Discovery starship discussion [SPOILERS]

[Longinus]

It's long been speculated that the Constellation was, in fact, much older that the Enterprise and got a Consitution-like refit that made it close to looking like a Connie, but not quite.

'Long been speculated' by couple of registry fundamentalist, that rather come up with this completely hare-brained convoluted theory of two ships looking identical being different classes than accept the plainly obvious fact that the registries are no sequential.

 

[137th Gebirg]

Well, yes. It was a marginally more supportable theory prior to Discovery's run, which pretty much nailed the coffin shut on this particular topic.

 

[Crazy Eddie]

If the Constellation is a modernization of an older type, it's rather interesting that her registry number would be neighboring that of the Discovery. What could those two classes possibly have in common, to serve as the basis of a rebuilding from one type to the other?

Well, Dan "MadKoiFisH" Uyeno provided the answer a few months ago...

Timo Saloniemi

Yup. Constellation as a Crossfield class works fine for me.

Constitution class as a successor of the Crossfield (style changes included) works even better.

 

[Crazy Eddie]

But Picard, too, was a wartime captain.

To the rather laughable extent the conflict with the Cardassians and the Trelarians could be called a "war," sure. But that's like calling a police officer a "war veteran" because he was involved in bringing down the top lieutenants of the Vice Lords at the Battle of the 14th Floor (not even being sarcastic. Chicago "gang wars" are some pretty serious shit, but they're not real wars).

Peace seems to be rare in the Federation

Timo, we had two characters explicitly stating that the Federation and the Klingons have been engaged in a relatively bloodless cold war just prior to the outbreak of hostilities. We have Sarek and Burnham explicitly stating that randomly targeted weapons fire is basically Klingon for "hello" and that NORMALLY, exchanges of fire do not constitute war.

Understand this, in context, when you try to figure out what "war time" actually looks like in Star Trek; it is ALWAYS permissiable to open fire on your rivals in interstellar territory without broader political implication. But war is what happens when you fire on their ships, blow up their space stations, glass their planets and enslave whole populations by the millions. The random fist fights Starships get into along the frontier don't approach anything on the scale of "war" that Starfleet is now dealing with, and they are psychologically and organizationally unprepared for it, just as they were in TNG when the Borg showed up, just as they were in "Redemption" when they were struggling to put a fleet together big enough just to patrol the border.

 

[F. King Daniel]

The Enterprise was supposedly launched in 2245. Discovery is thought to be brand new (admittedly by a group of non-Starfleet convicts) in 2256.

While I don't think they're part of the same continuity, hull number aside, Discovery should be more advanced.

 

[Longinus]

The TOS design aesthetic simply hasn't aged well enough for it to be included in future productions, nor was it MEANT to age all that well, which is why everyone ignores it in prequels, sequels and reboots. The only time they ever faithfully reproduced those old sets and designs was in a cute nostalgia episode on a series that was canceled literally one episode later. It's been 50 years since that aesthetic actually worked on television; Discovery has RADICALLY departed from it and is not being even a little bit shy about it. So IF they show us a Constitution class, it will be the DISCOVERY version of the Constitution class.

If they show it at distance there is really no need to change it much, you cannot see any detail anyway.

 

[Mark_Nguyen]

The only time they ever faithfully reproduced those old sets and designs was in a cute nostalgia episode on a series that was canceled literally one episode later.

1) TNG "Relics" - recreation of the TOS bridge set (well, most of it).

2) DS9 "Trials and Tribble-ations" - recreation of sets, costumes and props.

3) ENT "In a Mirror, Darkly" - same thing.

VOY also recreated TUC, and ENT recreated TNG almost immediately after its aforementioned cute nostalgia episode. I agree that the original TOS aesthetic is too dated to be "realistic" in this day and age, and I believe that as such the DSC producers are simply side-stepping the issue. More than the hardcore fans would like, but we all know this show isn't aimed primarily at us. It's aimed at the masses of potential CBSAA subscribers whose own worries will be placated somewhat whenever the producers simply say "It's for the fans" (TM).

