Wikia

Memory Alpha

Talk:USS Enterprise (CVN-65)

37,590pages on
this wiki

Back to page

RemovedEdit

The following was removed due to lack of Trek relevance:

"As a nuclear ship, Enterprise could accelerate more rapidly than even most destroyers until the advent of the Naval gas turbine, leading to misconceptions of her maximum speed going up to 40, even 50 knots. In reality, her top speed was approximately 33 knots, the maximum speed possible given a four-shaft configuration with her hull form. Enterprise was intended to be the first of a two-ship class, but the expense of her building caused the second ship to be reordered as the conventional carrier USS America (CVA-66); series production of nuclear carriers would have to wait until the late 1960s and the Nimitz class."

--Gvsualan 07:06, 22 May 2005 (UTC)

Nimitz had nothing to do with Enterprise other than being a nuclear-powered aircraft carrier; her design and the design of her class was more derived from the preceding conventionally powered USS John F. Kennedy than from Enterprise, and her different reactor design meant that the inner engineering spaces were nothing alike. Their design similarities are because the same operational factors drove their design, no more and no less. Iceberg3k 19:31, 6 February 2006 (UTC)
The following was also removed due to lack of Trek relevance:

"The layout of her A2W reactors was actually quite conservative, possibly because of the radical nature of using nuclear propulsion in a surface ship; they were simply substituted one-for-one for the Westinghouse boilers in the preceding Kitty Hawk class. Enterprise was intended to be the first of a four-ship class, but her great cost resulted in the other three planned vessels being abandoned; CV-66 was the conventionally powered USS America and the ship which had been planned as CVN-67 was converted from nuclear to conventional propulsion before a single one of her planned four A3W reactors had been installed. It was not until the keel of CVN-68 Nimitz was laid in 1968 that the beginning of series production of nuclear-powered capital ships was marked, a progression which eventually led to the development of nuclear fusion and finally matter-antimatter power of modern starships."

--From Andoria with Love 20:39, 6 February 2006 (UTC)
Second verse, same as the first.

"When commissioned, her distinctive features included a square island topped by a conical-shaped "beehive" electronic warfare center, as pictured in the pencil sketch above; this was removed during a major overhaul in 1975 (although the square island remained). For most of her life she was homeported at Newport News, Virginia, although she would be periodically stationed on the West Coast, typically either in San Francisco or the larger naval base in San Diego."

--From Andoria with Love 22:40, 6 February 2006 (UTC)

Observation lounge modelEdit

Not 100% sure, but I believe the model on the Observation Lounge wall is the CV-6 not the CVN-65. The preceding unsigned comment was added by 70.112.4.39 (talk).

That would be an incorrect assumption. CV-6 and CVN-65 have very distinct island designs. The one pictured in the observation lounge is definitely supposed to represent CVN-65 (in it's pre-1975 refit configuration) The preceding unsigned comment was added by 138.162.0.41 (talk).
My guess is the assumption comes from the fact that the model in the lounge does not seem to have an angled flight deck of the CVN-65. --OuroborosCobra talk 18:48, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

Photo Caption ErrorEdit

If I'm not totally mistaken the caption under the photo from TMP is incorrect. It states that the alcove has representations of "all ships named Enterprise prior to 2272." This is demonstratively incorrect as there is only one aircraft carrier pictured (there have been two in the US Navy) and only one sailing ship (there have been several in the Royal and US Navies). I think it would be more correct to say its a display of "various ships named Enterprise prior to 2272." Any thoughts? -- General Grant 01:39, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

Enterprise NX-01 is missing too. Regardless, it is cited as stated by Decker. --Alan del Beccio 02:16, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

I would have to check my DVD, but I recall him saying "All these ships were named Enterprise" not "These are all the ships that have been named Enterprise." There is a huge difference. -- General Grant 02:19, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

Big E ConEdit

Here are cites for the info about the Big E Con which I just added. I can't link to them because I pulled the articles from LexisNexis.

CARRIER ENTERPRISE MEETS STARSHIPS ENTERPRISE; STAR TREK FANS PLAN TO BOLDLY GO ABOARD THE NAVY SHIP FOR CONVENTION TOUR, The Virginian-Pilot (Norfolk), October 28, 1994

'Star Trek' boards the real Enterprise, The Washington Times, July 3, 1993

Trek Rec Deck aims to boost real-life crew's morale, Chicago Tribune, May 14, 1993

Starfleetjedi 05:54, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

Also removed Edit

Removed the following info, which has no Trek connection. That's why we provide a link to the Enterprise's website and the wikipedia article.--31dot 02:25, October 20, 2009 (UTC)

Her "official" nickname, as well of that of her predecessor, is "Big 'E'". She also possesses the far less flattering nicknames Three-Quarter Mile Island and Mobile Chernobyl, after famous nuclear disasters. According to the Naval Historical Center, the name Enterprise means "Boldness, Energy and Invention in Practical Affairs".

Due to recommendation by the Chief of Navy Operations, the USS Enterprise (CVN-65) is set to be decommissioned in 2013 after 51 years of continuous service.[1]


Cite error: <ref> tags exist, but no <references/> tag was found

Around Wikia's network

Random Wiki