Removed Edit

I noticed some anonymous users expanded the section on the real-life shuttles a few weeks back; is this information absolutely necessary to have? I'd figure an external link to the NASA shuttle program would be more than enough... -- SmokeDetector47 // talk 03:03, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I wouldn't argue against the information being here, but the tense is all wrong. --Short Circuit 21:18, 13 Jul 2005 (UTC)

The tense is not wrong. Its all 'past tense', from a late-24th century p.o.v. Anyway, I have removed the following context because none of it can be cited to any movie or episode and really doesnt belong here anymore than a list with short description for every President of the United States:

Enterprise (OV-101) was only a glide-test prototype, and did not carry functioning engines or heat shields. It has not flown since the early 1980s and is now a museum piece, apparently at the Smithsonian National Air and Space Museum's annex at Washington Dulles International Airport in Chantilly, Virginia.
Columbia (OV-102) was the first shuttle to go into space. Its design was slightly different to subsequent shuttles, limiting its ability to reach higher altitudes. It could not, for example, reach the International Space Station. The Columbia was destroyed on February 1, 2003, during re-entry. The entire crew of 7 were killed, and all shuttle flights have been suspended, pending the safety redesigns due to be ready (at the time of writing) by July 2005.
Challenger (OV-099) was a refit of a static ground test vehicle with a lower number designation, converted for operational use. It was destroyed on launch on 28 January 1986, when one of its solid rocket boosters exploded. The entire crew of 7 (including a civilian school teacher, Christa McAuliffe) were killed, and all shuttle flights were suspended until September 28 1988.
Discovery (OV-103) and Atlantis (OV-104) have had relatively unremarkable careers thus far. Discovery was the first shuttle to launch again after the Challenger accident, and is also due to be the first to launch following the Columbia accident. At the time of writing, that launch was currently scheduled (after repeated safety-related delays) for mid-July 2005.
Endeavour (OV-105) was the last shuttle built, and was intended to replace the lost Challenger.
A full-sized steel shuttle mock-up, useful only for practising ground handling techniques, was also built. It was later named Pathfinder and given the unofficial designation OV-098. This is apparently now mounted on display in Huntsville, Alabama.
No shuttle is to be built to replace the Columbia, and Discovery, Atlantis and Endeavour will bear the brunt of NASA's manned space operations (primarily ferry flights up to the ISS) until about 2010, when its replacement is planned to enter service.

--Alan del Beccio 22:10, 13 Jul 2005 (UTC)


If we are going to list the space shuttles here, should Pathfinder be listed? or is it not really considered one of the space shuttles? Wikipedia says it was given an honorary designation of OV-098. I'm simply curious, perhaps I didn't understand the wikipedia page properly.--Terran Officer 08:53, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

As the Wikipedia article says, Pathfinder was not actually a Space Shuttle. It was a mockup made of steel and wood. It has been given an honorary designation number, but it isn't an actual shuttle. Nice to look at, though, seen it myself. --OuroborosCobra talk 19:10, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Buran Edit

The following go bye-bye:

Late in the Earth Cold War, the Soviet Union developed a competing space shuttle program called Buran, with hull design elements largely resembling the American Enterprise-type shuttle. The Buran made one unmanned flight into Earth orbit but, with the collapse of the Soviet Union, the Russian government cancelled the program for lack of funding. The Challenger-class starship USS Buran was named after this effort.

