Spoilers Starship Design in Star Trek: Picard

[Paul Weaver]

How much of the appreciation of a ship comes from an intuitive idea of how ships would be formed to cope with gravity, and cope with engines providing thrust.

The nacelles don’t seem to apply any actual thrust, and the impulse engines have SIF to help. The ships aren’t supposed to operate outside of freefall.

That said the original E looks ugly as anything compared with the superior D

 

[Timo]

I respectfully disagree.

No prob. But the flying saucer and cigars combo is not based on classic principles of balance and proportion as such, and outside those principles, any combination might be considered aesthetically more pleasing than another. I'm partial towards the TMP ship, but it's still far from being the ideal Pegasos or Bird or Angel or whatever. Although having the Golden Ratio here or the Area Rule there probably wouldn't actually help.

Timo Saloniemi

 

[Tomalak]

The whole point of the TOS Enterprise was that it was supposed to look impossible and bizarre, with no source of power or propulsion that could be discernable to primitive 1960s viewers.

That was continued with the Enterprise-D, which some still complain is "top heavy" (in space!) and has nacelles which are too small.

I quite liked the way the 2009 Enterprise evoked that sense of weird impossibility, with those giant nacelles on top of teeny pylons.

 

[fireproof78]

The result is amateurish, and is likely another byproduct of JJ & co. simply not giving a damn about the details.

Why is the assumption always apathy about the production team? This is a starship design not rocket science (yes, I'm aware of the statement). What looks good to one person isn't going to automatically look good to the next.

For instance, and I'm well established on this topic, the ENT-D is among the more ugly starship designs for hero ship out there. I think the big wide saucer looks very odd in comparison to the rest of the ship. As a design it doesn't appeal to me. If I were to design a starship I would pretty much ignore almost all the TNG going forward designs. They don't appeal.

I personally like the Kelvin Enterprise, largely because it looks very imposing and powerful. It has the general profile of the TOS Enterprise while still being its own thing.

As with all things, this is a mileage will vary type of situation. But, I highly doubt its because JJ & co. "don't give a damn."

 

[Racefuel]

Why is the assumption always apathy about the production team? This is a starship design not rocket science (yes, I'm aware of the statement). What looks good to one person isn't going to automatically look good to the next.

For instance, and I'm well established on this topic, the ENT-D is among the more ugly starship designs for hero ship out there. I think the big wide saucer looks very odd in comparison to the rest of the ship. As a design it doesn't appeal to me. If I were to design a starship I would pretty much ignore almost all the TNG going forward designs. They don't appeal.

I personally like the Kelvin Enterprise, largely because it looks very imposing and powerful. It has the general profile of the TOS Enterprise while still being its own thing.

As with all things, this is a mileage will vary type of situation. But, I highly doubt its because JJ & co. "don't give a damn."

The only time I think the Kelvin Enterprise genuinely looked bad was the odd refit it got for Beyond..it was a real looker in St09 and ID

 

[BillJ]

Worth noting: Horatio Hornblower's first Ship of the Line, HMS Sutherland, was described as "the ugliest and least desirable two-decker in the Navy List," and even that was a big step up from the ships he'd commanded previously. Like Kirk, Hornblower greatly overcame the shortcomings of the ships he was given.

That isn't how the Enterprise or Constitution-class is presented in either TOS or Discovery. In "Brother, I thought they were going to have to get out a drool bucket for the crew when the ship was identified.

 

[cooleddie74]

Yeah, the Connies aren't ugly, lower-tech throwbacks to an earlier generation. That theory is just ridiculous.

 

[fireproof78]

That isn't how the Enterprise or Constitution-class is presented in either TOS or Discovery. In "Brother, I thought they were going to have to get out a drool bucket for the crew when the ship was identified.

Kirk would go on to inherit that same bucket so he could drool when describing it to Captain Christopher.

 

[BillJ]

Kirk would go on to inherit that same bucket so he could drool when describing it to Captain Christopher.

Then passed the bucket to R.M. Merik in "Bread and Circuses".

MERIK: He commands not just a spaceship, Proconsul, but a starship. A very special vessel and crew. I tried for such a command.

 

[Jesse1066]

That isn't how the Enterprise or Constitution-class is presented in either TOS or Discovery. In "Brother, I thought they were going to have to get out a drool bucket for the crew when the ship was identified.

I don't think it's ugly or considerably lower tech in 2257, but I do think its age could be why it looks different from the other ships we see in DSC, and by 2285 the ship is well past its prime. Mostly though I just felt like talking about Hornblower.

 

[Timo]

"Ugly" is subjective, but "lower tech" is fairly in-your-face whether you compare the DSC Enterprise to the other DSC interiors, or the TOS ship to the DSC ones.

Or is that higher tech? It's the look of the future, after all, with push-buttons but no holograms in all the 2280s starships we get to see. Either way, NCC-1701 is different. And we can't seriously claim it's the only way to put together a starship now. So it's either cutting edge or past news, and basically everything in the stories speaks for the latter, giving the ship history.

Also, serial and indeed habitual refitting would seem more apt for a ship that is breaking apart at the seams than for something that just floated out of the construction dock. Unless we think NCC-1701 was something of a Monday specimen, built all wrong to begin with.

