Talk:USS Kelvin

Survey vessel

I dont think that was mentioned in dialog, was it? --Alan 01:38, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

I don't recall hearing it either, but I was mainly taking notes on visual things for the wiki. Should we put this on the "check on this" list? -- Captain MKB 02:02, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

Well, unless it was something mumbled somewhere, it wasn't spoken on audio. --Alan 02:04, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

It's mentioned on the official Star Trek website. Though if that is considered canon by MA's standards i don't know. Kellanium 02:36, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

There's the official site, plus the fact it performed as a survey vessel in the film. --From Andoria with Love 03:51, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

Didn't they all... --Alan 03:53, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

True enough. --From Andoria with Love 04:10, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

How do we know what they were performing as? And how does that firmly establish the vessel class? Given that the ship was so heavily loaded with people maybe they were in the middle of some sort of transport mission.--Hribar 13:43, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

The Official Website for the movie says it was a survey vessel, and no one has made any conjectures as to vessel class yet. It was a survey vessel, end of story. Kellanium 21:15, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

The website is not canon, end of story. --OuroborosCobra ^talk 07:03, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

800 People?

I understand that this number is given on screen, but it does not make sense in terms of what we know of other ships. Enterprise Prime had a capacity of 200 people as stated in "The Cage". After its refit, Enterprise Prime only had 400 crew.

That was a script error, as Gene Roddenberry, W. Matt Jeffries, and the like were designing the Enterprise they went through several designs including a design that would ultimately later emerge as the earlier USS Daedalus: Regardless, by the time they arrived at the basic shape that would become the Enterprise, the vessel was only 540 feet in length and had a crew of 203; they had later doubled the size of the ship to 1,080 feet, then somehow reduced it to 947 (I'm unsure why they did that) and changed the crew complement to 430. It was never updated into the script by the time the pilot aired. 69.127.45.17 16:18, June 17, 2013 (UTC)

It was established in the script for "Yesterday's Enterprise" that the Enterprise-C had 700 people, which makes sense when you look at it compared to the Enterprise-D which was stated to have over 1000 people on board at one point. Is there something else going on or is it possible that Pike was exaggerating the number of people Kirk's father saved to increase the challenge? IndyK1ng 02:12, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

It is what it is unless it is contradicted. --Alan 02:00, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

Exactly... I don't remember any part of the movie that established the size of the ship. If they said it had a large crew, why shouldn't we believe them? -- Captain MKB 02:02, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

Technically I think the Kelvin was supposed to be smaller than the TOS Big-E initially, but with the need for the shuttlebay to be so large (to carry all those shuttles to evacuate the whole crew) the vessel's size ended up growing to something like 1500 feet (which was mentioned on the "Starships" Blu Ray Feature).

Technically the Nu-Enterprise while I'm at it, was supposed to originally be either 302 or 366 meters (302 was impractical because of the size of the hatches; 366 scaled up better): Unfortunately due to the size of the huge-shuttlebay and engineering-room, the vessel would have to be at least 725, possibly 762 meters in size (bigger than the Sovereign-Class from the normal timeline); with the size of the bridge and window factored in, approximately 1,200 meters.

We shouldn't believe them because historically speaking ships get bigger over time. That's what I was establishing above. There are exceptions based on need, but it makes no sense to make what must have been a massive ship for the time only for your next greatest vessel to be a fifth or half the size. IndyK1ng 02:12, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

Correct, the Constitution Class was the biggest line-vessel of it's era at 288.6 meters and 190,000 tons and had a crew of 430. Admittedly crew size doesn't necessarily correlate to size: The B-17G from WW2 had a crew complement of 10, was approximately 74'4" in length, and weighed in fully loaded at up to 65,000 pounds; the B-52H from the 1962 to present has a crew of 5-6 (depending on whether it has a tail-gun); a length of 156'6.9" to 159'4" and a maximum weight of 488,000 pounds. 69.127.45.17 16:18, June 17, 2013 (UTC)

So? He said 800. For that matter, I can speculate too... they were transferring a shipload of refugees or colonists, etc...if we don't know the circumstances, we shouldn't be trying to justify what was stated. --Alan 02:15, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

