No, the "name of the plane" is not Air Force One. There is a specific plane that's been designed to serve as a mobile base of operations for the President, but it's only Air Force One when the President is aboard. Planes don't, as a general rule, have names.
Similarly, there are a number of 747s that have been modified to serve as the National Emergency Airborne Command Post, or NEACP (pronounced "kneecap"), but only the one currently in the air is designated "Looking Glass". And should the President be aboard, it would no longer be "Looking Glass", but "Air Force One".
No matter where in the world the President travels, if he flies in an Air Force jet, the plane is called Air Force One. Technically, Air Force One is the call sign of any Air Force aircraft carrying the President. In practice, however, Air Force One is used to refer to one of two highly customized Boeing 747-200B series aircraft, which carry the tail codes 28000 and 29000.
Please continue to demonstrate that you have zero grasp of the difference between a name, a callsign and a registry number (or tail code if we want to be specific to USAF craft).
Dude, the name of the plane is Air Force 1. It's kept in a secured hangar, on a secured airstrip, guarded by Secret Service agents at Reagan Int'l Airport. I've stood less than a hundred feet away from it. Here's some pictures, one as a Boeing 707, and one as a 747 Heavy.
Here's a DC-9 AF1 picture. Note it says that first ladies, generals, and cabinet members flew around on it, but it's the President's plane and it's always called Air Force 1.
it is truly af1 only when the president is on it, but because it is so distinguishable it is referred to as af1 in other terms, such as maintenance. But I can assure you that even in training for the air and ground crews, if the Prez is not aboard they have an exercise name for it. You are getting your information from the media and wiki. there is more to it than that. I can't help you beyond you will have to accept that what you find online is not 100% accurate.
PvE Jem'Hadar motto:Participation Ribbonsare life.
Once again a thread has degraded into something completely different that the question the OP asked.
From what I have been taught a "Class" of ship can be created from any existing ship name. For example in Korean war there was a Ship named USS CImarron AO-22 (1929-1969). Then the Navy created the "Cimarron Class" and it's Flagship. The one I served on was also the USS Cimarron (AO-177) (1978-1998) So like in real life an older pre-existing name can be used again to name a Class of ship with the 1st in the class being named after it. Thats why in the real Navy there were 2 different class ships having the same name buit different hull numbers. For example the 1st USS Lexington was a Connie the next was a Nebula Class. Then the USS Crazy Horse was an Excelsior-class cruiser then later became a Nomad Class Cruiser. Now for Famous ships like the Midway or the Missouri will never be used again unless they are to be flagships of a new class. But some like the Arizona will never be used again out of respect. The letter desigination is used for Famous ships to pass down the tradition or heritage of a class or command or Fleet. Like the 7th Fleets Flag ship for example is the USS Blue Ridge. Once that ship is decommissioned the Admiral can name the new flagship of his fleet the Blue Ridge-A. Its his choice. But it does not happen very often. I have only in the real Navy seen letter designiations used frequently in Torpedo retrevial squads and small assault craft squads or on Captians/Admerals barge's.
the Defiant is even worst when the DS9 one was blown up and replaced with the Sao Paulo and got the same name and number of the first ds9 defiant. THAT one should have been A atleast.
Dude, honestly, I could care less about call signs, and tail codes.
Then you shouldn't have stepped into a thread primarily focused on the relationship between names and registries and spewed idiocy based on your own lack of knowledge.
See? There you have it, straight from the horse's mouth.
Did you actually bother to read anything in that statement? Different planes. Different registries. They don't change based on who rides in them, regardless of the callsign. Similarly, a ship doesn't just magically gain the name Enterprise and the registry NCC-1701 based on it's status in the fleet.
End of discussion.
Keep trying to play the "well they call it Air Force One, so the name changes" all you want, it won't change the fact that you're hilariously misinformed, and utterly wrong.
