Agreed on that point of design in particular!
USS Enterprise (eventually) on Discovery?
- Thread starter EJD1984
- Start date
Which is what I considered especially fitting - after all, the TOS Enterprise was built sometime between the NX-01 and the TOS Enterprise!
The brief flip-flop from "The Cage" visuals notwithstanding, we now have a ship built using the ancient art of the 22nd century and then at some point refitted to TOS specs - but not to the even more modern specs that call for boxy nacelles with triple ramscoops. And that is the "looks like this comes from the wrong time period" problem here. A refit from ENT-style cylinder nacelles to TOS-style cylinder nacelles at some point before boxes become fashionable is fine. These cylinders lingering on the NCC-1701 and a number of auxiliary vessels in TAS still, while the bulk of the fleet is already transitioning from boxes to the art deco slimline nacelles of TMP, is also perfectly fine. But why would Starfleet bother to do a major refit from DSC to TOS/TAS style at a time when the TOS/TAS style already is sooo early 23rd century?
Then again, it's not that big a hop from DSC to TOS/TAS. A bit of fresh paint (for stealth?) over the "bare metal" hull already does wonders. Perhaps the nacelles never really changed, except for a few aesthetic touches around the ramscoops and yet another set of pylons and aft shrouds? (The only problem I have with the TOS engines being ancient is that this makes Larry Marvick a true Wunderkind for having helped design "the controls". But perhaps he just designed modern controls that allow outdated engines to keep on serving? Or "controls", overall, Marvick thus being responsible for the move away from blue-glowing graphics and holograms?)
Timo Saloniemi
The brief flip-flop from "The Cage" visuals notwithstanding, we now have a ship built using the ancient art of the 22nd century and then at some point refitted to TOS specs - but not to the even more modern specs that call for boxy nacelles with triple ramscoops. And that is the "looks like this comes from the wrong time period" problem here. A refit from ENT-style cylinder nacelles to TOS-style cylinder nacelles at some point before boxes become fashionable is fine. These cylinders lingering on the NCC-1701 and a number of auxiliary vessels in TAS still, while the bulk of the fleet is already transitioning from boxes to the art deco slimline nacelles of TMP, is also perfectly fine. But why would Starfleet bother to do a major refit from DSC to TOS/TAS style at a time when the TOS/TAS style already is sooo early 23rd century?
Then again, it's not that big a hop from DSC to TOS/TAS. A bit of fresh paint (for stealth?) over the "bare metal" hull already does wonders. Perhaps the nacelles never really changed, except for a few aesthetic touches around the ramscoops and yet another set of pylons and aft shrouds? (The only problem I have with the TOS engines being ancient is that this makes Larry Marvick a true Wunderkind for having helped design "the controls". But perhaps he just designed modern controls that allow outdated engines to keep on serving? Or "controls", overall, Marvick thus being responsible for the move away from blue-glowing graphics and holograms?)
Timo Saloniemi
Huh?
..When do you think she was built?
Clearly NCC-1701 has seen the universe, despite Admiral Morrow's "She's barely out of her teens, Jim, so think twice about those possessive outbursts of yours!" speech. She was utterly rebuilt at least once. That her TOS appearance would not also represent a rebuilt status is becoming more and more difficult to argue for.
Timo Saloniemi
Clearly NCC-1701 has seen the universe, despite Admiral Morrow's "She's barely out of her teens, Jim, so think twice about those possessive outbursts of yours!" speech. She was utterly rebuilt at least once. That her TOS appearance would not also represent a rebuilt status is becoming more and more difficult to argue for.
Timo Saloniemi
Pretty much put in cannon that She was built in 2245, and was captained by Captain April from 45-50, then Pike took over in 50 till "Present" in Disco.
Now a ship would un doubtably go for a refit between the 5 year missions.. so you have the Initial rollout in 45, a refit in 50 when it came back, then in 55-56 during Pike's disco captaincy and 3 months after the Enterprise was in Reft. and in 60 probably another refit, and then in 65 before Kirk was another refit. So in all unless alot of damage, you had 4 complete refits of the ship before the "Refit" to Tmp version.
So you have another 2 refits to go before Kirk, so plenty of time for the ship to "More Align" with the Tos version
Now a ship would un doubtably go for a refit between the 5 year missions.. so you have the Initial rollout in 45, a refit in 50 when it came back, then in 55-56 during Pike's disco captaincy and 3 months after the Enterprise was in Reft. and in 60 probably another refit, and then in 65 before Kirk was another refit. So in all unless alot of damage, you had 4 complete refits of the ship before the "Refit" to Tmp version.
So you have another 2 refits to go before Kirk, so plenty of time for the ship to "More Align" with the Tos version
I was able to render an animation of Marc Bell's Enterprise over the weekend.
They have to do that anyway. Nothing sits still in space, ever.
Nicely done. The ship is fine on its own, but I miss the taller, more elegant look of the 60's version.
That's some movie quality shit right there ... Nicely Done!
Acceleration is different from velocity.
Everything in space is moving to some degree at a different velocities and vectors from everything else. It's why docking is hard. Apart from the vehicle accelerating faster than the shuttlepod could reach. I may have misunderstood. Sorry.
Quite so, and it's finally set in stone after decades of speculation between the "Okuda" and "original" takes of the ship's age. But we also have a ship of the same shape with a registry some 700 units lower - so what is the design age of the class? We already have plenty of examples of ships being built to the same specs at different times, with Mirandas coming out of the slipways in their "original" 2280s shape but with higher registries (and sometimes names recycled from 2280s ships). Is this what happened to the Constitutions as well, with NCC-1701 a late example?
If anything, it's a wonder there wasn't more refitting going on, so that Starfleet would have standardized on one look - at least on those all-important nacelles.
Timo Saloniemi
Very nicely done, as usual.
About the model itself, what's through the windows? There's a lot of red and blue stuff.
I’m pretty sure you knew what I meant, but I’ll be more specific: the DSC Enterprise looks like a ship that was built over 50 years after ENT but at least 20 years before DSC and 10 years before TOS. And no, I’m not referring to whatever canon or non-canon construction dates that are known. I’m referring to the design aesthetic of the ship in relation to both the NX-01 and the TOS Enterprise.
Marc just took screen shots of the Enterprise interior from the DSC episodes and mapped them behind the windows to create a sense of rooms in there.
That video is being featured in the Facebook Star Trek Group "Star Trek Universe."
Yup, we're on the exact same page, then: Kirk's ship was built long before Kirk got her, and her design should reflect that fact, until <whatever> happens to change the design to that seen in TOS. A design deriving from the 2230s at the very latest is a good fit, with the 1700 series vessels the very tail end of the production run that explicitly features ships from the 1000 series and, if you put TOS-R before TOS proper, also from the 1600 range. A design from the 2220s would be nicer still, because that was the fan and backstage assumption before the Okudas got to it and gave this (nowadays canonical) 2245 launch date.
Although did you mean "30 years before TOS" above, or are you implying a contradiction of some sort?
In terms of fictional lineages, the Abramsverse ships that still have cylinder nacelles all have registries higher than that of the Constellation, and might represent what came after the NX-01 style of nacelles but before the DSC boxes. And it would be fun to believe in Starfleet periodically ripping out nacelles from 90% of its ships and installing more modern ones, to give justification to the concept of using standoff nacelles in the first place!
Timo Saloniemi
Drydock - and it’s named on the model - came years before Space Dock. Which is a very generic name also.
Similar threads