If they were moving colonists, would they have had enough shuttles to get everyone off? Same with refugees. What's bothering me is that it just goes unexplained. The ship also appears to be smaller, just judging from what is shown, it seems to have fewer decks and be shorter. I really don't like that this is going unchallenged and unexplained when it doesn't make sense. IndyK1ng 02:59, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

But Memory Alpha isn't the place to "challenge" something said on screen. There are plenty of Star Trek forums where you can argue about what does and doesn't make sense; Memory Alpha is here to record what was given in the fiction as it stands, in the form of an online encyclopedia. I don't think that MA is in the business of ignoring something given clearly in dialogue just because it doesn't fit our theories of how things work in Star Trek. If the evidence doesn't fit the theory, you change the theory, not the evidence. —Josiah Rowe 02:30, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

IndyKing, older ships might have had less automated equipment and needed more crew to operate all of it. And, if transporters were relatively new at the time, they might have had enough shuttles for everybody, no matter what the people were doing there.

And your assumption about the size of the crew or the size of the ship having anything to do with the capabilities is fairly unfounded. After all, the aircraft carrier Enterprise has 10 times as many crewmembers as the NCC-1701, but that doesn't make a boat 10 times more advanced than a starship, does it? But they still pack those 5,000 people into a pretty small space on the US ship, even compared to any of the Trek Enterprises. -- Captain MKB 02:33, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

I had already come to the conclusion the ship would have enough shuttles for a normal crew complement. I was questioning if it would have enough if they were transporting more than the usual number of people, like if they were transporting refugees or colonists. In that case I was directly challenging speculation, not stated fact. It also makes sense that any ship which doesn't have escape pods will have enough shuttles for evacuation since transporters can go down or be blocked, such as when they evacuated the Enterprise-E where they would not have been able to transport anyone. In that case they had escape pods for crew to leave the ship by, otherwise it would make sense for them to have enough shuttles. As for Memory-Alpha being the place to challenge established screen facts, I have seen places elsewhere on Memory-Alpha where speculation is brought up for items that don't make much sense or conflict with other information, such as the Borg article. As for the crew complements of the Enterprise aircraft carrier and the Constitution-Class Enterprise, it is apparent that Starfleet has a history of giving crew more private space than the US Navy does. Those ships are really packed and it is established in Enterprise that crew have decent size quarters about the size of a small dorm room. Speaking of dorms, organizations such as Starfleet have a tendency to give their trainees the same amount of private space as they would have in the field. This makes sense since they want their trainees to be acclimated to their living conditions in the future. Judging from the size of Uhura's quarters, the crew quarters on the Enterprise are actually fairly big for such a vessel. Also the Kelvin had families on board which means their quarters would be the size of an apartment and assuming Starfleet policy wasn't different before the 24th Century Prime, they would not have been packed into crowded living quarters. All I'm saying is that these numbers should not be taken unquestionably. IndyK1ng 02:59, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

Noted, nevertheless, what was said was said and that's how things work around here. --Alan 02:57, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

Sorry I keep forgetting to sign my posts, I'm new to wiki article discussion editing. IndyK1ng 03:00, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

Assuming the stats are correct, the new Enterprise is larger than the Enterprise-D. Since the Kelvin is possibly a variant, it is conceivable it has a similar crew size.- JustPhil 03:22, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

Guys, there's really no point in arguing about this or speculating. The fact is that Pike said there were 800 people aboard the ship which were saved by George Kirk's actions. This is now canon, meaning there's nothing that can be done about it. --From Andoria with Love 03:25, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

Pike said that Kirk saved 800 lives that day. He didn't say that they were all on Kelvin.--Hribar 19:00, 16 May 2009 (UTC)

Rrrrrrright.... you keep tellin' yourself that, mate. ;-) --From Somewhere with Love

Where the heck are you? :) Well, those 800 lives were actually on life boats. — Morder 02:43, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

Hey, I'm all for them coming from the Kelvin. All 800. But there is certainly wiggle room for nitpickers. For those arguing that they didn't have enough shuttles... I once saw ten people stuffed into a phone booth. As for the Kelvin- when push came to shove, I bet they'd found a way.--Hribar 01:23, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