In Battlestar Galactica, Laura Roslin was the Secretary of Education. She was traveling on Colonial Heavy 798. Once the Cylons attacked, and the President of the colonies (and the next 42 successors) dies, Laura is now the President of the Colonies. Colonial Heavy 798 changes it's designation to Colonial 1. However, if it worked like the US Presidency, throughout the rest of the show, whenever Roslin was traveling on BSG (or any other ship), BSG itself would be Colonial 1, and the other ship would revert to Colonial Heavy 798.
Is "Enterprise" the only ship line to get lettered incarnations?
In other words, There was a Constitution Class Defiant, and there was a Defiant Class Defiant, but they had separate and distinct registry numbers.
Why? Shouldn't it have kept the same reg number, and our well known Defiant be the Defiant-A?
Browsing through the Memory Alpha Ship List shows many other reused names, but with distinct registries. (Hood, Intrepid, Endeavour, Constellation, etc.)
This registry number for a particular ship is unique, names of ships tend to be recycled by the committee that names them. It is actually the Enterprise of Star Trek that is the aberration as it's the only one to use the same registry number a number of what amounts to several different ships.
As a real world example lets look at the USS Alabama. Originally commissioned as a battleship during WW2 and designated BB60. After being decommissioned after the war the name Alabama was used for the Ballistic Missile Submarine designated SSBN731. Two separate ships, two separate designation numbers, one name used for both. Note as well that the name is never used when a ship with the same name is currently commissioned. Thus when the Constitution class cruiser USS Defiant was destroyed, and thus decommissioned, its name was then available for use at some point in the future.
Is "Enterprise" the only ship line to get lettered incarnations?
In other words, There was a Constitution Class Defiant, and there was a Defiant Class Defiant, but they had separate and distinct registry numbers.
Why? Shouldn't it have kept the same reg number, and our well known Defiant be the Defiant-A?
Browsing through the Memory Alpha Ship List shows many other reused names, but with distinct registries. (Hood, Intrepid, Endeavour, Constellation, etc.)
Production Reason: The producers decided that, much like the "Data can't use contractions" bit (watch the first few produced episodes of TNG, and you'll hear Data using contractions. I believe it was something decided in the TNG episode "Datalore" and continued from that point in the series.
As for the 'Enterprise' being the ship name with an alpha-character appended to it's name; again, it was something finally fixed on years after the first TNG episode aired. My proof of this:
In the TNG second season episode 'Contagion' - the 'sister ship' to the the 1701-D; the Galaxy Class 'U.S.S. Yamato' had a registry number in the episode of NCC-1305-E. (Micheal Okuda later claimed the above was a production mistake, and later retconned the Yamato registry to NCC-71807 in subsequent materials related to TNG.)
IMO - since NCC-1305-E appeared IN the episode, sorry Mike - it's canon.:D
Personally, I think it's ridiculous to say that such a standard only applied to ONE ship name; and again, we have on screen canon evidence it was not the case.
Formerly known as Armsman from June 2008 to June 20, 2012 PWE ARC Drone says: "Your STO forum community as you have known it is ended...Display names are irrelevant...Any further sense of community is irrelevant...Resistance is futile...You will be assimilated..."
Whereas, except for the aforementioned -C/-D gap, the Enterprise has been a constant, twenty years was the shortest time between Intrepids...
Hood, some hundred years between the name being used; Defiant, again some hundred years (the Sao Paulo was only renamed because of a special dispensation, remember); Saratoga, at least eighty years...
So it's kind of like cars - Dodge, for example, recently brought back the Challenger name... but there's a difference between a 'classic' Challenger and the 'new' Challenger' and three consecutive year-models of the 'classic' Challenger. Same thing; there's a difference between 'classic' Defiant (Connie) and 'new' Defiant (Defiant) and six or seven more or less consecutive models of Enterprise.
