The Enterprise-D & Her Sisters: which were the initial six Galaxys? 

This is a great observation! The 3 visible ramscoops per nacelle also suggests Batch 2 or 3 as well.

The Syracuse nacelles also has the phaser strip along the top of the nacelle, which was a feature of later Galaxy-class ships (Though the *Enterprise* was admittedly upgraded with this feature) which always suggested phase II or later, and it would make sense that she was one of the Dominion War Phase III ships rushed into service, since if you were to choose which ships to keep in service, you'd likely choose a fully-outfitted science vessel with all the requisite facilities and interiors over a 60% empty shell strapped with extra guns and shield generators. It would also explain the weapon systems issue (As they were obvious PHYSICALLY quite functional) as Geordi would have had to get Dominion War era weapon systems to talk to the original *Enterprise* bridge control systems and software.

This makes a lot of sense. I had just assumed the D was more powerful as Geordi would have loaded her with modern photons not old ones.

This is exactly How I've been thinking of it too. Towards the end of the war, Dominion ships regularly undertook Kamikaze runs, particularly against capital ships. A Jem 'Hadar fighter slamming into the Syracuse' saucer would knock the ship out of the fight but might leave the star drive section relatively intact. With the end of the war and drawdown of forces and ships, the damaged but salvageable star drive section would be in mothballs until someone (Geordi) found an appropriate use for it.

throw in the fact that the Soong Brothers are all fused together in an updated body, and everybody has an additional 30 years experience under their belts...

Yeah, Syracuse, Sicily was the birthplace of mathematician and engineer Archimedes, and widely considered a center of higher learning in its time.

Yes this youtuber didn’t do a cursory google search for the significance of the name as this fact came up as the first entry when searching for “syracuse history.” Naming a galaxy class starship after an American city doesn’t make a lot of sense.

One of the College's symbols is the Goddess Diana. The Latin goddess of Light, The Moon, and the OPEN SKY.

While I agree its unlikely, the Lexington, Yorktown, Saratoga, the 3 Texas class ships, and the ENTIRE California ship class (at least 70 odd ships) would disagree with it being impossible. @@jp93309

@@jp93309I mean, it could have been named after Syracuse, NY. It’s a TV show. Rod named *two whole characters* after his army buddy Kim Noonien Singh.

Ya it makes no sense that 6 were left incomplete..they weren’t specifically warships with a war ending and the federation didn’t go away so why would they not finish them eventually regardless? But let’s pretend that continuity was a strength of Star Trek 😂

If not before - Yamato, Enterprise and Odyssey were all lost.

@@KkevrockKIt makes sense if you don’t want to expend the resources to complete her, and/or you don’t have the personnel to man them.

@@FS2K4Pilot I think more likely they were waiting on the performance information from the original six. The technical manual indicates there was a lot of reticence in producing the Galaxy due to the unprecedented amount of automation and complexity in the design.

I thought two of them became USS Venture and USS Victory, the 2 Galaxies sent to reinforce DS9 after the Klingon attack in Way of the Warrior.

with those middle threeas spares

@@Revkor The registry codes tell us all we need to know about which was build in which order. Challenger (71099) Galaxy (70637) Odyssey (71832) Venture (71854) Yamato (71807) Obviously Galaxy was first, followed by Challenger, Yamato, Odyssey and Venture. The Enterprise-D is the only wildcard due to her legacy suffix.

@@housecoatgaming coorection Yammy's is 1305-E and practixally at that point the writers was jsut making up numbers

@@housecoatgamingThe Enterprise was the 3rd space hull. Galaxy, then Yamato then Enterprise. Galaxy and Yamato congratulated Enterprise on entering the fleet 4 Oct 2363 (TNG tech manual page 17)

@@Revkor Adorable that you used the _fake_ Yamato's registry. Something _the producers_ outright stated was a _mistake._ Go watch Contagion. The Yamato's registry is labelled as 71807 in her technical readouts.

NCC-17744 may have been an open slot from years earlier & was therefore available.

71744 certainly makes more sense

I like to think that the registry number we see is an amalgamation between the Enterprise and the Syracuse. The engineers at the museum were busy removing and putting in the Enterprise's registry number at the same time as removing the Syracuse's.