I can't help but think of the quote by Jadzia Dax in Trials and Tribble-ations: "They really packed them in on these old ships." Even crewmen aboard the Enterprise-D had to share quarters (I believe that's shown in TNG: Lower Decks). Senior officers seem to enjoy the benefits of large private quarters while lower-ranking, unmarried officers and crewmen share rooms. Judging from Dax's quote, it seems like older ships like the Kelvin had an even higher population density than their 24th century counterparts. I'm not sure the fact that George Kirk has a pregnant wife aboard is evidence enough to deduce that the Kelvin was a family ship. Given the extreme negative reaction Captain Picard had to the idea of children living aboard the Enterprise-D seems to suggest that it wasn't so common on Starfleet ships previously.--Cougurrd 06:21, May 7, 2011 (UTC)

I know this is old but to be fair, this is an alternate universe so comparing it to classic Trek is useless.--Spock78 (talk) 08:04, September 13, 2013 (UTC)

shipclass?

Did anyone catch the shipclass of the Kelvin? I did not hear it's name spoken in the film, but maybe anyone saw it on an okudagram I didn't see, or maybe given from an official (read MA-permitted) source? --Rom Ulan 08:30, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

I've checked both MB and the EU wikis and yeah, I got nothing. I think Abrams is trying to drive us trekkies mad. :p--Kross^{Transmit on Holonet?} 03:18, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

Abraaaaaaaams! --Rom Ulan 20:43, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

It looks like it may have been that universes version of the Hermes or Saladin class ships. But who knows, may just be some unknown class that they wont reveal the name of.--Theta][Sigma

Keep in mind, the Kelvin originates from the prime timeline. It was in existence when the timeline was altered by Nero, so it's not unique to that universe. --From Andoria with Love 02:18, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

As with the Enterprise there may have been a (as yet unseen) dedication plaque made for the Kelvin. If this could be spotted on screen one may be able to read the class name (assuming it states the class name).--Hribar 02:51, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

It has a striking resembelence to the Apollo-class doesn't it? (92.238.249.121 22:18, January 5, 2010 (UTC))

To my eyes, the Kelvin-type is a modified Ranger-class with one nacelle, instead of two.– Throwback 00:03, January 6, 2010 (UTC)

Throwback & user 92... : please, stay on topic. The Ranger class and Apollo class are not canon and aren't relevant to this wiki or this talk page. it's great that you've followed fan fiction and Star trek games, but it has nothing to do with our discussion here. -- Captain MKB 02:07, January 8, 2010 (UTC)

single warp engine

Is it safe to say the Kelvin is the first canon ship we see that has only 1 warp engine/nacelle? (Not counting ships seen in minor background graphics or okudagrams.) Or were there kitbashed ships from DS9 with 1 or 3 warp engines that we're counting as first? Starfleetjedi 06:28, 12 May 2009 (UTC)

Well, there's the Freedom-class. --OuroborosCobra ^talk 06:32, 12 May 2009 (UTC)

Which pretty much falls under "minor background"... Starfleetjedi 07:47, 12 May 2009 (UTC)

At that point, it starts becoming a matter of personal opinion and a subjective, not objective, difference. Who decides what is "major" and "minor?" The fact of the matter is that it isn't the first Federation ship shown with only one engine nacelle. --OuroborosCobra ^talk 13:55, 12 May 2009 (UTC)

So, it is not the first shipclass that is canon to have only one nacelle. But I think it is safe to say that it is the first non-minor ship seen with only one nacelle. In that i am not counting those background-ships as those seen in wreckage of battle of wolf 359, but only clearly depicted ships, as miranda-class, excelsior, and bla bla...

Again, that gets into a subjective judgment on what constitutes "minor" --OuroborosCobra ^talk 03:10, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

Exactly. If we take things as they are it's not the first. — Morder 03:15, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

Less subjectively, it's the first single-nacelle vessel with the interiors shown onscreen. -- Captain MKB 23:01, January 5, 2010 (UTC)

at template

I added the {{at|ar}} template to the page simply because the majority of the page takes place in the alternate reality, however, the header "alternate reality" implies that it mainly exists in the prime reality. But virtually nothing is known about it in the prime reality. Seems like the wrong header but not having the header seems to be a mistake. I might not be articulating this the way I want but hopefully you all get what I'm trying to say. :) — Morder 07:24, 10 June 2009 (UTC)