"If you can't take a little bloody nose, maybe you ought to go back home and crawl under your bed. It's not safe out here. It's wondrous, with treasures to satiate desires both subtle and gross; but it's not for the timid." -- Q, TNG: "Q-Who?"
^Words that every player should keep in mind, especially whenever there's a problem with the game...
That's just MA trying to make sense after the fact, of confusion from different writers throughout the IP's history. There's only one ship in Star Fleet with a letter after it's name, and that number.
There are no ex post facto explanations of the registries of the Yamato, Dauntless, and Relativity on Memory Alpha. What I said is simply what is known about the circumstances of each of their registries.
Such an explanation could be created for the Yamato's letter-suffixed registry in Where Silence Has Lease, in that the vessel's appearance was an illusion created by Nagilum, who either considered it unimportant or made it up from the template on the Enterprise.
Even if they weren't going to name the Defiant in DS9 the NCC-1764-A, they should still have named the second Defiant Class (the ex Sao Paulo) the NCC-74205-A.
Norway and Yeager dammit... I still want my Typhoon and Jupiter though. JJ Trek The Kelvin Timeline is just Trek and it's fully canon... get over it. But I still prefer TAR.
#TASforSTO
'...I can tell you that we're not in the military and that we intend no harm to the whales.' Kirk: The Voyage Home
'Starfleet is not a military organisation. Its purpose is exploration.' Picard: Peak Performance
'This is clearly a military operation. Is that what we are now? Because I thought we were explorers!' Scotty: Into Darkness
'...The Federation. Starfleet. We're not a military agency.' Scotty: Beyond
'I'm not a soldier anymore. I'm an engineer.' Miles O'Brien: Empok Nor
'...Starfleet could use you... It's a peacekeeping and humanitarian armada...' Admiral Pike: Star Trek
Is "Enterprise" the only ship line to get lettered incarnations?
In other words, There was a Constitution Class Defiant, and there was a Defiant Class Defiant, but they had separate and distinct registry numbers.
Why? Shouldn't it have kept the same reg number, and our well known Defiant be the Defiant-A?
Browsing through the Memory Alpha Ship List shows many other reused names, but with distinct registries. (Hood, Intrepid, Endeavour, Constellation, etc.)
My fanon: Reuse of a registry number is an honor reserved for Starfleet's equivalent to the Roll of Honor in the Honor Harrington novels. In the RMN a ship that distinguishes itself by acts of exemplary courage (usually suicidal courage) in defense of the realm is honored by requiring that there must always be a ship of that name commissioned.
How many times did Kirk save the Federation, again?
"Great War! / And I cannot take more! / Great tour! / I keep on marching on / I play the great score / There will be no encore / Great War! / The War to End All Wars"
— Sabaton, "Great War"
The USS Nash on DS9 has the Registry NCC-2010-5. So maybe this is the 5th Starship of the name Nash but they went with an additional number for some reason instead of a letter or maybe the USS Nash was commissioned as part of a squadron of ships because she was a small and minor craft and she is the 5th ship of the squadron (they commissioned PT boats as a squadron and not individual boats IRL)
the Defiant is even worst when the DS9 one was blown up and replaced with the Sao Paulo and got the same name and number of the first ds9 defiant. THAT one should have been A atleast.
The producers wanted to give it the -A but since the series finale used so much recycled footage the would have had scenes where the ship would have the old number because there was no budget for new CGI.
If you need a in universe believable explanation, maybe they kept the old number as disinformation to use against the Dominion.
My Romulan Liberated Borg character made it to Level 30 and beat the (old) Defense of New Romulus with the skill point bug.
The Enterprise was never the "flagship" of the fleet. It had a proud and storied history - but with the exception of the upgraded version of the Enterprise-D in the future setting of the TNG episode "All Good Things", it was never commanded by anyone of flag rank. (Well, okay, there was that one time a commodore took command when the rest of the command crew was incapacitated by an alien aging virus in TOS, but the less said about that incident the better, I think. Commodore Stocker did not exactly cover himself in glory there.)