Another possibility is that the Syracuse was a non-commissioned unit, and a 'parts donor' and/or test asset for active ships, similar to what the STS Endeavor was before they turned it into a flying example after the loss of Challenger. So the low hull number would be due to it being technically built before even the pathfinder hull, but it did not give the class the name due to it not being commissioned (or possibly even named) until well after.

unfortunately it's probably some kind of injoke; as much as i love Lower Decks and Picard Season 3 they fluctuate *wildly* between "attention to detail" and "yeeeeee-haaa!" when it comes to registries. It can certainly be explained (like a legacy registry that wasn't deemed cool enough to play with the Registry-Letter kids) but it's probably like that one time Nagilum made a Galaxy Class with four numbers and an -E.

That's the result of restoring the 'All Good Things' galaxy model back to a 2 nacelle design. The alteration left permanent marks on the model.

@@defies4626 incorrect, they were new 3 foot VFX models used for deep background shots made out of model kits, tehre are photos of them available. They are definitely _not_ the 4 foot D as by the time of Ds9 season 5, the model was on a promotional tour for Generations and had just gone missing at the ti

I wonder what they were called. I know there might be a USS Madison. It's fun to speculate.

Indeed, not being finished in order of hull number / registry number has real world - historical foundations. A number of USN Essex class carriers, heavy and light cruisers as well as Fletcher and Sumner class destroyers were completed or commissioned out of order with the rest of the class. Battleship Wisconsin (BB 64) was laid down, launched and most importantly commissioned and ready for action before Battleship Missouri (BB 63) as an example.

Good points and I like this as an explanation.

Now the Syracuse was established in the eye of the beholder back in TNG that's where Terry metallic and his crew got the name and registry number but for the script that was never established as a Galaxy class but that puts the Syracuse at roughly the same time frame of the Enterprise D so she was either one of the original six ships according to canonical sources

@@TheDogGeneral "so she was either one of the original six ships" or.....? Now, while it's true that U.S.S. Syracuse is on a personnel file in TNG, there is no registry number attached to it, and no on-screen information about what class this ship is. In beta-canon, there is a colony ship with that name, but that's beta canon. There is zero mention of the Galaxy-Class U.S.S. Syracuse NCC-17744 until The Picard S3 episode "Vox", demonstrating that it was created for the show.

@@numberyellow a one-off or she was constructed when the Yamato was destroyed if it follows real-world Naval conventions Starfleet would have wanted to preserve at least six operational galaxy-class Starships if they were going to maintain six Active vessels the possible theory that hasn't been correlated it could be the Syracuse was constructed to replace the Yamato. But there's no proof of that her registry number is also an enigma it is an outlier it is in a 17,000 series when the rest of them are in at least the 71,000 series with the exception of the Enterprise in the USS Galaxy hard to say at this point when the USS Syracuse was established back in the eye of the beholder in a file of some Personnel of one of the minor characters it wasn't established as a Galaxy class ship now here's the kicker once she has been now the question is when and where does she come into Commission. As I see it simply logical to conclude that she was one of the original six ships given when she was established given what we know with her lore whether the first or second batch evidence would seem to point to the first

@@TheDogGeneral Yes, but like i said in my last message, and you acknowledge, The Syracuse mentioned in the personnel file is not established to be a Galaxy-Class. furthermore, restating from my last message, the registry number never shows up until "vox". The Syracuse mentioned in the personnel file could have been anything. It's far more likely that the Syracuse mentioned in the file was an older ship that was decommissioned (perhaps that's even why the guy got transferred to Enterprise), and then the Galaxy-Class Syracuse was a new Galaxy, built during the dominion war era (or slightly before. There is on-screen evidence to support this possibility as well), given the same name as the older ship. But you are right, the registry IS an inconsistency, as it seems to be in a range of numbers that came BEFORE the ones of the other ships of the class....which would seem to imply that it's a legacy registry, with no suffix, which is also entirely out of place.

I like ENT-C better than the D. The Galaxy-X trireme ENT-D on the other hand, kicks ass and takes names.

I always thought the Enterprise-B looked absolutely amazing. I liked the beefier look of the added impluse engines and added secondary hull space. Plus the white paint scheme with aqua blue highlights made it so cool. Wish it had gotten more screen time. We did get basically the same ship in DS9's "Homefront" episode so that was cool.

