I've done a lot over the years to address the in-universe stuff that's been created and shown from "The Cage" on up. I massage and "certain-point-of-view" as much as I can to get contradictory things to reconcile. I prefer to have to throw out as little as possible. I also treat all the ancillary material and fan-created stuff as a grab-bag, of sorts, to fill in gaps. Enterprise is not part of my main continuity, as too much within it just flat doesn't work with what we'd seen prior. I treat it as an alternate timeline kicked off by Our Heroes interference in First Contact, and one that led to the JJ-verse. Discovery should've just picked up after the Burn and gone from there. Picard, too. perhaps. Out past "All Good Things...", "Endgame", and "The Visitor".
So yes, that limits what I choose to incorporate, but with good reason. I go with first sources wherever possible, and work from there. If later material contradicts, each instance is examined uniquely to determine which way I go. I never do anything frivolously, and always have solid reasoning behind my choices. This is not to say I am permanently locked in to those choices. If new information comes along, I will incorporate it and revise my worldview accordingly. I've had complete reversals on several things over the years, as I discovered what I thought I knew was flawed.
So. The
Grissom... First, it is not
Oberth-class. They had wanted to make a new model for "The Naked Now" and, when Paramount vetoed the expenditure, stuck the
Grissom in instead. Didn't even change the decals from the unused TVH re-deco (
Copernicus, NCC-640). The registry is visible onscreen, and clearly so in the remastered version. They had vague notions of what they wanted, and most of the times an
Oberth was picked as the ship in question, they tried to get a new model for it. The closest they came was "The Pegasus", where designs and drawings of how the ship was to be embedded within the asteroid were all drawn up, and an MSD for the engineering display was created, but, once again, Paramount said no, so they used the
Grissom again. It's supposed to be a newer class, more analogous to an
Ambassador-era
Miranda than the dinky
Grissom, so I mentally overlay what it
should be every TNG+ episode that shows an "
Oberth". So the
Grissom's actual class is backspaced to be blank.
Back in the '70s, Franz Joseph Schnaubelt, an aerospace engineer like Matt Jefferies, had a daughter who was an avid Trekkie. He never really got into the show, but she and her friends had it on all the time, and he began wondering how such a ship would function. After some questionable research methodology, the result of his rumination was the
Constitution class booklet of general plans that he sold at Star Trek conventions. Gene was at one and saw them, they talked, Gene had Ballantine publish the plans and the book (the Star Fleet Technical Manual) that FJ talked to him about. They were official up until Gene and FJ had a falling-out and Gene blackballed FJ and his works. So they were official at the time TMP and TWOK were made, at least. TSFS, iffy, and definitely not by the time of TVH. So photostats from the plans and technical manual are used on bridge displays in the first three films and ships from the manual are name-dropped in TMP. Put that on another square and move on...
Way back in the beginning, Matt Jefferies, who was a pilot as well as an aerospace engineer, came up with a hull number for the ship he'd designed, mostly arbitrarily. NC was the civil aviation code for the US at the time, and he tacked another 'C' onto that to give it a bit of a remove from reality. He found out later that the civil aviation code for the Soviet Union, at the time, was CC, and liked the after-the-fact symbolism of the two 20th-century antagonists joined in peaceful exploration through the mashed-up prefix. For the number, he had to eliminate anything that would be unclear on TVs of the day, and, from what was left, as he put it, "'1701' was as good as anything". But
because he was an engineer, he immediately started pondering and rationalizing what it all meant. Since 1920, the U.S. Navy codified a system of identifying its hulls with a two-letter prefix. Generically, it was the first letter of the ship type, doubled (CC for Cruiser, BB for Battleship, SS for Submarine, DD for Destroyer, etc. -- Aircraft Carriers being the exception, being, initially, Cruisers converted for aViation application). So, he reasoned, since this was a space
cruiser, it stood to reason the "CC" in the registry indicated that (and there were probably other vessel types with appropriately similar prefices -- "NDD" for the Destroyers, for instance). "N" would be some governmental identifier. And, for the number, he decided it meant the operating authority's 17th Cruiser design, and the 01st production hull built after the prototype (00).