The USS Constellation, in the TOS episode "The Doomsday Machine", may have been the fleet flagship at the time, as it was commanded by a flag officer, Commodore William Decker; then again, it may have been that Decker earned promotion but was grossly unsuitable for the desk assignment that would usually accompany flag rank (apparently command of a starbase, judging by the other starbase commanders we met). However, none of the Enterprises ever carried the flag of the fleet.
The Enterprise was never the "flagship" of the fleet. It had a proud and storied history - but with the exception of the upgraded version of the Enterprise-D in the future setting of the TNG episode "All Good Things", it was never commanded by anyone of flag rank. (Well, okay, there was that one time a commodore took command when the rest of the command crew was incapacitated by an alien aging virus in TOS, but the less said about that incident the better, I think. Commodore Stocker did not exactly cover himself in glory there.)
The USS Constellation, in the TOS episode "The Doomsday Machine", may have been the fleet flagship at the time, as it was commanded by a flag officer, Commodore William Decker; then again, it may have been that Decker earned promotion but was grossly unsuitable for the desk assignment that would usually accompany flag rank (apparently command of a starbase, judging by the other starbase commanders we met). However, none of the Enterprises ever carried the flag of the fleet.
In a fleet situation with no admirals, the Enterprise would assume command. According to starfleet regulations (according to Janeway), the tactically superior ship takes command in the event of equal ranks. That's why Picard could take command in the battle of sector 001 even though he just got there. Since we usually don't see many admirals commanding ships from the lines in the series except the large operations, usually the captains were the highest ranking field officers. In these situations the Enterprise would command the fleets.
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC] Harden up Princess Looking for an Oceanic fleet? Check out our website: www.ausmonauts.com
In 6 pages[though I did skim read] did anybody not remember Star Trek IV? The Enterprise A was named and the name kept in commission throughout the alphabet for Kirk saving the Earth from the probe.
If anybody would ever check memory alpha or any of the books, you'd find out it was an honor to KIRK to do so.
Infact the Enterprise A was never meant to be NCC-1701-A. She was renamed to honor Kirk and his crew for saving the earth.
That's why only the Enterprise has A, B, C and so on, but why you don't really consider the NX-01 apart of that. And why you have names constantly being reused but you don't see the same registry number.
Star Trek Battles member. Want to roll with a good group of people regardless of fleets and not have to worry about DPS while doing STFs? Come join the channel and join in the fun!
Even if they weren't going to name the Defiant in DS9 the NCC-1764-A, they should still have named the second Defiant Class (the ex Sao Paulo) the NCC-74205-A.
The reason behind not doing so for the latter case was so they could re-use all the old stock footage. Whether that's a good enough reason or not I'll leave to you.
Is "Enterprise" the only ship line to get lettered incarnations?
In other words, There was a Constitution Class Defiant, and there was a Defiant Class Defiant, but they had separate and distinct registry numbers.
Why? Shouldn't it have kept the same reg number, and our well known Defiant be the Defiant-A?
Browsing through the Memory Alpha Ship List shows many other reused names, but with distinct registries. (Hood, Intrepid, Endeavour, Constellation, etc.)
As far as in-universe explanations go, the way I've always seen it is that ships with lettered incarnations are meant to honor the contributions of a significant ship and crew to the Federation, or to note a ship of some widespread reputation.
The second Defiant-class U.S.S. Defiant (NX-74205) was to honor Sisko and crew of the first U.S.S. Defiant (NX-74205) for their service during the Dominion War.
STO's own U.S.S. Stargazer (NCC-2893-A) (from the Path to 2409 lore for those who don't remember) is an homage to the U.S.S. Stargazer (NCC-2893) for the novel Picard Maneuver.
And the Enterprise is...well, the Enterprise. Kirk and crew are just awesome.