We are lucky to have gotten that many ships we can swoon on about

@@tinman3586 actually I will amend my criticism. The beefier impulse engines *are* nice and the colour scheme is good. I'm afraid I just can't get past the bulkier 2ndary hull though.

@@drt1605 The fact that it was likely done just to differentiate the Excelsior class from the ones shown in the TOS films irks me. Modifications over time that improve performance, like the beefier impulse engines, make sense. Changing the shape of the secondary hull just seems like something done to make it look different with no real-world purpose.

Sycuse was likely a dw rush galaxy

LaForge also mentions there needing to be a "ton of hull work left to do." When we see it take its place at the museum, the damage to the saucer from its battle in Generations is repaired and the star drive hull now matches that of the saucer. It's likely the Syracuse was a later ship (probably from the Dominion War) that was repurposed to replace the missing Star Drive of the Enterprise. We know most of the original Galaxy class ships were destroyed and therefore no batch I's may have been available by the time LaForge became the curator of the museum. He stated he had been rebuilding it over 20 years, but we do not know when the drive section became available. The ship might have been destined for the scrap heap until he saved it.

In Season 1 of the garbage picard series the Enterprise d in picards dream had 3 lights under the forward nacelle endcap, this was likely done because discovery has 3 on it's nacelle. In the original continuity the Enterprise D hand 2 bussard collectors under the forward nacelle endcaps. It's even in the blueprints of the ship. The real world reason for this was because the 6 foot model had 2 lights sources under the endcap. The people working on nuTrek don't care about star trek or any continuity. In the trash picard series you can see the Hologram of the Enterprise d has shuttle bay 2 and 3 the same size, that's just stupid. Same stupid problem in most shots in the 3rd season of the trash picard season, the only time the shuttle bays were correct was the shot of the Enterprise D approaching Jupiter. In the scenes where the ship was flying around shooting at the cube the shuttle bays where wrong again.

The color difference comes from The D's Saucer having gone through entry on Veridian III and cooking and charring the hull as a result. No to mention the thousands of tons of dirt it slid through.

@@hudsonball4702 no outside of tbe scoring her hull us the same white as we knew the starduve have a different color thus dufferent batch

This would make sense. I would imagine a number of ships lost at Wolf 395 had their names reassigned to ships that were already planned, or possibly already under construction, with different names.

it would follow with history too, at least US history CV-5 and CV-10 were both USS Yorktown, CV-5 being the one that gave the class name to CV-6(Enterprise) and CV8 CV-8 and CV-12 were both USS Hornet CV-2 and CV-16 were both USS Lexington CV-7 and CV-18 were both USS Wasp CV-10 was supposed to be the Bon Homme Richard CV-12 was supposed to be Kearsarge CV-16 was supposed to be Cabot CV-18 was supposed to be Oriskany DD-459 and DD-724 were both USS Laffey, DD-459 was a Benson class destroyer, and DD-724 was an Allen M Sumner class CV-2 was sunk at Coral Sea, CV-5 at Midway, CV-8 was sunk at Santa Cruz, CV-7 by sub transporting reinforcements for Guadalcanal, and DD-459 at Guadalcanal USS Laffey DD-459, actually helped rescue survivors of USS Wasp CV-7 Wasp is actually the most reused name in US Naval History, with 11

@@artbrann This doesn't even touch on the Cassin and Downes situation. The two destroyers burned down in drydock Dec 7. The Navy salvaged their machinery, shipped it to a yard in San Francisco, and built two entirely new destroyers making use of the machinery. The new ships? Cassin and Downes, with the exact same hull codes as the ones lost at Pearl Harbor. :D Also, there's USS Princeton, CVL lost to IIRC kamikaze, that got upgraded to naming an Essex. Or Langley (CV-1) that got a second life as an Independence-class CVL. The USN in WW2 was big on reusing ship names, possibly in part as a way to mess with Japanese Intelligence gathering on whether a ship was actually sunk. And of course, USS Canberra, named after a heavy cruiser sunk off Savo Island. An Australian heavy cruiser. US Navy, you do you. :D

​@@nekophht it was already getting a bit long the USN was absolutely trolling, USS Shangri-La CV-38 which played into the interview with President Roosevelt and the launch point of the Doolittle raid and they just commissioned a new USS Canberra(if you consider like 7 months ago just)

It's "Wolf 359", not "Worf 359"! 😂

It's likely I will continue to add detail and make corrections as I use my model. I'm still not happy with the stardrive section.