In any case, dialogue painting Kirk's ship as the most modern thing out there is completely missing. Dialogue painting her as superior to her colleagues is also absent, although back in the 1960s we could still argue whether this was because there were no other types of starship in existence at all, or because this particular type did not outshine the bountiful competition enough to warrant mention. Nowadays we must accept the latter.

That a starship trumps other types of ship isn't a vote in favor of the Constitution class specifically, and hasn't been since Kirk declared the old Archon "starship", too.

But yes, more Hornblower is good. Although I do have a soft spot for WWI era ships fighting on in the 1940s. I mean, most of the heavyweights were of that sort anyway.

Timo Saloniemi

 

[Jesse1066]

"Ugly" is subjective, but "lower tech" is fairly in-your-face whether you compare the DSC Enterprise to the other DSC interiors, or the TOS ship to the DSC ones.

Or is that higher tech? It's the look of the future, after all, with push-buttons but no holograms in all the 2280s starships we get to see. Either way, NCC-1701 is different. And we can't seriously claim it's the only way to put together a starship now. So it's either cutting edge or past news, and basically everything in the stories speaks for the latter, giving the ship history.

Also, serial and indeed habitual refitting would seem more apt for a ship that is breaking apart at the seams than for something that just floated out of the construction dock. Unless we think NCC-1701 was something of a Monday specimen, built all wrong to begin with.

In any case, dialogue painting Kirk's ship as the most modern thing out there is completely missing. Dialogue painting her as superior to her colleagues is also absent, although back in the 1960s we could still argue whether this was because there were no other types of starship in existence at all, or because this particular type did not outshine the bountiful competition enough to warrant mention. Nowadays we must accept the latter.

That a starship trumps other types of ship isn't a vote in favor of the Constitution class specifically, and hasn't been since Kirk declared the old Archon "starship", too.

But yes, more Hornblower is good. Although I do have a soft spot for WWI era ships fighting on in the 1940s. I mean, most of the heavyweights were of that sort anyway.

Timo Saloniemi

I think it takes nothing away from TOS to say that the Enterprise isn't the biggest, strongest, fastest, or newest ship in the fleet. Indeed, I think if we suppose the Enterprise is about average, it elevates the accomplishments of Kirk and his crew.

 

[Timo]

This is very much my angle on the show. Picard's team is the cream of the cream, in the modern Flagship, handpicked to showcase the diversity and superiority of the Federation. Kirk is a working stiff, a space bluecollar whose reputation as a warrior extends to the Klingon Empire but who otherwise doesn't yet rank up with the likes of Tracey or Decker or Pike. His hardware ought to be allowed to reflect that, too.

Except that Tracey, Decker and Pike also seem to be riding the same hardware, and may well have gained their reputation aboard said, too. And DSC is very clear on this hardware being special. Not modern, not fast, not strong, not salubrious or ostentatious or orange-green, but merely special. Special enough to make heroes. Although whether due to the mission profile inherent in the vessels (say, deep space surveys or frontline scouting or whatever, possibly roles suited for smallish ships), or due to the danger inherent in stoking the strained old boilers, we are not told even in DSC.

...And, hopefully, not in PIC, either. Let this ship rest in pieces at long last!

Timo Saloniemi

 

[Longinus]

No prob. But the flying saucer and cigars combo is not based on classic principles of balance and proportion as such, and outside those principles, any combination might be considered aesthetically more pleasing than another. I'm partial towards the TMP ship, but it's still far from being the ideal Pegasos or Bird or Angel or whatever. Although having the Golden Ratio here or the Area Rule there probably wouldn't actually help.

Timo Saloniemi

https://www.goldennumber.net/uss-enterprise-golden-ratio-design/

 

[cooleddie74]

It’s the same ‘kewl’ factor that gave us turbolift roller coaster rides in the Discovery and the Enterprise. Which makes little sense either.

That turbolift roller coaster is an insult to the intelligence of every Star Trek fan.

 

[Timo]

Oh, I like the idea of the Discovery being an old high-volume ship whose interiors have been perverted into this flying laboratory with 300 parallel experiments including weird mushroom trips but no doubt also other stuff that doesn't conform to a neat rectangular grid of facilities. Plenty of sections in that ship that could be essentially empty, such as the fat neck that's curiously devoid of portholes.

Just add a smidgen of artistic license to accommodate the actually presented scale. (And perhaps say that the ride in "Q&A" was inside the starbase rather than the ship proper, if it comes to that.)

Oh, and that's not how the golden ratio works. Drawing random lines to connect random dots on an essentially random image doesn't indicate any sort of connection to the concept of the 1:1.618 ratio - you can do those lines on all the DSC ships, too. Or on the Starfleet Delta, all versions of it. There is no golden taper to the secondary hull or the relationship of the saucer and said hull, just disingenuously selective numerology.

Timo Saloniemi

 

[fireproof78]

That turbolift roller coaster is an insult to the intelligence of every Star Trek fan.

Some things are best ignored.

Like how many decks the Enterprise A has

 

[cooleddie74]

Yeah, the roller coaster has almost no visible support in the Trek community. One of the aesthetic choices of DSC that practically everyone can agree on.

 

[Jesse1066]

Some things are best ignored.

Like how many decks the Enterprise A has

Or the Enterprise E, for that matter.

 

[fireproof78]

Or the Enterprise E, for that matter.

Yeah. How many ships have bottomless pits on the lowest deck?