Basically, if a ship and crew have done something particularly notable, then the name and registry are reserved. Other names are simply recycled into the pool for new ships and registries as needed. Ships like the Intrepid (NCC-1631), Constellation (NCC-1017), and Defiant (NCC-1764) are only known for being lost/destroyed/magicked over to the Mirror Universe/etc., and thus do not merit having their registries reserved for future namesake vessels.
I imagine there could even be a U.S.S. Voyager (NCC-74656-A) at some point. I wonder what kind of ship that would be?
The Enterprise was never the "flagship" of the fleet.
Yes it was. They constantly refer to it as such. You're imposing your conception onto a setting where that conception is different. In modern (and ancient) navies, flagships are where officers of flag rank reside their command. But in starfleet, 'flagship' obviously means something else - in the same way that flagship can have non-military connotations in real life.
Even your own link shows that there are multiple definitions of the word, and most are non-military in meaning.
Comments
Similarly, there are a number of 747s that have been modified to serve as the National Emergency Airborne Command Post, or NEACP (pronounced "kneecap"), but only the one currently in the air is designated "Looking Glass". And should the President be aboard, it would no longer be "Looking Glass", but "Air Force One".
Please continue to demonstrate that you have zero grasp of the difference between a name, a callsign and a registry number (or tail code if we want to be specific to USAF craft).
I kinda see where you are coming from, there is a lot of misinformation on the internet.
http://www.whitehouse.gov/about/air-force-one
it is truly af1 only when the president is on it, but because it is so distinguishable it is referred to as af1 in other terms, such as maintenance. But I can assure you that even in training for the air and ground crews, if the Prez is not aboard they have an exercise name for it. You are getting your information from the media and wiki. there is more to it than that. I can't help you beyond you will have to accept that what you find online is not 100% accurate.
From what I have been taught a "Class" of ship can be created from any existing ship name. For example in Korean war there was a Ship named USS CImarron AO-22 (1929-1969). Then the Navy created the "Cimarron Class" and it's Flagship. The one I served on was also the USS Cimarron (AO-177) (1978-1998) So like in real life an older pre-existing name can be used again to name a Class of ship with the 1st in the class being named after it. Thats why in the real Navy there were 2 different class ships having the same name buit different hull numbers. For example the 1st USS Lexington was a Connie the next was a Nebula Class. Then the USS Crazy Horse was an Excelsior-class cruiser then later became a Nomad Class Cruiser. Now for Famous ships like the Midway or the Missouri will never be used again unless they are to be flagships of a new class. But some like the Arizona will never be used again out of respect. The letter desigination is used for Famous ships to pass down the tradition or heritage of a class or command or Fleet. Like the 7th Fleets Flag ship for example is the USS Blue Ridge. Once that ship is decommissioned the Admiral can name the new flagship of his fleet the Blue Ridge-A. Its his choice. But it does not happen very often. I have only in the real Navy seen letter designiations used frequently in Torpedo retrevial squads and small assault craft squads or on Captians/Admerals barge's.
I hope this sheads some insight for you Brandon.
Then you shouldn't have stepped into a thread primarily focused on the relationship between names and registries and spewed idiocy based on your own lack of knowledge.
Did you actually bother to read anything in that statement? Different planes. Different registries. They don't change based on who rides in them, regardless of the callsign. Similarly, a ship doesn't just magically gain the name Enterprise and the registry NCC-1701 based on it's status in the fleet.
End of discussion.
Keep trying to play the "well they call it Air Force One, so the name changes" all you want, it won't change the fact that you're hilariously misinformed, and utterly wrong.
In Battlestar Galactica, Laura Roslin was the Secretary of Education. She was traveling on Colonial Heavy 798. Once the Cylons attacked, and the President of the colonies (and the next 42 successors) dies, Laura is now the President of the Colonies. Colonial Heavy 798 changes it's designation to Colonial 1. However, if it worked like the US Presidency, throughout the rest of the show, whenever Roslin was traveling on BSG (or any other ship), BSG itself would be Colonial 1, and the other ship would revert to Colonial Heavy 798.