I would say keep the {{at|ar}} template since everything short of the description of the ship and crew is from the alternate reality, as Morder pointed out. Also, the specifications info should probably be moved to Kelvin type. --From Andoria with Love 07:28, 10 June 2009 (UTC)

Warp Brewery

I believe that the main article should mention that the Kelvin's warp engineering section was influential in the alternate timeline and not in the "main" timeline, given that in the "main" timeline the brewery-like engineering section seems to have been abandoned yet in the alternate timeline is present in the brand-new flagship.Sings-With-Spirits 14:50, August 13, 2010 (UTC)

Just because we didn't see a "brewery" engineering section in the original timeline doesn't mean that other ships didn't have them. We shouldn't speculate that it was something unique to the alternate timeline.--31dot 21:17, August 13, 2010 (UTC)

Considering that all Starfleet vessels seen on-screen (i.e. canonical) share the same type of puckered backlight nacelles and large size of both Enterprise and Kelvin, things that were absolutely never seen in TOS or TNG era ships (at most they had blue lighting on the sides of the nacelles, with red Bussard scoops), there is plenty of evidence to point to influence from an experimental ship that did not take place in the original timeline (remember that Kelvin and her brewery did exist in the original timeline). We also have as evidence the fact that the entire Fleet went from Earth to Vulcan in the same mind-staggeringly short period of time, implying that they all had the same advanced warp technology. My argument is not that the brewery was unique to the alternate timeline, but that beer-powered ships gained a degree of commonality that they never attained in the "original" timeline.Sings-With-Spirits 00:24, August 17, 2010 (UTC)

The key word there is "on-screen"- we have not seen every ship in Starfleet on-screen in either reality and as such we should not draw conclusions about them, unless some sort of specific statement was made in canon. --31dot 00:40, August 17, 2010 (UTC)

Yes, but every ship seen in the "prime" timeline shares many factors, such as smaller hulls and lower speeds AND every warp engine we have seen is a non-brewery type, while the JJverse has all capital ships sharing the same brewery features on them (like lights at the aft end of the nacelles), with only the small craft (i.e. shuttles) not showing such features. Given that the most important capital vessels in the JJverse share significant features with the Kelvin while not a single known ship in the main universe does (and there is a buttload of those, in all shapes and sizes) leads to only one conclusion: Kelvin was influential in the development of warp technology from that point onwards. This influence is clear. The reason for this influence would be sheer speculation, which does not belong in the article, but the influence itself in undeniable. Oh... and one does not have to see every ship in Starfleet to be able to draw this conclusion; there might be brewery-powered ships visiting DS-9 on a regular basis, but the workhorses of the fleet (Exelsior, Constitution [original and refit], Miranda, Oberth, Ambassador, Galaxy, Nebula) as well as the major capital ships (Galaxy, Sovreign) are not beer-powered (superlarge, superfast with lights on the ends of the Nacelles and blue Bussard scoops), so the influence of the brewery on Starfleet designs was, at best, limited. OTOH, based on the names alone (USS Enterprise, USS Antares, USS Armstrong, USS Farragut, USS Hood, USS Mayflower USS Newton, USS Truman, USS Wolcott. ), the ships lost on Vulcan were either major capital ships or workhorses... and all used beer-powered nacelles and features. Res ipsa loquitur. Sings-With-Spirits 15:26, August 17, 2010 (UTC)

It's only your assumption that "beer powered" engineering sections correspond to external features like lights on the aft end of the nacelles. One might assume a correspondence based on Occam's razor, but it can't be proven either way. For all we know, the engineering section of every Excelsior-class ship looked like a brewery, and the engineering section of all the ships seen in Star Trek except the Kelvin and the Enterprise had large central warp cores, like the ships that we were used to seeing before.