The Illinois and Kentucky battleship were part of the Montana class battleship not the Iowa class battleship 👌

Wow, I didn't know that, Very interesting, and worth noting when thinking of, say, the Enterprise-A, as well.

@@edwinarnold4865 they were originally supposed to have been but were laid down as Iowa class because of wartime priorities. They might have actually become Essex class aircraft carriers as well. The Navy during that era was changing priorities and the battle of Coral Sea changed Navy doctrine. Congress wasn’t going to give blank checks anymore so in order to not throw money away so they had to basically change things midstream in production. This continued on into the 1950s as the Cold War commenced. I served on Forrestal (the first “supercarrier”) and there were rumors that it was built on a battleship keel in 1951. Indeed, even its design was changed mid production. This is in stark contrast to how Newport News basically churned out Nimitzes every 4 years for 40 years like they were cookie cutter carriers and gradually altered the design with each iteration so that they could conceivably move on to the Ford class without having to completely retool- but even then they doubled the costs and extended the production times. Military spending nowadays looks incredibly wasteful in comparison.

​@edwinarnold4865 afraid not, Montana Class starts at BB-67 and goes through to BB-71 for five total

@@kwaktak the last two Iowa class battleship that were laid down were cancelled and their unfinished hull were used for a new class supply ships called AOE those two hull would become u.s.s Sacramento AOE -1 and u.s.s. Camden AOE -2 I was stationed on the u.s.s Sacramento

In a very real sense, the Galaxies os something of a luxury hotel in space.

Do you have a screenshot of that? 14 seems a lot, even for the fleet shot

USS DAUNTLESS NCC-71879 She appears in the game "Star Trek - Bridge Commander". It may therefore be non-canon.

It's within a 10-second clip where the fleet engages the Cardassian-Jem'Hadar fleet. It's just after Sisko speaks and the attack begins, it's the shot that begins at 0:09 and ends at 0:19. Blink and you'll miss the first one's warp nacelles exit screen left. ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-X0N16g-_LV4.html

@@TomBatemanRT85 Thanks!

​@@TheWoblinGoblin @TomBatemanRT85 - I've noticed this myself, when SOA came out I remember rewinding, pausing, frame by framing it to try and count alllll the different Galaxy's on screen. The fact that there are 14 or so in that shot alone.. the Enterprise, Yamato, Odyssey AND Admiral Hansen's BoBW's Galaxy all being destroyed ANNND that these ships are from the combined Second and Fifth fleets (the Ninth was still a day away and couldn't make it to the battle) There had to be way more than just 1, 2, 3 or even 4 "batches" of the Galaxy. A) we don't have an actual end number, for the number of Fleet groups in Starfleet. The highest I remember hearing was 9th fleet.. but not hearing 10th, 12th or 14th doesn't preclude it. B) If we presumed that it DID preclude it.. we have other things to consider as well.. like the other 7 fleets.. (1st, 3rd, 4th, 6th, 7th,8th & 9th) - ALL the Galaxy's wouldn't be just in the 2nd and 5th fleets. Its Reasonable to assume that they're -roughly- distributed -roughly- similarly throughout the total fleet.. some numbered fleets may have a couple more.. a couple less, but it's fair to assume that each fleet had.. at least 8. Then.. there is the 3rd fleet which as we were told on a few occasions, was a special fleet. 3rd fleet was tasked with Defending Earth and surrounding territory.. (likely Vulcan as well) If I was a fleet planner during war time.. I'm gonna have that 3rd fleet as my strongest. And in that time frame, that means more Galaxy, Defiant and Sovereign class ships.. It's reasonable to assume 10 to 12 in the third fleet alone.. And all of the above, is assuming that the 14 we see in the Charge Scene in SoA was ALL the Galaxy's in those combined fleets. Its reasonable to believe some are simply out of our ability to see because they've charged ahead.. are further to starboard or further back. Simply.. I think they Built a dozen frames, filled out six (batch one) as test ships. The Galaxy launched first.. it went ok for the year.. they launched the other 5, after another year, no serious design flaws were found, they filled in and launched the second set. And it makes sense.. They were still in the middle of the unseen Cardassian war, they had to maintain a fleet along the Romulan Neutral Zone where every ship which is confronted is ALWAYS a D'Deridex - Starfleet would need to match what they see from their counterparts, else risk those counterparts saying "lol Miranda Class ? ok.. lets invade". I think after the second batch (the first full dozen) had launched, they just went into full blown production of them. Going by the Excelsior's example, they know / we know that this ship should have a service life of at -least- 100 years.. likely longer barring a fatal flaw. She would be the new backbone of the fleet for decades to come and you can't be the backbone without numbers. So.. in closing.. Safe to say at least 80 Galaxy's were built.. I personally believe a couple hundred.