Mark

 

[Dukhat]

'Long been speculated' by couple of registry fundamentalist, that rather come up with this completely hare-brained convoluted theory of two ships looking identical being different classes than accept the plainly obvious fact that the registries are no sequential.

While it's true that there are differences between the model kit and the filming model, I agree that the Constellation was meant to be the same class of ship as the Enterprise. And while it's also possible that registries are not chronological (at least during the TOS/TMP era), there's also never been a canonical registry for the U.S.S. Constitution. For all we know it's NCC-1000, not 1700.

 

[Lakenheath 72]

The Constitution might have a registry in the 900s, as the Eagle, a Connie, had the registry number NCC-956.

 

[Ensign_Rowan_McGrath]

The Constitution might have a registry in the 900s, as the Eagle, a Connie, had the registry number NCC-956.

No actually on-screen evidence proves that the Eagle was a Constitution. There may have been a Constitution-class Eagle at one point but it could've been destroyed in the interim.

 

[Timo]

But the only point of having the TOS ship in any form is to please the fans who want to see it. Nobody really cares about how she should look, as long as she is the same old thing. If she isn't the same old thing, she's nothing.

People talk about the "tastes" and "aesthetics" of the era in which a particular spinoff is produced. But Trek has never paid attention to those people. The Trek aesthetic has always been its own thing, neither believable nor attractive for its given era. And DSC is no exception here.

There simply is no upside to remaking the Gimmick Ship, and no downside to not remaking her. Nobody will start watching if the ship is remade, and nobody will stop watching if it is not.

Remaking the Gimmick would cost money, too. Why pay for nothing?

But again, this is all utterly irrelevant anyway, because we know for a fact that Trek never changes the TOS design. They have had half a century to do so, the incentive postulated has always applied, and yet they have decided four times already not to do it. This preempts all further "ifs", "buts" and "becauses".

Timo Saloniemi

 

[Timo]

What type of new data do we actually have on this ages-old issue thanks to DSC?

- We see boxy nacelles are in fashion in the 2250s.
- We see cylinder nacelles are not.
- We see ships with registries in the 1000, 1200, 1400 and 1600 ranges.
- 1000, 1400 and 1600 have boxy nacelles. 1200 has another type altogether.
- 1200 is said to be old as of the 2250s. 1000 is said to be new.

That's it so far. So, what previous theories or assumptions are outdated by this?

A) That cylinder nacelles steadily evolved from ENT to TMP, then were replaced by the slim TMP style and then by the fat TNG style.

(New model: ENT cylinders went out of fashion in favor of boxes, some time after the Kelvin, except in the Kelvinverse where ships up till the 1700 range still had them. The TOS ship may be a relic from the Kelvin era, or a failed attempt at a revival.)

B) That nacelles always match saucers in aesthetics.

(New model: Saucer designs with the ENT rim angle see parallel use with the TOS angle and the vertical "Kelvinverse/ 2230s" angle, all with the boxy nacelles - because Starfleet has for a rare once modernized the propulsion systems of its entire fleet at once. ENT angle may still denote "old", but TOS angle being "new" went out of the window with the Franklin.)

And that's pretty much that so far. The idea that registries would be strictly chronological gains no support. That they would be utterly nonchronological likewise gains none. The DSC registries play it safe, in the very center of the board.

Timo Saloniemi

 

[Timo]

This is basically the same as stating that the US has not fought any "real wars" after the 1860s. In certain respects, this is absolutely accurate. It doesn't much affect the war readiness of US troops at any particular post-1860s decade, though, as in certain other respects, the US has never had such a decade without being at war. There's a steady supply of hardened veterans and a steady feedback on how the newest weapons systems should perform in a "real war".

Starfleet just manages to have Picards and Georgious and Janeways even in those circumstances. And the likes of Garth or Lorca or Sisko or whoever who adjust to war in about twelve seconds and then treat it as their second nature.