Your inference is reasonable, but not conclusive, and as such I don't think it belongs on the article page. That said, if someone affiliated with the making of the movie has said something to support this view, that could be added. —Josiah Rowe 16:21, August 17, 2010 (UTC)

It's not just the lighting special effects; the aft lights brighten when the ship accelerates; a feature unique to the Kelvin and all starfleet capital ships seen in the JJverse. Other observable features are the overall size of these ships (comparable to the HUGE new Enterprise; according to canon it is larger than the Galaxy Class Enterprise D) and the enormous warp speeds attainable (Earth to Vulcan in less than an hour) clearly indicates that these ships share the same technology, which as seen in the two engineering decks seen is a TARDIS-like enormous brewery-like arrangement of copper vats and water tubing. My original position is that mention should be made in the article of the influence the Kelvin's design and "brewery tech" had on the alternate "modern" Starfleet. I could speculate that in the original timeline the tech was deemed either too crew-intensive, too expensive or somehow inferior to the non-brewery tech used in the TOS Enterprise, its contemporary Constitution-class cruisers and everything that came after, but I am not speculating on the reasons behind the general adoption of "beer-tech" in major capital ships/workhorses of the JJ film era; just observing that the ship that by all canon accounts changed the course of Starfleet history by getting blown up seems to have influenced far, far more than just the history of the heroes.Sings-With-Spirits 02:28, August 18, 2010 (UTC)

As Josiah Rowe said, no one is saying that your claim does not make sense- but as an encyclopedia we need more than that. Such a claime is conclusions based on original research unless backed up by those who worked on the movie.--31dot 08:33, August 18, 2010 (UTC)

Prime and Alternate Reality Pages

I'm a little confused why the articles on the Kelvin, Richard Robau, and George Kirk are on one "Multiple Realities" page, instead of two pages, one for the prime universe, and one for the alternate reality, like there are on James, Kirk, Spock, McCoy, etc. When the two versions are put on one page, it implies that the exact same ship traveled to both uiverses, like Nero and the Nardara.

So I think that the Kelvin page (as well as the George Kirk, Robau, and other like pages) should be split into two pages: "USS Kelvin (for the Kelvin that existed in the prime reality, and "USS Kelvin (Alternate Reality)", for the version of the ship that Nero destroyed. Am I making any sense? 146.57.201.146 19:14, February 11, 2011 (UTC)

If that were the case, then the entire article for the alternate reality Kelvin, Robau, and George Kirk articles would consist of:

See <normal article>

X died/was destroyed minutes after the Narada arrived creating an alternate reality.

So... what's the point? -- sulfur 19:16, February 11, 2011 (UTC)

I think the point is is that it's more accurate. If the Kelvin had been like the Nardara, the exact same ship went from the prime universe, to the alternate reality, then, yes, I'd agree that one "multiple realities page would be correct. Bit since we have a prime universe and an alternate reality Kelvin, I believe we need two separate pages: It would be easier to understand than what we have know. Besides, the George Kirk page was split in two with no problems. With that evidence, I'm making a motion that we do the same thing with the "Kelvin" page. Any response? 146.57.192.65 15:47, February 14, 2011 (UTC)

Note that if we do split this, someone will have to take great care to ensure that all of the incoming links go to the appropriate places. Though, I'm not certain if there's a great win with splitting the page, since the prime reality version will be (for all intents and purposes) a stub. -- sulfur 15:51, February 14, 2011 (UTC)

In the case of George Kirk, there's individual information for each article (although, one has to admit, it's not much; perhaps not enough for a separate article, but that's to be discussed there, not here). Here, there isn't - there is apparently nothing we know about the prime universe ship that we don't also know about the other ship. An article should not be written about nothing. :) -- Cid Highwind 15:55, February 14, 2011 (UTC)

Although I find the general idea behind 146.57.201.146's comments a good one, I'm afraid I will also have to oppose splitting the article for the reasoning mentioned above (not enough information for a separate article) but also for the fact that when someone comes to MA and searches for the Kelvin, they will expect to find information about it before, aswell as after, the timeline split and I think separating them would confuse matters. However, that's not to say I think the idea was a bad one, I just think it shouldn't be done with this article. -- TrekFan ^{Open a channel} 16:06, February 14, 2011 (UTC)

2225

The last three edits to this page have attempted to add "2225" as the commissioning date without giving a source. I don't recall seeing/hearing that in the movie, so I'm wondering where people are getting it from? I assume it isn't canon, but... --31dot 19:06, May 6, 2011 (UTC)

It's my understanding that 2225 info comes from the novelization. - Archduk3 00:12, May 7, 2011 (UTC)