This registry number for a particular ship is unique, names of ships tend to be recycled by the committee that names them. It is actually the Enterprise of Star Trek that is the aberration as it's the only one to use the same registry number a number of what amounts to several different ships.
As a real world example lets look at the USS Alabama. Originally commissioned as a battleship during WW2 and designated BB60. After being decommissioned after the war the name Alabama was used for the Ballistic Missile Submarine designated SSBN731. Two separate ships, two separate designation numbers, one name used for both. Note as well that the name is never used when a ship with the same name is currently commissioned. Thus when the Constitution class cruiser USS Defiant was destroyed, and thus decommissioned, its name was then available for use at some point in the future.
Production Reason: The producers decided that, much like the "Data can't use contractions" bit (watch the first few produced episodes of TNG, and you'll hear Data using contractions. I believe it was something decided in the TNG episode "Datalore" and continued from that point in the series.
As for the 'Enterprise' being the ship name with an alpha-character appended to it's name; again, it was something finally fixed on years after the first TNG episode aired. My proof of this:
In the TNG second season episode 'Contagion' - the 'sister ship' to the the 1701-D; the Galaxy Class 'U.S.S. Yamato' had a registry number in the episode of NCC-1305-E. (Micheal Okuda later claimed the above was a production mistake, and later retconned the Yamato registry to NCC-71807 in subsequent materials related to TNG.)
IMO - since NCC-1305-E appeared IN the episode, sorry Mike - it's canon.:D
Personally, I think it's ridiculous to say that such a standard only applied to ONE ship name; and again, we have on screen canon evidence it was not the case.
PWE ARC Drone says: "Your STO forum community as you have known it is ended...Display names are irrelevant...Any further sense of community is irrelevant...Resistance is futile...You will be assimilated..."
1701 - 2240's to 2283 (Destroyed over Genesis)
1701-A - 2283 to 2293 (Decommissioned)
1701-B - 2293 to 2329 (MIA, Apocryphal.)
1701-C - 2332 to 2344 (Destroyed over Narenda III)
1701-D - 2363 to 2371 (Destroyed over Veridian III)
1701-E - 2372 to 2408 (MIA or Destroyed, Exact Status Unknown, STO)
1701-F - 2409 (Active, STO)
The almost twenty-year gap between -C and -D is the longest time that Starfleet went without an Enterprise. Compare that to Intrepid, for example;
NCC-1631 - 2268 (Destroyed)
NCC-38907 - 2346
NCC-74600 - 2370
Whereas, except for the aforementioned -C/-D gap, the Enterprise has been a constant, twenty years was the shortest time between Intrepids...
Hood, some hundred years between the name being used; Defiant, again some hundred years (the Sao Paulo was only renamed because of a special dispensation, remember); Saratoga, at least eighty years...
So it's kind of like cars - Dodge, for example, recently brought back the Challenger name... but there's a difference between a 'classic' Challenger and the 'new' Challenger' and three consecutive year-models of the 'classic' Challenger. Same thing; there's a difference between 'classic' Defiant (Connie) and 'new' Defiant (Defiant) and six or seven more or less consecutive models of Enterprise.
^Words that every player should keep in mind, especially whenever there's a problem with the game...
There are no ex post facto explanations of the registries of the Yamato, Dauntless, and Relativity on Memory Alpha. What I said is simply what is known about the circumstances of each of their registries.
Such an explanation could be created for the Yamato's letter-suffixed registry in Where Silence Has Lease, in that the vessel's appearance was an illusion created by Nagilum, who either considered it unimportant or made it up from the template on the Enterprise.
Norway and Yeager dammit... I still want my Typhoon and Jupiter though.
JJ Trek The Kelvin Timeline is just Trek and it's fully canon... get over it. But I still prefer TAR.