The Big One with the Klingons here is remarkable for not being remarkable, really: three decades later, Marcus can claim with a straight face that Starfleet has kept the peace throughout all this. Which is basically what is going to happen if this blows over during the first season of DSC as apparently planned. A few billion dead is a routine peacetime afternoon in TOS, and if Starfleet stops the Klingons from occupying Earth for too many consecutive days, then it apparently has kept the peace.

Timo Saloniemi

 

[Samuel]

In DS9s "Rule of Engagement" when O'Brien was testifying on Worf's behalf it was stated how many times he had been in combat. The number was way over 200!. And this was BEFORE the Dominion War.

Sure sounds like O'Brien was a very highly experienced and seasoned war veteran. Perhaps Starfleet is divided up like the FASA RPG suggested. Galaxy Exploration Command & Military Operations Command. During "normal" times most of the border confrontations, routine exchanges of fire, even showing the flag would be handled by the ships and crews of the Military Operations Command but when a major war arises they need all hands on deck. The ships and crews of the Galaxy Exploration Command have to be drawn on. And this means you have lots of ships and crews having to prepare for major combat that have never done so before.

 

[The Librarian]

A) That cylinder nacelles steadily evolved from ENT to TMP, then were replaced by the slim TMP style and then by the fat TNG style.

(New model: ENT cylinders went out of fashion in favor of boxes, some time after the Kelvin, except in the Kelvinverse where ships up till the 1700 range still had them. The TOS ship may be a relic from the Kelvin era, or a failed attempt at a revival.)

These new nacelles remind me of the ones on the Andorian cruisers in Enterprise, which were superior warp drives to the one the Enterprise had. It's possible that many ships of the intervening time between ENT and TOS drew more from the Andorians in terms of warp drive than Earth. Maybe ships like the Shenzhou are some of of the first products of a truly united Starfleet, as opposed to ships largely built by the members like the Daedalus, and the TOS Constitution and Kelvin are more outliers than previously believed. Eventually both styles were replaced by the TMP design and its sucessors.

 

[F. King Daniel]

There simply is no upside to remaking the Gimmick Ship, and no downside to not remaking her.

Merchandise. Remake the ship and you have a new model, new posters, new t-shirts to sell. Keep the old and... everyone who wants that already has it.

 

[Lakenheath 72]

Some could argue that the plans from ST VI, which show the silhouette of the Eagle as a refit Connie can be used for identifying this starship as being of that class. I am in that camp. If you are not, that is fine.

 

[Avro Arrow]

Some could argue that the plans from ST VI, which show the silhouette of the Eagle as a refit Connie can be used for identifying this starship as being of that class. I am in that camp. If you are not, that is fine.

Assuming these are accurate images of the Operation Retrieve charts, rather than a fan-made version (which admittedly, I can't be 100% sure about), the dorsal silhouette of the Eagle is smaller than the silhouette of the generally-accepted-as-Constitution Potemkin:

That kind of silhouette is not going to tell you a lot of details about a ship, and there are many ways an older ship could resemble a refit Constitution in silhouette. Based on the size difference, I tend to think it's a different class.

It might be the same class as the Emden and Ahwahnee, though, but nothing in these outlines are really definitive.

 

[Ensign_Rowan_McGrath]

Assuming these are accurate images of the Operation Retrieve charts, rather than a fan-made version (which admittedly, I can't be 100% sure about), the dorsal silhouette of the Eagle is smaller than the silhouette of the generally-accepted-as-Constitution Potemkin:

That kind of silhouette is not going to tell you a lot of details about a ship, and there are many ways an older ship could resemble a refit Constitution in silhouette. Based on the size difference, I tend to think it's a different class.

It might be the same class as the Emden and Ahwahnee, though, but nothing in these outlines are really definitive.

Because of where the Endeavour and Emden sit on their registries (contradicting myself a bit I know), I consider them Miranda class starships while the Ahwahnee is an Excelsior class.

 

[Lakenheath 72]

I am on the rim, looking into the heart of the whirlpool. It is not where I want to go. I am changing my course and heading away from the maelstrom before it consumes me.