I did a quick skim of the novelization and didn't see a 2225 in there. Might be from the Hayes book. -- sulfur 01:13, May 7, 2011 (UTC)

Split

I'd like to suggest this page be split, creating a new Kelvin attack page for the battle between the USS Kelvin and the Narada. Having investigated this possibility, there seems to be adequate info for both the Kelvin and the conflict to justify the split. Plus, the new page about the engagement could present bg info on the incident in a more equal fashion, rather than being concentrated so much on the Kelvin. --Defiant (talk) 06:10, April 30, 2013 (UTC)

I suggest the title attack on the USS Kelvin, which is a partial quote from alt Spock, and more descriptive. - Archduk3 09:20, April 30, 2013 (UTC)

That's great, if it's taken from the movie. It trumps Kelvin attack, which I took from J.J. Abrams in the film's audio commentary. --Defiant (talk) 09:56, April 30, 2013 (UTC)

Further comments, anyone? Is there a consensus for splitting this page, creating the suggested Attack on the USS Kelvin article? --Defiant (talk) 03:37, May 1, 2013 (UTC)

Support. While a short battle, it created a new universe and was a direct harbinger to the destruction of Vulcan. Plus, as you noted, two separate articles will make for more specific background info on each. – The preceding unsigned comment was added by Mitchz95 (talk • contribs).

The battle itself didn't create the alternate reality; the arrival of the Narada did, in the prelude to the battle. But anyway, any more support for creating a separate page? --Defiant (talk) 08:10, May 2, 2013 (UTC)

I take it a split would result in a pre-arrival prime universe Kelvin article and an alt. universe Attack on the Kelvin article, then yes, Support--Sennim (talk) 08:55, May 2, 2013 (UTC)

Well, the Kelvin didn't just exist in the prime timeline, so it would be a bit inappropriate to only present prime-universe info about it on this page. The way I'm proposing this, there will just be less ins-and-outs of the battle, with that info moved to the battle page. --Defiant (talk) 15:36, May 2, 2013 (UTC)

Since we don't have any info on the Kelvin after the split for the prime reality, and there isn't a problem with linking to the crew's pages, I don't think we gain anything by splitting the page down the reality lines beyond the fact that is the standard. This and the battle page would still be in both realities, since the battle's prelude is going to cover events in the prime reality, and the remaining info here on the battle would be in the alternate reality. Either way though, we can discuss any reality split in more detail after the battle is split off. - Archduk3 07:38, May 3, 2013 (UTC)

Agreed, maintaining my Support--Sennim (talk) 07:44, May 3, 2013 (UTC)

Weapons

Watching ENT, STO and TNG, I would like to know what kind of weapon the kelvin was using. It's really annoying, that 40 years of Trek was changed in this few minutes, before this strange freakish Romulans arrived from the future. – The preceding unsigned comment was added by 217.85.152.252.

Robau gave an order to "fire all phasers", so I presume they were phasers. 31dot (talk) 20:21, May 4, 2013 (UTC)

And the script[1] identifies the blue bolts as photon torpedoes. Presumably low-yield ones intended to be used as a point-defense system. - Mitchz95 (talk) 01:15, May 5, 2013 (UTC)

Akula-class?

In the non-canon video game Star Trek: Starfleet Command, there is a ship called the Akula-class that basically looks like a TOS-variant of the USS Kelvin (see: [2] [3] [4] [5]). I realize the game was made several years before the film, however, is it worth mentioning the similarities in the apocrypha section? I can't decide. --| TrekFan ^{Open a channel} 06:40, February 7, 2014 (UTC)

Akula class had two nacelles over and under, not a single nacelle and a secondary hull. Seems more like the Kelvin was inspired by one of the original designs for the Enterprise, but with a single nacelle, instead of two. --Pseudohuman (talk) 14:32, February 7, 2014 (UTC)

Double Name meaning

I guess in universe it's named for Lord Kelvin, however Kelvin is also the maiden name of Carol Ann Abrams, JJ's mother. Lt.Lovett (talk) 15:52, November 9, 2014 (UTC)

It's already mentioned that the writers named the ship after Abrams's granddad. --Alientraveller (talk) 23:40, November 9, 2014 (UTC)