A background note on the USS Buran page is one thing, but the shuttle itself was never mentioned in canon, so away it goes. --From Andoria with Love 05:10, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

Merge space shuttle articles Edit

If the STS patches were seen on screen (which don't contain shuttle names) the patches should be listed here. — Morder 22:03, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

Speculation Edit

I'm sure there is...Though I agree, it's not valid — Morder (talk) 22:27, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

Can we get a citation from a production source? Then it could be put back. --OuroborosCobra talk 22:46, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

Agreed. Stupid lack of season 5...(and 6 and 7) — Morder (talk) 22:47, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

From Discovery (OV-103) Edit

Previously deleted Edit

I see that this article was deleted in 2005 on the grounds that it wasn't referenced. Was the insignia seen in the episode, as claimed in this new article?--31dot 20:29, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

Yes.– Airtram3 20:36, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

Although I did not see it, even if it was on the set, that does not mean it was seen in the episode.--31dot 20:39, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

Btw 31dot. [1] Discovery is the top right - however it doesn't state it was discovery and it still means it wasn't referenced. — Morder 22:19, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

Merge Edit

While I disagree with Morder on the last point, this page should still be merged with space shuttle on the grounds stated in every other merge discussion. Also, the page isn't using the correct title format, IE: Enterprise (OV-101). - Archduk3:talk 16:45, September 22, 2009 (UTC)

Fixed the name. - Archduk3:talk 18:09, September 22, 2009 (UTC)

From Atlantis (OV-104) Edit

Citation? Edit

Can we get some visual confirmation on this, please? The wikipedia article that formerly existed about all the images in the intro stated that it was the Space Shuttle Discovery. --Alan del Beccio 19:58, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

Here is the visual evidence. Note the Spacehab logo to the left. It matches the one shown in the credits. [2].--Airtram3 15:39, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

Precedent? Edit

Is there a precedent for something only seen in the credits, and not in canon, having its own article? (Unless the credits are canon, but I don't believe they are.) If there is, then I wonder how detailed it needs to be.--31dot 21:09, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

Search "Sojourner". This is only shown in the credits. Yet, it is treated as being in-universe.--Airtram3 15:41, 22 February 2008 (UTC)
Obviously, this is not the case - Sojourner is also shown in an episode, as the article describes. -- Cid Highwind 14:51, 22 February 2008 (UTC)
OV-165, T-90 tank, F-5 Tiger II, 2K12 Kub, B-1B Lancer, Project 705, F-15 Eagle, Alan Shepard. --Alan 21:50, 22 February 2008 (UTC)
We should perhaps slap a {{real world}} on those. -- Cid Highwind 02:22, 23 February 2008 (UTC)
Why? Especially the ones for the mirror universe opening seem to have been intentioned to illustrate things in that universe. --OuroborosCobra talk 02:27, 23 February 2008 (UTC)
Yeah, I kind of thought that was a given, especially when it contains somethign like File:Terran-Empire-Insignia.jpg and File:Terran Empire moon landing.jpg. On that note, let's not forget the various opening theme images that appear in "legitimate" articles, which walks the same line and the articles discussed here: (ENT) File:First World War.jpg, File:German Fokker airplane.jpg, File:German U-Boat.jpg, File:Sailing ship firing, In a Mirror, Darkly.jpg, File:Chuck Yeager.jpg, File:ISS model, ENT opening credits.jpg, File:HMS Enterprize opening credits.jpg, File:Lunar colonies.jpg, File:SpaceShuttleEnterprise.jpg, File:Warp delta, prototype.jpg, File:Amelia Earhart, Enterprise.jpg; (TOS) File:USS Enterprise, TOS opening credits.jpg, File:MarsTOSremastered-Intro.jpg; (DS9) File:USS Leeds at DS9.jpg, File:Three repairmen in EV suits.jpg; and possibly more. --Alan 03:52, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

Merge Edit

No need for separate space shuttle articles with the exception of Enterprise (OV-101), which is the only one of any length. - Archduk3talk 16:48, September 22, 2009 (UTC)

From Endeavour (OV-105) Edit

Merge Edit

It was suggested that this be merged with space shuttle. Making it an official suggestion. Discuss below. --From Andoria with Love 03:04, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

