• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Discovery itself

They didn't mean anything the way you imply, quite the opposite. Man it drags though doesn't it? Am halfway too and ....man
No actually they do mean it. From what I recall they were both in Hollywood and they were shown some things, probably not too much. They don't reveal anything except that they cant reveal it. :) I guess the only real thing of interest is that they think the changes are more in line with what fans like.

As for the show itself, it's interesting when they have guests on.
 
Personally, I don't particularly like how the nacelles are stuck straight out to the sides. If they basically took the design and bent the sides up into nacelle pylons like on the Planet of the Titans study models, it would look just fine, and the secondary hull would no longer appear absurdly wide.
It's "absurdly wide" if you think the problem with the ship is that it doesn't look like the Ent-D. But it's not the D. It's the Discovery, a different ship with its own identity.

And that would be where you're mistaking. A few of "you" (ie, not limited to this sycophantic forum) "love" it. And of those few of "you" who "love" it, that "love" is actually "tolerate/okay with it."
Only YOU know the real truth! :techman:
 
Personally, the sharp turn it more jarrimg to me. I'm not sure why, but it feels awkward. The original concept for the design felt like it was trying to conform one idea to another which made the nacelles etc seem tacked on.

I think this....

F5lzlax.png


....feels a bit more natural. But still seems to have the 'Serenity' belly.

I completely agree. Yours is an improvement over both the original and my own attempt.
 
No actually they do mean it. From what I recall they were both in Hollywood and they were shown some things, probably not too much. They don't reveal anything except that they cant reveal it. :) I guess the only real thing of interest is that they think the changes are more in line with what fans like.

As for the show itself, it's interesting when they have guests on.

No, I mean their mention of minorities didn't come over as negatively tinged, and they didn't use racial caricatures, they said that the show had a history of not doing that or of making fun of the existence. It was never a big deal that Chekhov was Russian, or that Sulu was Japanese, and if anything they always had moments that were the inverse of the caricature.
 
Am I the only one thoroughly disgusted by the fact that they simply dusted off a pre TNG enterprise D ship sketch and reused it for discovery?

Thankfully it doesn't have anything to do with the Enterprise-D or the "proto-Galaxy" ship sketches.

Using a real star trek ship would have been far far better. And besides there are SO MANY of canon ships that have never gotten much screen time, that they could have used anything say a Daedulus or hermes or saladin..

It is a real Star Trek ship… or about as real as the rest of them.

from what ive seen, its nothing more then a half assed attempt to put a D7 engineering section onto a federation saucer.

Oh, it's a lot more than that:

http://trekcore.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/ussdiscovery.jpg

http://losttrek.weebly.com/uploads/3/0/7/1/30713909/9793024_orig.jpg

http://www.sharecg.com/images/medium/141024.jpg</a></div><div class=

http://vignette2.wikia.nocookie.net...an_IDIC.png/revision/latest?cb=20130626182349

http://i.stack.imgur.com/mVOSg.gif
 
Discovery isn't ugly in any side view at all imo. Different yes, but acceptable to me. She actually has good flow all around from side views. It's the views from the top down or bottom up that may take some getting used to. Thinking of it as a homage to the IDIC symbol helps me better appreciate those awkward angle views.


I like the upper version more, it's a more sensible layout for crew movements. In the lower, the corridors would need be sloped or a set of stairs added at every deck transition.
 
Nobody from the Discovery team has mentioned the IDIC as a design influence. I don't think it was used in the 70s either. That's people coming up with their own rationalizations for an ugly design.
 
Personally, I don't particularly like how the nacelles are stuck straight out to the sides. If they basically took the design and bent the sides up into nacelle pylons like on the Planet of the Titans study models, it would look just fine, and the secondary hull would no longer appear absurdly wide. I even did a ten second mockup:
F5lzlax.png

While you're at it, increase the size of the main dish. There's always been a consistent ratio of main dish to total ship size that we're all used to from TOS onward (where they had them, unlike, let's say, the Miranda class). The only exception I can think of is the Sovereign which had a small one like this, and it was just as glaring.

Likewise, the oft discussed primary hull (saucer) being too small. In your revised sketch, the ends of the saucer extend beyond the nacelles. That is a classic Trek ship "look". Secondary hull below, nacelles above, and struts/pylons to the nacelles. Everyone intuitively "gets" this even if they can't easily describe it. They know it when they see it. It either clicks or it doesn't. Even the nuPrise, despite its flaws, adheres to this look better than Discovery.

I mean, Trek is 50 years old. There's a design language that has carried all the way through. It still provides enough leeway for a lot of different ship designs, but it doesn't let you just do anything. The sign of a bad concept is when the artist somehow doesn't "get" this design language and just does something completely oddball. That's why this concept was probably rejected in the 70s and doesn't deserve to come back.
 
I like the upper version more, it's a more sensible layout for crew movements. In the lower, the corridors would need be sloped or a set of stairs added at every deck transition.