That might just be academic historical footnote material, except he also worked as the show's set designer, senior illustrator, and scenic artist. He came up with all the control layouts, backlit screen inserts, and, notably, this piece of set dressing for Commodore Stone's office wall in "Court Martial":
This is from the "coming next week" teaser, original film stock, not down-rezzed for broadcast or VHS or DVD transfer. Two of those registries have been erroneously referenced for decades (1831 as 1631 and 1864 as 1664 -- yes, the
Reliant was at Starbase 11 in this episode). Greg Jein, in the '70s, wrote an article for the "T-Negative" fan magazine ("The Case of Jonathan Doe Starship") where he connected those numbers with the known-extant
Constitution-class ships, though what he described as a "barely-logical" approach, that he admitted he could tear down just as easily as assert. No one seems to have asked Matt what he had in mind -- or, later, when they actually
did, didn't seem to grasp the significance. I'll spell it out...
In his capacity as scenic artist, he made that status display, using the system he'd noodled out since production on the first pilot. Ergo, the other three 17XX registries belong to
Enterprise stablemates (notably the class lead ship, the
Constitution, herself), and the rest belong to Cruisers of other classes. The 16XX registries (all pretty high, notice) to an immediate predecessor that is still in service, and the two 18XX numbers we know to be
Miranda class. Since that's what the
Reliant is, at 1864, since that's what the
Lantree is at 1833, since that's what the
Saratoga is at 1887, and to assert Matt's registry system here. Stone points to the 1831 line when saying they're rushing to get the
Intrepid out of dock. Makes sense they'd give the Vulcans a science vessel (the rôle we usually see the class performing), and not a Heavy Cruiser.
FJ did something similar in his Technical Manual, having the classes he showed with registry groupings based on their type. The Scouts and Destroyers had three-digit hull numbers, the Heavy Cruisers had four-digit hull numbers starting with '1', the Dreadnoughts had four-digit hull numbers starting with '2', and the Transports had four-digit hull numbers starting with '3'. After that it all falls apart, though.
After FJ was blackballed, FASA came to Paramount wanting to do a Star Trek RPG. One of the things they asked about was ships lists, and wanted to know if they could use the FJ stuff. Gene emphatically said no. The only other thing out there was Greg Jein's article, so that's what got incorporated into the game -- with even more misreadings of the hull numbers. That, then, being an official publication, became what Mike Okuda had to reference for the last few TOS films and everything from TNG forward. Despite the fact that it's wrong, and, as I said, no one ever talked to Matt. So Mike had a system for TNG where the hull numbers just steadily increased, irrespective of class or type.
Matt's system, including a modified version of FJ's take, works for the era up to about TSFS. Because of the sheer volume, Mike's has to hold sway
after that point. I hold that, in-universe, the one gave way to the other, as increasing shipbuilding capacity made the old registry blocks no longer workable. Note the 16XX numbers in the 90s? And the
Saratoga in the '80s? Bigger, more complex linchpin classes, like the
Constitution, would have fewer built (the
Defiant's "1764" was pulled out of Greg's ar-- um... the ether -- highest canon registry we see is 1718, but they probably made it into at least the 30s or 40s). But that would have to give way. Similarly, as Starfleet was falteringly trying to move from more militaristic to more exploratory, the non-NCC classifications needed to go away. So starting at NCC-2500, going forward, all numbers were assigned as a given vessel was ordered, regardless of class or type, and all starting with NCC. This is the approach that results in the fewest unresolvable contradictions. Two ships (
Grissom and
Jenolan need new prefixes, and two ships,
Bozeman and
Constellation, need registry tweaks).
[
Speaking of the Constellation
, the one we see in TOS is a massive headache. The model-builders used an off-the-shelf AMT kit, built and "distressed" it, and had the original-issue decal sheet with just the "1701" on it. Rather than ask Matt what to do, they just jumbled it into the sequence most visually distinct from the Enterprise
's. *sigh* In my ship lists, I've "corrected" it to 1710.]
We see ships in both canon and fanon that are an identical base class, with more or less stuck-on gear. For instance, the roll-bar that is on the
Reliant is not on the
Lantree. Fandom also gives us versions of the
Grissom saucer-and-nacelles platform that is just that, or has an underslung torpedo pod, etc. I recognize these as subclasses within a registry block.
