melbourne. The Encyclopedia called it a Nebula and gave the registry as NCC-62043. Later episodes have featured a desk model of the Melbourne as a Nebula class. However in "Emissary" we see Wolf 359 again and we see an Excelsior class with the name Melbou... being destroyed. The Encyclopedia confirms that this is meant to be the Melbourne and that it was given the same registry, NCC-62043. This is much higher than the normal range of Excelsior registries.
The solution - Hard to ignore the Excelsior class as it's very visible. But that registry is a bugger. One option is to perform my favourite trick and swap two digits to produce NCC-42063, a perfectly good Excelsior registry.
Or go with the Nebula class and say that the Excelsior was another ship altogether. Or even that the Excelsior was an older U.S.S. Melbourne (with a different registry) brought out of mothballs for the battle, maybe used merely as a flying bomb (we never see her fire).

U.S.S. Valiant

What was the ship lost over Eminiar VII fifty years before TOS? Most of fandom had it as the Constitution class, NCC-1709. (The Spaceflight Chronology had it as NCC-1102 of unknown class.) The Encyclopedia (first edition) has it as Daedalus class, NCC-1223. Neither of these are posiible. To be a Constitution stretches 50 years to mean about 42 with the fandom launch dates and is simply impossible with the Encyclopedia launch dates. Daedalus class is also out as they were all retired from service in the 2190s. The LUG RPG (TOS Core Rules) make it a member of the Ranger class.
The solution - Keep the NCC-1223 registry but make this U.S.S. Valiant a member of another class. Also see the entry for the Mann class.

U.S.S. Yeager

How can there be a Sabre class U.S.S. Yeager and another U.S.S. Yeager? The dates don't allow one to be destroyed and the other named after it.
The solution - Not really a solution, but this is what Mike Okuda had to say on the subject:

"Alas, the two Starships Yeagars was an oversight borne of the fact that two seperate effects teams were working on Star Trek: First Contact and Star Trek: Deep Space Nine. Both teams wanted to pay homage to Chuck Yeagar, and neither was aware of the other's efforts until it was too late."
Back to the front page.

[Constitution] [Miranda] [Excelesior] [Constellation] [Oberth] [Ambassador] [Akira] [Nebula] [Galaxy] [Danube] [Intrepid] [Defiant] [Sovereign]
[22nd and early 23rd Century] [Mid to late 23rd Century] [24th Century Part 1] [24th Century Part 2] [Misc Classes] [Federation Timeships] [Fighters and Maquis Vessels]

Last updated June 21st 2004. © Stephen Pugh <steve@pugh.net>
Star Trek™, ® & © by Paramount Pictures. All Rights Reserved.
Star Trek is a registered trademark of and all characters and related marks are trademarks of Paramount Pictures.