USS Enterprise (eventually) on Discovery?

[Groppler Zorn]

that doesn't mean it looks good or "cool".

While I agree with your overall point (particularly that reality doesn’t make for good tv - I’m looking at you “Geordie shore”) the previous argument was that “no detail” and “simple shapes” equals “dated” which doesn’t make sense in light of the Zumwalt design.

Also wasn't the Zumwalt designed that way for stealth?

And I don’t know if I’m honest but that rings a bell. Maybe that’s why D7s are essentially big triangles? In the pre-cloaking device version of the timeline at least...

 

[CorporalCaptain]

It has a massive saucer.

That's a non-answer.

Unless the material is perfectly absorbent, the point is that greebling the surface only increases the radar cross section. Perfect stealth is obviously not the mission of the Connie, but why make it even less stealthy unnecessarily?

Anyway, that's really neither here nor there. The primary takeaway I think we should be seeing here is that there are technical reasons IRL that favor something that many have been regarding as antiquating. For all we know, there are very good in-universe technical reasons why a smooth Starfleet ship is preferable to a greebly one in the TOS era. Perhaps deflectors or warp drive works more efficiently the smoother the surface of the ship is; IIRC it's already been established, in behind-the-scenes information at least, that the eccentricity of the Ent-D's saucer was chosen for optimal warp performance.

 

[Blamo]

While I agree with your overall point (particularly that reality doesn’t make for good tv - I’m looking at you “Geordie shore”) the previous argument was that “no detail” and “simple shapes” equals “dated” which doesn’t make sense in light of the Zumwalt design.

Well I was speaking more in terms of TV shows.

It's like how sci-fi shows give advanced alien ships overly flowery and intricate designs (lots of things to break off). It doesn't remotely make sense, but it looks good and gets across that the ship is more advanced than the heroes.

It's also why they keep trying to make the next federation ship look more and more streamlined and "fast" looking, until they look like a tadpole. In my opinion it doesn't work with the starfleet configuration, but hey.

And I don’t know if I’m honest but that rings a bell. Maybe that’s why D7s are essentially big triangles? In the pre-cloaking device version of the timeline at least...

It probably also explains the Romulan Bird of Prey in TOS.

 

[GNDN18]

why not put some windows on the deflector dish too.

Or windows on the windows.

 

[Phoenix219]

The pylons are not completely split though, the hole doesn’t go from top to bottom.

FYI I don’t like the hole either. I also don’t like that the Pylons are TMP shaped.

John Eaves didn’t like that change in shape either, he has said that his final submitted design had them straight like TOS. It was the show’s SFX team that made them TMP shaped.

Does anyone have a model put together of what the Discoprise would look like with straight pylons?

 

[Nerys Myk]

Weird question: do we know for sure we'll be seeing the Enterprise bridge next season, or will Spock's quarters perhaps be the extent of our visit?

Because I can imagine them doing that

It better include lots of drapes and incongruous weaponry.

 

[Tuskin38]

It's got windows in the pylons. that makes 0 sense.

Those are there on the TOS studio model as well.

they're also on the DSC connie, but they don't glow, so I don't think they're windows, or if they are, the lights are off.

 

[Belz...]

The primary takeaway I think we should be seeing here is that there are technical reasons IRL that favor something that many have been regarding as antiquating. For all we know, there are very good in-universe technical reasons why a smooth Starfleet ship is preferable to a greebly one in the TOS era. Perhaps deflectors or warp drive works more efficiently the smoother the surface of the ship is; IIRC it's already been established, in behind-the-scenes information at least, that the eccentricity of the Ent-D's saucer was chosen for optimal warp performance.

You're absolutely right. But the larger discussion isn't about whether there's a good in-universe explanation for the changes, but whether the general audience will see it as tacky or dated.

 

[CorporalCaptain]

You're absolutely right. But the larger discussion isn't about whether there's a good in-universe explanation for the changes, but whether the general audience will see it as tacky or dated.

That's absolutely so.

 

[Groppler Zorn]

It's like how sci-fi shows give advanced alien ships overly flowery and intricate designs (lots of things to break off). It doesn't remotely make sense, but it looks good and gets across that the ship is more advanced than the heroes.

Ah ok I see where you’re coming from - and I broadly agree.

But none of that supports the argument that the Enterprise is “dated”.

 

[Captain Crow]

Because the TOS Enterprise was funnier in a comedy movie.

Because Shatner was still more connected to that version of Star Trek. He probably always will be.

Plus the fact at there were only two Star Trek movies (STII came out about 3 or 4 months before Airplane II) at the time. On the other hand the original show was being shown in syndication almost daily in some places and had been in syndication for almost 10 years by that point. So at that time when most people thought of the Enterprise it would have been the more familiar TV version rather than the twice used movie version.

 

[Belz...]

That's absolutely so.

For the record, I'd love it if people in general were more accepting of older movies and styles and didn't care about these things, so that we could have a more consistent Trek canon. But as I've seen, this is not the case. Not only do they think that movies from 10 years ago are "old", but some won't even watch stuff like B5 just because the special effects aren't up to par with those of today. A real shame.

 

[XCV330]

Those are there on the TOS studio model as well.

they're also on the DSC connie, but they don't glow, so I don't think they're windows, or if they are, the lights are off.

Learned something new
Pity the poor redshirts that get that for their sleeping quarters.

 

[TrickyDickie]

It would have been interesting if they had done a test-audience kind of thing with the TOS Enterprise in Discovery and then shown them a version with footage of the Discoprise, for comparison, and gauged reaction, before just going ahead one way or another. But, they didn't.

As far as the Phase II design, I could have accepted that and figured that there were elements that they were trying to work the bugs out of that didn't go too well, so they went with the TOS design after and then went back to those elements later for the TMP refit when they finally had the problems eliminated.

I think Discovery lighting / coloring would have made the TOS design look better than bright white.

I don't feel that the design is 'dated', that's my opinion, and that's where I'm going to leave it.

As an 'alternative' does the Discoprise look horrible? No. But various aspects / elements could have been done better. My biggest focus right now is the saucer, which looks too flat.

 

[Belz...]

As far as the Phase II design, I could have accepted that and figured that there were elements that they were trying to work the bugs out of that didn't go too well, so they went with the TOS design after and then went back to those elements later for the TMP refit when they finally had the problems eliminated.

I don't know why there _must_ be an in-universe explanation for cosmetic and retroactive changes. :/

 

[Tuskin38]

I can't find any rear weapon placements on the DSC Connie, at least on Adversaries' model.

So either, there aren't any, or the they're just missing.

 

[TrickyDickie]

I don't know why there _must_ be an in-universe explanation for cosmetic and retroactive changes. :/

Personally, I don't feel that it's a "must" thing....just a "could-be" thing had anyone wanted to do it that way.

Just like I am not....offended or the like that they didn't use the TOS Enterprise in Discovery.

I simply feel that it would have worked just fine. Because I don't feel it's 'dated'. That's my opinion. Others disagree. Fine by me. I just reject the idea that it is somehow being obtuse or whatever to have that opinion.

Hope that clarifies.

 

[Tuskin38]

New shot of an Enterprise corridor.

Well, I assume it is, it matches the shots from the Production teaser.

 

[Nerys Myk]

New shot of an Enterprise corridor.

Well, I assume it is, it matches the shots from the Production teaser.

Too much color!!!!! Ships don't have that color until TOS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[Tuskin38]

I want Pike to complain about it.

Oh, and the image came from here

http://ew.com/movies/comic-con-2018-first-look-photos/#star-trek-discovery