nah makes more sense the stardrive is the Syracuse

Then it would as much the Syracuse as the Enterprise. Makes more sense to me if the Star drive section is rebuilt from new or salvage or spares. The complicated stuff, engines and deflector, nacelles, etc. came from a donor ship.

@@CrazyFool75 note this has been a side project for Geordi. he has his hands full rebuilding the saucer intertior. so getting a nearly intact stardrive makes things easier

@@Revkor Maybe, but that’s not what the script says. And since in Star Trek, only what happens on screen is considered canon, we must assume that only the nacelles and engines are from the Syracuse. Besides if the curator of the fleet museum can also lay his hands on a sizeable load out of photon torpedoes with armed warheads, then almost anything is possible…

@@CrazyFool75 he commands a starbase those would be easy to get. the build from scratch an entire stardrive. I doubt. and the fact one ofthe nacalles was givign him trouble it's likely a damaged stardrive. damaged from when. likely DW thus making her likely a DW rush job Galaxy

There was no galaxy was at wolf 359. Not seen on screen

there was no Galaxy at wolf 359

Good callback, Admiral Hanson's ship was, according to the script for Best of Both Worlds, a Galaxy class - they just didn't have the budget to make every aspect of the script present on screen. It's good enough for me.

@@s2k997 but again even ifthey couldn't visually show a Galaxy the battle bridge was set up to be the battle bridge for this episode so why not use it. we just see hanson in a charir with some railings and a screen flashing red alert. and the last time we saw him he was using an excelsior

​@@Revkor I cannot be sure, but I have a guess - audiences get confused. Safer to put him on a bridge that obviously wasn't a look-alike of the Enterprise D's bridge to avoid the viewer getting muddled and their brains hurting too much if they were pretty thick. It makes sense, production wise, to have it look visually distinct so our less smart brethren can easily see "He's clearly not on the hero ship". This switch out trick was done time and again on TNG, where the script called for a simple redress and the director changed it to something more visually distinct to help thickos follow the plot by simple visual cues; such as the famous last minute swap of the Star Gazer from a constitution vs constellation class - because they thought they were worried stupid viewers would see the ship, think it was the Enterprise A, and then get sad/complain there was no Kirk and Co., only the ship. I'm happy to go with the simple production logic that they had the bridge visually distinct for viewer comprehension reasons aka "having an identical bridge to the hero ship on a non-hero ship, in an episode already involving a lot of ships, could hurt too many stupid people's brains, lets make an insignificant visually clear deviation what the script calls for at a surface level". I'm also not entirely convinced it isn't necessarily a Galaxy battle bridge either - is it that unthinkable that it could look different, considering how many wildly different bridges we've seen on the Excelsior class? For all we know, the old fashioned alert screen could have been down the the Admiral's personal preference, it's hardly rocket science to change a display to appear how the flag officer wants his flag ship to be stylised. Or it could have been simply down to that very reason, it was configured differently because it was a fleet command ship, as opposed to the very rarely used battle bridge of a deep space explorer. Would explain why the Enterprise D's battle bridge is incredibly spartan, they didn't think it was too relevant in the assigned diplomacy/explorer role and did a bare bones job. The class is designed to be reconfigurable and with loads of empty space to suit its intended individual purpose after all. It's not like we didn't see the Enterprise D get different bridges over time. Hence, I'm happy to lean into what the script says. Nobody else needs to be though...

