USS Enterprise (eventually) on Discovery?
- Thread starter EJD1984
- Start date
The Kelvin-E was always weird: The windows clearly align with the TOS-connie, both in size, position and scale to each other. Because that's the size the ship was originally designed for, before Abrams decided to scale her up to make the shuttlebay look more impressive.
But then the shuttlebay is GIGANTIC, and the bridge window tiny (Imo, the gigantic bridge window through which we always see inside isn't significantly "bigger" than each and every "normal" window on the saucer). The Kelvin-Enterprise-A somewhat fixxed the window size - the ship now definitely is gigantic, and all the windows tiny. But the design doesn't look as good as before.
Overall, I love Church's design for the Kelvin-Enterprise (I might be alone with that
). But the new size was always ridiculously stupid. The original size fits for it's mission: 400 people, most of them probably specialists, technicians, a few scientists. It makes sense the commanding officers are regularly going on away missions - there are probably the only trained "alrounders" on board. With the Kelvinprise being the size of a stardestroyer, they should have tens of thousands of people on board - they don't need the Captain and the chief scientist to beam down to a planet, they can send an ARMY.The Star Destroyer in the OT is still 800 meters longer then the Connie.
What's interesting is the Konnie's bridge is in the same spot as one of the lights (or is it a window?) on the Connie Refit's bridge dome.
I presume no one in DSC production cares about the effect of needing to scale up all ships and objects from TOS onward??
Let's be fair. The Captain and senior staff really shouldn't be the first line on an alien planet anyway, regardless of crew compliment.The Kelvin-E was always weird: The windows clearly align with the TOS-connie, both in size, position and scale to each other. Because that's the size the ship was originally designed for, before Abrams decided to scale her up to make the shuttlebay look more impressive.
But then the shuttlebay is GIGANTIC, and the bridge window tiny (Imo, the gigantic bridge window through which we always see inside isn't significantly "bigger" than each and every "normal" window on the saucer). The Kelvin-Enterprise-A somewhat fixxed the window size - the ship now definitely is gigantic, and all the windows tiny. But the design doesn't look as good as before.
Overall, I love Church's design for the Kelvin-Enterprise (I might be alone with that
Because they finished Discovery ALOT earlier on in production and thus have a lot less to say about it. Also, because fewer people have asked them about Discovery because the origins of its designs are pretty obvious (Planet of the Titans ship as baseline, modded it from there).
How come they don't talk at length about the thruster suit props or the phasers or the lateral vector transporters? There's probably some pretty interesting backstage stories there too, but it's not the Enterprise, so nobody cares.
Given the sets in TMP and even in TOS, it pretty much HAS to be. We've known that for years, we've just never talked it out because the canonistas shout down any deviation from the "official" figures before the conversation can even start.
The size of the Kelvin Enterprise doesn't bug me as much as those interiors with all of that piping. Makes the ship look like an oil refinery or something. For me, in all of Trek, that is the second most annoying thing after the Klingon translation scene in TUC.
Speaking of TUC and size, there's the line "Not so big as her captain, I think."
As far as ship size, 'nuff said.
Any kind of revisionist history in fiction....what does it really harm?
Now, this thing in reality where we hear that Valley Forge was nowhere near as bad as we were led to believe by teaching in school all these years....
Speaking of TUC and size, there's the line "Not so big as her captain, I think."
As far as ship size, 'nuff said.
Any kind of revisionist history in fiction....what does it really harm?
Now, this thing in reality where we hear that Valley Forge was nowhere near as bad as we were led to believe by teaching in school all these years....
Not for a modern aircraft carrier with 2000 people.
But what for an exploration vessel, that was specifically manned and designed to bring those handfull of qualified and educated people to other planets?
Christoph Colombus' ship, the Santa Maria, had 40 man. But most of them were needed simply to keep the ship running. You can bet your ass, as soon as they reached soil, the first people to go to land were the officers.
Couldn't disagree more here. Bigger isn't better; it just seemed disproportionate. And what "internal action sequences" are you thinking of? The one with Scotty trapped in the brewery, oops, engineering section? The one that showed the saucer section is full of giant life-threatening chasms for no damn good reason, just like the Narada or, oh yeah, every ship ever in Star Wars?...
Personally I'd cheerfully trade in any action sequence in AbramsTrek (or two, or three, or twelve) for some actual logically plausible writing...
Indeed. I think it was a deliberate decision to never give a too specific sumber for the length of the ship - just a broad size to make it palpable: "It's roughly the size of a (then) modern aircraft carrier".
That's why you should take ALL these "starship size comparison charts" with a BIG grain of salt. Who knows how long they really are? Doesn't even matter, as long as relative size relationships are clear (a shuttle is this much bigger than humans, the Enterprie is SO much bigger than a shuttle, and the Excelsior is a lot bigger than the Enterprise, and both are dwarfed by the Spacedock...)
Perhaps senior officers, but Ill always struggle with the Captain being down in a dangerous or unknown situation. But, then, I'm also of the opinion that the bridge on top of the ship is also dumb.
Also, GR made it a point that the Enterprise was staffed by all officers, experts in their fields. Am I to believe that the Captain is the only one qualified to lead a landing party? O_o
I think the Captain should be the most qualified tactical and diplomatic officer. He should know when a situation is "safe" to bring down the specialists. (That includes - he should never leave the ship in a situation where the ship might be in need of it's tactical knowledge). Aka only beam down when the ship itself is safe and he can leave it.
But that just makes him by default as the most qualified guy to go to a new place, check out the situation, and meet with their local leaders to access the situations, gain trust, and make a judgement call about further proceedings.
Sorry, that to me sounds like the Captain basically needs to be a know-it-all who must micro-manage every situation.
G
Gonzo
Guest
It is unfortunate that you can't enjoy what was created but that's your problem not mine or the creators of the show.
To be honest you still sound rather bitter about it, which is a bit silly really as it's been almost a decade now since the first of the new films was released.
[opens ship-wide communications] @King Daniel Beyond, please report to this thread with TOS / Kelvin Enterprises interior comparison gif. That is all. [/ship-wide communications]
Well... that's kind of what he is. Depending on the crew size.
On a space shuttle (crew: 7) he HAS to be. On Archer's Enterprise (like on old time sailships: ~40 - 80 men) pretty much as well. On a 2000+ aircraft carrier sure as hell not - that's more like being the major of a moving city. For the TOS Enterprise (~400)? Probably something in between.
Similar threads