Definitely. No need for separate pages. -- Cid Highwind 15:53, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
This ship is canonically as it's name is shown on a mission insignia. So, there is really no need to merge it. However, I agree with you that the other shuttle articles, save Enterprise, should be merged or deleted.– Airtram3 08:06, 14 May 2009 (UTC)
Merge. - Archduk3:talk 16:28, September 22, 2009 (UTC)
No merge. I for one don't agree. All these separate shuttle pages have some notes in them, info and links. Also, there are hundreds and hundreds of planet-, item-, starship- and people-pages of single appearance things that only appear on illegible lists or are mentioned in dialogue. We should not start a trend of compacting MA for the sake of making all the pages we have look more full. --Pseudohuman 18:00, September 22, 2009 (UTC)
This is true. But on the other hand, I'd like to see more proof/evidence of the source that this shuttle was referenced, as the article certainly lacks said information as well. --Alan 18:38, November 6, 2009 (UTC)

Unmerge individual shuttlesEdit

Despite them being merged 7 years ago, I propose to unmerge the articles on the individual space shuttles seen onscreen. I don't see why we have separate articles about individual components of Nomad, but not about about individual spacecraft. At least the Atlantis should have its own page, since it was actually visible. Kennelly (talk) 20:58, December 11, 2016 (UTC)

Support. That merge never made a lick of sense to me. If individual named ships down to the most insignificant shuttlepod don't get merged into their class, then why can't individual space shuttles get articles. -- Capricorn (talk) 23:33, December 11, 2016 (UTC)
Oppose. Only Enterprise and Atlantis have direct references, all the rest are mission patches that don't actually identify the shuttle used beyond our real-world knowledge of which shuttles were used for which missions. Technically, we shouldn't even be identifying them here beyond a bg note. We barely cover the people who flew those missions too, and we actually have their names. For Atlantis, since it would be a one line page, the redirect here was considered enough, though categorization is in order. - Archduk3 05:53, December 12, 2016 (UTC)
I should have specified I'm only in favor for having articles on shuttles that were either actually seen in some way, or named (although iirc none were?). And I agree this page has serious problems by the way. Articles for all that was featured and none that was not, would be my motto. -- Capricorn (talk) 06:36, December 12, 2016 (UTC)

If "one line-page" is an argument A LOT, a really lot of our articles shouldn't exist! Kennelly (talk) 07:41, December 12, 2016 (UTC)

The shuttle Endeavour is identified by name on the patch for STS-49 and the shuttle Enterprise is represented by a model bearing its name. These details are not seen in the episodes.--Memphis77 (talk) 10:16, December 12, 2016 (UTC)
I've already begun work on this page (moving, redefining, cleaving off the obvious 'other' types, and remade the Atlantis (OV-104) article) and am at the point where we would continue the discussion. I agree that we shouldn't be able to make that extra degree of separation to make an shuttle id from a patch, though, I do believe that the Challenger (OV-099) should revert to, at least, a real world article, due to this, and about the same for Columbia (OV-102), for this (and did ENT have a dedication for when that shuttle was destroyed, or was it just indirectly through the NX-02?), and can it be figured out which shuttle this is? (that pic doesn't seem to be on MA yet.) --Alan del Beccio (talk) 23:49, July 13, 2017 (UTC)
The Endeavour is identified by name on a mission patch, and the interior of the Discovery is seen in the opening credits of Star Trek: Enterprise. One of the astronauts is John Glenn. This information is from the Star Trek Encyclopedia (4th ed., vol. 1, p. 306).--Memphis77 (talk) 00:04, July 14, 2017 (UTC)
I've uploaded that space shuttle picture that we didn't have yet (here), FYI. It seemed like a wicked lead pic for the space shuttle page... -- Capricorn (talk) 03:15, July 18, 2017 (UTC)


I've shuffled some background info around because there was little consistency in what went in mid-text notes and what in the end of article bg section. Here's one bit that I ended up removing outright:

The Columbia was named after a Boston sloop famed for its exploration of the Pacific Northwest and the command module of Apollo 11.

Because this isn't wikipedia, and a wikipedia link is in fact provided for people who want to know more. -- Capricorn (talk) 21:57, August 6, 2017 (UTC)