Star Trek Discovery

[Overgeeked]

I can't speak for Jax whom you are quoting, but to me it just feels like the most obvious and unimaginative name they could have thought of. Of course they shouldn't go for something weird just to be different (no one wants Star Trek: Crazy Horse)

I would. It would be great to see the leaders of the past acknowledged in the future. But then it is a series made in the modern US, and we're clearly not advanced enough as a culture to acknowledge our mistakes or the leaders effected by those mistakes.

 

[Tuskin38]

Turns out, that ship design wasn't by Ralph McQuarrie, it was designed by someone named Ken Adam. Ralph did sketches of it but the original design wasn't by him. So the whole Star Destroyer thing some people mention probably wasn't intentional.

http://memory-alpha.wikia.com/wiki/Ken_Adam
http://memory-alpha.wikia.com/wiki/Star_Trek:_Planet_of_the_Titans#History

 

[JD]

That would lead to the question why a CBS executive would green light a direct sequel to a show which is regarded to be a failure.

We don't know that that is what they did. I'm not giving up on my hope that the show is set post Nemesis. I know there's no more guarantee that that will be the case than any other time, but I also haven't seen anything to rule it out.

 

[Tuskin38]

4. The so-called "prime" timeline is the real Star Trek timeline and the other(JJverse) never existed at all but is an abomination that is best ignored.

In your opinion.

 

[yenny]

What I've could see about the USS Discovery NCC-1031. Is that base on her registry. That she was commssion around 2210 or 2211. She has 18 pairs of phaser turrets. 8 on top and 10 on the bottom. She 8 pairs of torpedoes tubes, 5 forward and 3 aft. Of the 5 forward, 3 above the deflector disk and 2 below the dish. The 3 aft tubes are aboved the aft shuttle bay. She has 3 shuttlebays 1 aft and 2 forward.

 

[Overgeeked]

I'm thinking there might be something there in regards to Section 31. A ship built in secret, for a long-term classified Starfleet mission.

Others are thinking the same as well - Herc Has A Crackpot Theory About The NCC-1031!!

Doubtful Section 31 would be the focus of the show given Fuller's clear philosophical bent as presented at the panel. Besides, Section 31 would never name a ship something as neutral or positive as Discovery. They'd name it something harsh and warlike.

 

[The Mighty Monkey of Mim]

That would lead to the question why a CBS executive would green light a direct sequel to a show which is regarded to be a failure.

I don't know that ENT really is considered to be a failure generally. I know that I don't personally consider it so. It was cancelled, sure, but so was TOS. If anything, its main obstacle was market oversaturation that had built up over a decade with so many ST series in continuous succession. The final season (apart from the tacked-on finale) was a big fan pleaser, and not everyone hated it before that either. The current film series has certainly been happily making reference to it.

And, again, it has not been revealed when the new show will be set, let alone that it will be a "direct sequel" to ENT.

 

[uniderth]

In your opinion.

Clearly. Merely pointing out that there are more then three schools of thought.

 

[Lieut. Arex]

I wonder if Discovery might not be a Star-fleet starship what if she is a civilian vessel attached to the Daystrom institute or American Continent Institute such a ship could be dropped into almost any point in the time frame and it would dodge quite a number of canon issues and it divorces the show from the military/paramilitary aspects of Star-fleet I'm thinking Calypso, nah it's gotta be Star -fleet I'm just mapping some of my thinking about how I would attack a new show onto these fragments

 

[The Mighty Monkey of Mim]

U.S.S. and NCC would seem to suggest Starfleet, but I guess anything's possible.

 

[mos6507]

At this point I'm hoping that the show is a season-by-season anthology so they can just pivot to a whole new era and drop this ship during the season-break.

 

[aloha62]

At this point I'm hoping that the show is a season-by-season anthology so they can just pivot to a whole new era and drop this ship during the season-break.

Why wait that long? We heard a cloak noise at the end of the trailer so with a bit of luck the launch is just a fake out and that particular junker gets destroyed by a decloaking ship leading us into the real show.

 

[mic of orion]

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

I kind of like the new design, think it can be done better, hey I am so glad another star trek show is back on tv Getting Netflix btw.

 

[Galileo7]

I am hoping that this teaser is not going to be the NCC-1031 Discovery that will actually be used in the series because it is a very disappointing design of any of the existing federation starships of the prior Star Trek series.

 

[jep316]

Its possible the series could be set in the TMP era or slightly later and the Discovery has been in service for a while and has undergone refits like the TOS Enterprise did to update it for service..that could explain the low registry number.

 

[publiusr]

It's amazing how close this concept is to some of the things I was thinking recently - complete with the sweet MacQuarrie asteroid base! I always thought that was a great image - the way the ship seems to be sailing in like a swan. I love the MacQuarrie designs, and even advocated it for this new series - but I was shocked that it's the other design they have chosen (the Star Destroyer), rather than the one with the long neck I liked more:

I wish the nacelles of the USS Discovery were a bit higher on their struts, then I think it would be a very pleasing retro design - it currently looks great from the front - a really nice profile from that angle - but not so great from below (and presumably from above). Just a little bit of tweaking would solve that - making the nacelles a little less massive, and putting them on struts:

Other than that, I would love it, and it's retro MacQuarrie look.

Agreed. They need to get with Lord Sarvain and have him tweak it. I do love it being angular. Lots of shuttlecraft room.

 

[O_Kav]

I don't care much how the Discovery looks on the outside, triangular, Star Destroyer or whatever. Her interior being Kelvin-esque would be enough for me to be happy with it. Loved that bridge, it's the perfect mix between Retro and new.

 

[The Old Mixer]

Besides, Section 31 would never name a ship something as neutral or positive as Discovery. They'd name it something harsh and warlike.

Would they? They're spies. If they want to keep a low profile, they'd name it something innocuously generic.

 

[JoeZhang]

[

Would they? They're spies. If they want to keep a low profile, they'd name it something innocuously generic.

The spies who seem to have a easy to spot uniform?

 

[Sammael]

beauty is subjective. i think the Discovery looks great.

Beauty is definitely subjective. But shared subjectivity is an approximation of objectivity. If we polled a THOUSAND people and asked them if they thought this ship was an attractive design, I'd be surprised if over 10% thought it was.

It is butt ugly to the bulk of humanity, distracting ugly, the kind and scale of ugly that might even detract from the show because of the eye pollution we'll be subjected to.