I disagree if first batch why different hull color?

There's also a Syracuse in New York. Given how Star Trek usually names ships, I think that's the more likely origin.

@@Revkor the hull color could be easily explained. For one, the Enterprise saw much more action likely so its hull would naturally be more deteriorated. Plus it crashed into a planet and still has some visible damage, and we see in the concept art that they tried to differentiate the two. We don’t know how long the Enterprise sat on the planet, but the ship’s hull could have corroded or oxidized or something while on Veridian 3. It could have also been from one of the many weird encounters the enterprise throughout the 7 seasons had that discolored the hull slightly, who knows Or Geordi could have also just not gotten around to putting a fresh coat of paint on the saucer. Or more likely, they just have differently colored hulls… Starfleet doesn’t usually build two ships to be completely identical, we usually see a lot of variation even across a single production run of ships. The NX-01 and NX-02 were sister ships but had completely different hull colors, and hell just look at the hull of Discovery vs other TOS era ships. The technical manual even talks about Galaxy class ships being testbeds for lots of new tech. They could have been testing different alloys or paints.

@@johnsledge3942 I point to the last one. while Geordi clearly hasn't had time to do fresh coat of paint. we do see a darkening of ship hulls even from Voyager. her hull is more bluish grey then Enterprise D was. so meaning between E-D's launch and Voyager's launch they changed something. different blend or refining who knows. But this is why i point to Syracuse not being a batch one ship. Let's look at the senario. Geordi needs a new stardrive to restore her. there is not goign to be many galaxys that will donated. Yet Syracuse is used why? that stardrive is not being used. likely in a surplus yard. Why is it there. likely damaged badly and not worth repairing at the time and now why would a Galaxy not be worth to repair. not worth the investment. And what kind of galaxy would not be worth it. A DW Rush Galaxy. Dw rushers are bare bone Galaxys. besides key systems they only have the basics. I bet quarters are similar to an excelsior or even a defiant depending. with lots of empy space. so one of these gets badly damaged and the war has ended for she can be repaired so why they don't scrap her they leave her in a mothball yard just in case. and that is where Geodri gets her. he mentions issues with one of the nacelle covers so i bet Syracuse lost her saucer and got hit in the engines late in the war.

putting that stardate into a date converter spits out April 11th, 2363; this supports that the Syracuse is most likely a Batch I (and was likely launched while the E-D was undergoing her "Sea Trials" before her October 2363 Commissioning making the Syracuse the 4th Galaxy Class ever built.)

While I'm not a great fan of the show, it could make sense that discovery is officially just missing, not lost 😉

Have to remember several things with that scene. First they were already engaged in combat with the cube, i doubt the cube would sit and wait for them to complete a separation, the enterprise was weaving and dodging incoming fire. And second time was a huge issue, they didnt have any spare time to pull back to a safe distance, and do a saucer separation, they were under the gun and had to go now or never. I do agree it would make sense to take just the stardrive in, but under the circumstances it makes sense they couldnt.

Was the battlebridge even ready?

@@poiujnbvcxdswq probably best reason they didn't leave with just the battle section.

@@joshuakrieski9628 I was thinking maybe they could just leave the museum with just the stardrive in the first place, but as someone else commented, maybe that part wasn't even ready to go by itself.

While that was likely a possibility, they had no idea at the time they were going to have to navigate INSIDE a massive borg cube, so again no real reason to separate the ship.@@danandtab7463

I'm sorry, but FAA regulations do not permit us to depart for battle without fully functioning holodecks!

That first part is apparently from the TNG tech manual. Not sure how canon it is.

@@vic5015It was written by Sternbach and Okuda..the people who basically wrote TNG...not sure how much more canon it gets.

​@@poiujnbvcxdswqwell, there were a couple of Voyager prequel novels written by Jeri Tsylor, a producer on the show. She then used her position to declare them canon.

​@@poiujnbvcxdswqthere's a ToS technical manual as well as something called "Mr. Scott's Guide to the Enterprise". As nest i know, both are considered "backstage" sources and neither is canon. The DS9 and Voyager tech manuals have some odd incongruities with the shows.