I.e.,
Miranda at 1800, the
Soyuz subclass at 1840, and the
Avenger subclass at 1860. Not all slots in those authorized groupings might get ships ordered to fill them. That lets us get different functions out of one class. A base
Miranda, for instance, is a Light Cruiser -- blended hull, more exploration and science oriented than combat, but still able to defend itself. The
Avenger is significantly upgunned, so is classed as a Frigate, as it's skewed more toward combat. Similarly, a Destroyer recontextualized with more scientific capacity will be classed a Frigate. Bureaucratic term for such an in-between status.
Now, to TMP. The radio chatter refers to the Scouts
Revere, at 595, and
Columbia, at 621, taken from FJ's ship lists. It is all one long list of over a hundred ships, starting at Destroyer-rigged
Saladin-class ships at NCC-500, all the way up to the Scout-rigged
Hermes-class, in -- IIRC -- the 580s. Using the film canon and forcing Matt's system onto this... The
Saladin class was initially authorized as a Destroyer, at NDD-500, during the Four Years War with the Klingons. Somewhere along the way, it was decided to rework the design with more sensor capacity to serve as Scouts -- fleet outriders -- and that was the
Hermes subclass, to which the
Revere belonged. To reflect its new rôle, the prefix for those is NSS. Since I hold the
Oberth to be a 24th-century design, I go with the old fandom designation for the base saucer-and-nacelles design of the
Grissom:
Gagarin class, a dedicated Scout, at NSS-600. At NSS-630 is the
Sagan-subclass planetary surveyors, with their massive underslung sensor pod. And at NDD-660 are the
Jester-subclass Destroyer Escorts with their underslung weapons pods.
In TVH, Cartwright reports to the Federation Council President that "two starships and three smaller vessels" have been neutralized by the whalesong probe. The two starships are the
Saratoga and
Yorktown. One of the calls up on screen is from the disabled
Shepard -- a stablemate of the
Grissom. So we know that class counts as a "smaller vessel" and not a starship. Part of why I have no problem with flexible prefixes within those classes, depending on loadout.
The other thing I dove into was what can be gleaned from how many of a given type there were by 2285, when the changeover went into effect. From my accumulation of all the ships and registries, NCC-2500 made the best transition point to the new system. So I took that to mean the Jefferies system would cap out at 24 Cruiser classes, back to the founding of the Federation (pre-Federation Starfleet ships would have a completely different registry system, that I won't go into here). The
Excelsior, the 20th, was launched in 2285. The
Constitution, the 17th, was launched in 2245. Going back to the Founding, in 2161, I got a nice 10/20/40-year periodicity...
2165:
Daedalus class launched.
2175: Surviving early-Flight vessels begin undergoing first major refits.
2185: Production ceases, second wave of refits begins, development starts on next-generation technological leader.
2195: Third wave of refits begins.
2205:
Horizon class launched. Early-Flight
Daedalus-class vessels begin being withdrawn from active service or downchecked to lesser rôles.
And so on, all the way up. Forty years later, 2245,
Constitution. Forty years later, 2285,
Excelsior. (Almost) forty years later, 2223(two years early?),
Ambassador. Forty years later (back on track), 2363,
Galaxy. Forty years later...? Well, CBS and I disagree. *lol* I can't remember what class the
Enterprise-F in Star Trek: Online is, but it looks a
lot like an uglier version of my
Majestic class that I began designing in 1989 to be the successor to the
Galaxy class.
Meanwhile, in that same span from Founding to changeover, we only had a dozen or so Scout/Destroyer classes (given the low number of the
Saladin, I'd say most were prompted by hostilities with the Klingons)... And twenty Transports (
Sydney class being the last before the registry change).
So. For my builds and writing, this ship is NSS-638, and is a
Gagarin-class [
Sagan-sublass] Scout rigged for planetary surveying. Weaponry is Class-3 defensive. At least one forward phaser, possibly two more on the dorsal trailing portions of the warp engines (those little bumps don't seem to be lights). Here's the one time we see one firing, in the far background in First Contact:
Additionally, I feel all the stuff in the aft trench of the main engine deck is sensor and ECM equipment. While I consider Captain Esteban over-cautious and not tactically-gifted (his "Stand by, evasive"
should have been an order
for evasive maneuvers), I feel if he'd had aft weapons available, he would've at least had them trained-to.
).
. 
. 
. 
. 
. 
. 