#TASforSTO
'...I can tell you that we're not in the military and that we intend no harm to the whales.' Kirk: The Voyage Home
'Starfleet is not a military organisation. Its purpose is exploration.' Picard: Peak Performance
'This is clearly a military operation. Is that what we are now? Because I thought we were explorers!' Scotty: Into Darkness
'...The Federation. Starfleet. We're not a military agency.' Scotty: Beyond
'I'm not a soldier anymore. I'm an engineer.' Miles O'Brien: Empok Nor
'...Starfleet could use you... It's a peacekeeping and humanitarian armada...' Admiral Pike: Star Trek
Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!
It's a Nemesis Plot made by an Iconian plot.
How many times did Kirk save the Federation, again?
— Sabaton, "Great War"
Check out https://unitedfederationofpla.net/s/
The producers wanted to give it the -A but since the series finale used so much recycled footage the would have had scenes where the ship would have the old number because there was no budget for new CGI.
If you need a in universe believable explanation, maybe they kept the old number as disinformation to use against the Dominion.
The definition of "flagship".
Wikipedia on the topic.
The Enterprise was never the "flagship" of the fleet. It had a proud and storied history - but with the exception of the upgraded version of the Enterprise-D in the future setting of the TNG episode "All Good Things", it was never commanded by anyone of flag rank. (Well, okay, there was that one time a commodore took command when the rest of the command crew was incapacitated by an alien aging virus in TOS, but the less said about that incident the better, I think. Commodore Stocker did not exactly cover himself in glory there.)
The USS Constellation, in the TOS episode "The Doomsday Machine", may have been the fleet flagship at the time, as it was commanded by a flag officer, Commodore William Decker; then again, it may have been that Decker earned promotion but was grossly unsuitable for the desk assignment that would usually accompany flag rank (apparently command of a starbase, judging by the other starbase commanders we met). However, none of the Enterprises ever carried the flag of the fleet.
In a fleet situation with no admirals, the Enterprise would assume command. According to starfleet regulations (according to Janeway), the tactically superior ship takes command in the event of equal ranks. That's why Picard could take command in the battle of sector 001 even though he just got there. Since we usually don't see many admirals commanding ships from the lines in the series except the large operations, usually the captains were the highest ranking field officers. In these situations the Enterprise would command the fleets.
Harden up Princess
Looking for an Oceanic fleet? Check out our website:
www.ausmonauts.com
If anybody would ever check memory alpha or any of the books, you'd find out it was an honor to KIRK to do so.
Infact the Enterprise A was never meant to be NCC-1701-A. She was renamed to honor Kirk and his crew for saving the earth.
That's why only the Enterprise has A, B, C and so on, but why you don't really consider the NX-01 apart of that. And why you have names constantly being reused but you don't see the same registry number.
Star Trek Battles member. Want to roll with a good group of people regardless of fleets and not have to worry about DPS while doing STFs? Come join the channel and join in the fun!
http://forum.arcgames.com/startrekonline/discussion/1145998/star-trek-battles-channel-got-canon/p1
The reason behind not doing so for the latter case was so they could re-use all the old stock footage. Whether that's a good enough reason or not I'll leave to you.
As far as in-universe explanations go, the way I've always seen it is that ships with lettered incarnations are meant to honor the contributions of a significant ship and crew to the Federation, or to note a ship of some widespread reputation.
Basically, if a ship and crew have done something particularly notable, then the name and registry are reserved. Other names are simply recycled into the pool for new ships and registries as needed. Ships like the Intrepid (NCC-1631), Constellation (NCC-1017), and Defiant (NCC-1764) are only known for being lost/destroyed/magicked over to the Mirror Universe/etc., and thus do not merit having their registries reserved for future namesake vessels.
I imagine there could even be a U.S.S. Voyager (NCC-74656-A) at some point. I wonder what kind of ship that would be?
Even your own link shows that there are multiple definitions of the word, and most are non-military in meaning.