Venomgeekmedia and drachinifel made a long video series with an interesting take on the war-Galaxys. just FYI

Challenger wasn't there. and if Hanson was on the battle bridge why didn't they use the battlebridge set. it was prepped and ready to serve in that role for that very episode

More likely, like real world supercarriers, while ordered in batches (frequently in pairs), they all end up as one offs by time of competition. So the plan may have been 6 Batch 1's leading to 6 Batch 2's, but by then end of production, you've got 12 ships that at most end up in pairs, with steady incremental improvements. The same thing may have happened with the war built Batch 3's, especially if production didn't really stop between Batch 2 and Batch 3. Then, by the end of the survivors service lives, all the remaining ships are essentially unique, as each ship has seen different combinations of refits based on Starfleet's needs. Plus, depending on how many shipyards are involved, and exactly how Starfleet numbers it's ships (When ordered v/s when the contract is signed v/s when it's laid down) with delays between yards, the hull numbers might cross over batches, with some batch 1 ships having later numbers than batch 2 ships.

I strongly doubt that Hanson were on Galaxy class. No Galaxy starship were available for Wolf359. That episode airing when Gene Roddenberry still alive. Galaxy class battle bridge were only mentioned in the script, referring as the set of bridge they are using for the show. We knew , that in order to fit w/ the budget, they are also using Galaxy class battle bridge with minor different make up to simulate other ships as well. (ex: Nebula class). No indication he's in Galaxy class for the entire of two episodes. No Galaxy class were shown on DS9's Wolf359 flashback either. More, the bridge set showing TMP era's red alert symbol, indicate he is in 23th century starship. Lastly, we knew when they show Galaxy class starship, they only use her main bridge as these set were the most well known layout.

I do love it when people like you bring up real world Navy knowledge. Even if it doesn't fit Star Trek exactly I've still learned something pretty cool.

I live in Syracuse NY and have yet to see any shipyards.

Also, Lockheed Martin is an aerospace company. They build missiles that can be launched from ships, but they're not a maritime contractor.

I think it wasn't ever officially named the Auriga (it's a cool and fitting name, though)

Not a Galaxy

@@Revkor obviously this fanmade video series isn't canon, but I believe also in the show they actually used the Galaxy Class battle bridge as background for Hanson. It would make sense if he commanded the fleet from a Galaxy Battle Bridge ru-vid.com/group/PLuhckVF3wY0Bm69sC_hjmkY-9YxIo4WWd&si=gwtsr7bnI0psMWDo I know, in the show he was transported via Excelsior class to the Enterprise, it may even have been the Hood, which is named regularly in fleet lists for Wolf 359

Orgonally cvs were named adter battles, a hold over from whe. The lexingtons were battlecruisers

@@paulrasmussen8953No they weren`t. The original CVs were named for rather a mixture. Ranger the very first US carrier from the keel up was named after John Paul Jones Sloop.

@poiujnbvcxdswq ranger was off but you look at the bulk of the cvs their were battles. Lexington, saratoga, midway, bunkerhill

Mariner could Captain that ship well.

She will be Boaty Mc Boat face class

USS Deez Nuts

Not actually funny, Cesar. Just juvenile, IMO.

Originally it was supposed to be Aircraft carriers, but the writers got mixed up and put in Potemkin,Hood and Kongo..all WW1 battleships/Battlecruisers and then we ended up with Defiant that has never been a real warship being thrown in as well

The difference can be due to the fact that the underside of the E-D saucer still had scuff marks and discoloration from its crash on Veridian III.

@@mikedicenso2778 no you also see it on top. the saucer and the stardrive clearly have differnt hull colors.

@@Revkor Even the top wasn't unscathed, as attested by the damage done to the bridge despite being so far up on top of the saucer, and we saw the saucer during the crash plow through a large hill. There's just too many variables because of the crash, and Geordi clearly not having had the time to cosmetically restore it, assuming he was ever going to go that far.

@@mikedicenso2778 Only thwe glass broke on the outside. again take a good looking in picard and pay attention the the colors of the saucer vs the stardrive

not really, it all depends on how long the Enterprise-D's saucer stayed on Veridian III after the crash. the Sun has an oxidizing effect on materials.