Maybe. I'm just seeing them as massive struts with equipment and access bits more than decks.

I'm not keen on the flat as it looks too much like a booster pack. Previous engineering sections have had this weird flow that worked, but Discovery looks disjointed; as if the transition from saucer to massive thing carrying the saucer flows as two seperate entities tacked together.
 
Discovery isn't ugly in any side view at all imo. Different yes, but acceptable to me. She actually has good flow all around from side views. It's the views from the top down or bottom up that may take some getting used to.
Yep.
Nobody from the Discovery team has mentioned the IDIC as a design influence. I don't think it was used in the 70s either. That's people coming up with their own rationalizations for an ugly design.
It may not have been in the designer's mind, but when you stick a triangle into a circle, that's where Trek fans' minds will go.
There's always been a consistent ratio of main dish to total ship size that we're all used to from TOS onward... The only exception I can think of is the Sovereign which had a small one like this, and it was just as glaring.
... In your revised sketch, the ends of the saucer extend beyond the nacelles. That is a classic Trek ship "look". Secondary hull below, nacelles above, and struts/pylons to the nacelles. Everyone intuitively "gets" this even if they can't easily describe it. They know it when they see it. It either clicks or it doesn't. Even the nuPrise, despite its flaws, adheres to this look better than Discovery.
"Everyone?" This seems a needlessly fundamentalist view. Anything you're not used to is bad. So presumably that ship with the nacelles above and below its saucer (can't remember it's name) it right out as well?
 
Designing ships for Starfleet that can be eventually recognized as such by fans is an amazingly fluid process. The original series showed only a single Starfleet vessel. What other ships might have looked like, we really don't know. Our guess would have been weaker than if we had seen only a single aircraft from the US Air Force. The only vessels that were officially designed within the next decade, for TAS, were accepted as being Starfleet vessels despite having only similar types of double nacelles (and sometimes a round bridge component on a flat rectangular hull). Insignia were also helpful. The big and little starships designed by Franz Joseph basically dissected Enterprise and added or fattened parts; they were widely accepted by fans. The refit Enterprise in ST:TMP was basically a slicked-up version of the original, but the vessels that appeared in later movies were even more radical, with Excelsior having an enormous head, fat neck, very long and thin nacelles, and a semicircular secondary hull, which was criticized by the SF movie magazine Cinefantastique as resembling a squished toothpaste tube. Reliant and Oberth were even less Enterprise-like but were still accepted as Starfleet vessels. So, vessels are accepted as Starfleet as long as they include a few correct parts: nacelles with lights on front, and a round bridge on top. If you take a potato and put on that stuff, it would become good enough for Starfleet.

On the other hand, designing a ship to become the co-star of a new TV series is a bit different. You can't just take an earlier ship, like the original Enterprise, and slightly modify the parts in size, shape, and texture. The ship has to be recognized as being a different ship when barely and quickly seen. I've often heard designers say that these ships should be as distinctive and simple that they can be drawn by children. It's also a good idea, but not always required, that the ship is an attractive co-star. So, I think some lead ships of TV series were well designed, but some were not.

I think that the present version of Discovery would certainly be recognized as resembling no other lead ship. It has enough parts to be Starfleet, and I have to say I find it kind of attractive. People who are given an attractiveness ranking of 10 might be considered physically perfect, but they usually end up looking just like every other "10." That would be boring for a lead in a TV series. I think above-average attractiveness with a striking difference is better. So far, Discovery is like that for me.
 
Last edited:
Discovery has a silouette that is near identical to the romulan warbird of the period. The rear of the engineering section tapers identicaly and the saucer section despite being a seperate level unlike the romulan warbird. Only from close up will it obviously be federation. A ship with armoured up pre next gen galaxy class nacelles that are each concealing three older- and smaller naecelles.
So Discovery is designed to look like a romulan warbird on long range sensors running 'three phase' warp nacelles and what sounds like a cloaking romulan cloaking device.
 
I think I actually prefer the nacelle wing struts / pylons flat, rather than bent...
 
Last edited:
To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.
 
An American tank looks to the average viewer much like a Russian tank, a French naval destroyer looks much like a British one, a BMW follows much the same layout as a Mercedes. An informed viewer may well be able to tell what type they are, but the fact remains there isn't really too much in terms of the overall silhouette to instantly inform the typical civilian.

That civilian would readily be able to tell a helicopter from a motorbike.

Yes there may well be a design lineage for certain ship categories but form follows function. What works for an high performace explorer will be impractical for a cargo freighter, which in turn would make no sense on a warship.

Very few people seriously complain about the Defiant, because they understand what she is and why she is built the way she is. We know nothing about Discovery and thus nothing about her design, it makes little sense therefore to complain about her appearance.

Nor should we be too tied to the idea "Starfleet vessels look like this", just because we've seen some that do. IDIC and all that.
 
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top