And anyway, "completely different nacelles"?
The only thing similar is the blue vents or whatever they are running along the side.
Spoilers The Ships of Lower Decks
- Thread starter Tuskin38
- Start date
The only thing similar is the blue vents or whatever they are running along the side.
They're as similar as you'll get in Star Trek without being identical.
My point, which you seem to have missed, was that not every new Federation ship needs a completely different nacelle design and a degree of consistency works well (Ambassador > Galaxy > Nebula and Constitution > Miranda > Constellation).
Have to figure that in this brave new world, that there are multiple companies that design and build starships. Each company giving them their own design trademarks.
I would expect so, yes. Monolithic design does not seem in line with the cosmopolitan and diverse Federation.
IIRC, Starfleet working with corporations on starship design and construction was brought up in Mr. Scott’s Guide to the Enterprise by Lora Johnson.
Another book I can't wait to be able to unpack. Good book.
and yet, most do.
At the end of the day, how are they supposed to sell us more toys if we don’t have a variety of designs?
During the TNG era, new starships seemed to have at least three different nacelle types: The Galaxy/Nebula/New Orleans/Challenger/Freedom/Niagara type nacelles, the Cheyenne/Springfield type of nacelles, and the Raven-type of nacelles (a VOY retcon). There's also the possibility that the four FC ships designed by Alex Jaeger were also contemporaries of the TNG era, which would then add four more distinct nacelle types into the mix. Add in the California class and whatever class the Vancouver is, and that brings the total to nine different and distinct nacelle types for the TNG era.
(I'm excluding ships like the Sovereign, Prometheus, Intrepid and Nova because they're from a later point in the 24th century.)
We also had four distinct nacelle types in the TOS/TMP era: The TOS Connie type, the TMP Connie/Miranda/Constellation/Sydney type, the Excelsior type, and the Grissom type (five if you want to count the Planet of the Titans study model that was in Spacedock in STIII.)
My point: One cannot reliably say that a certain nacelle type has to be the same for every ship designed in a particular era. That might have been the case once, but not anymore.
(I'm excluding ships like the Sovereign, Prometheus, Intrepid and Nova because they're from a later point in the 24th century.)
We also had four distinct nacelle types in the TOS/TMP era: The TOS Connie type, the TMP Connie/Miranda/Constellation/Sydney type, the Excelsior type, and the Grissom type (five if you want to count the Planet of the Titans study model that was in Spacedock in STIII.)
My point: One cannot reliably say that a certain nacelle type has to be the same for every ship designed in a particular era. That might have been the case once, but not anymore.
Never said it did.
Just that a degree of consistency amongst some classes on occasion can be a good thing. Every ship on Discovery has different nacelles, and so far the two ships on Lower Decks do as well. It's not a big deal, just a thought I had.
Good to see Boeing and Lockheed Martin are still at it.
Consistency on nacelles is an artifact of these things being made of plastic, of course. Now that they no longer are, certain drift towards more realistic practices is to be expected: things not made out of plastic ITRW don't exactly feature modular, identical nacelle-analogues, either.
Say, aircraft; even a given engine is basically never packed in the same nacelle on a type B plane as on a type A (whereas engines from different manufacturers go into the same nacelle whenever applied on type A).
But modularity in Trek was fun when it lasted. That is, in the 1980s.
Timo Saloniemi
Say, aircraft; even a given engine is basically never packed in the same nacelle on a type B plane as on a type A (whereas engines from different manufacturers go into the same nacelle whenever applied on type A).
But modularity in Trek was fun when it lasted. That is, in the 1980s.
Timo Saloniemi
And there is nothing wrong with that, unless you're saying it's wrong that TNG era did it.
Also that's not true a couple designs in DSC shared nacelles.
Like I said:
I know there's nothing wrong with classes having different nacelles. I know. I'm suggesting that on occasion maybe use the same ones, like the TOS and TNG (also on occasion) did.
Yeah, exactly. Small variations are what I am starting to prefer. Otherwise it feels like me just utilizing Paint to take starship bits and reconfiguring them.
But this is a small variation. It's the same thing as the Cerritos, only with a sloped front instead of round and slightly shorter.
I've just watched the "Meet Rutherford" video over at StarTrek.com and noticed that the object of my affection (
) appears to be skydiving from a Vulcan Warpshuttle! It's only because I thought he was dressed as Father Christmas/Santa Claus that I looked closely and noticed it (although, I think it's just a Vulcan robe, on second glance) 
I don't know if this from an already aired episode or an upcoming one (I'm in the UK, so haven't seen LDS yet)?
) appears to be skydiving from a Vulcan Warpshuttle! It's only because I thought he was dressed as Father Christmas/Santa Claus that I looked closely and noticed it (although, I think it's just a Vulcan robe, on second glance) I don't know if this from an already aired episode or an upcoming one (I'm in the UK, so haven't seen LDS yet)?
Not there through four episodes.
Similar threads
