Spoilers 31st/32nd Century Ships Revealed

[Tuskin38]

Huh so STO's model for Book's ship isn't scaled up.
If you watch the first episode where the ship lands in Discovery's bay, it folds up to fit inside.

However, in the last couple episodes of the season, they just shrunk the CG model instead of folding her up for those shuttlebay shots.

 

[F. King Daniel]

Huh so STO's model for Book's ship isn't scaled up.
If you watch the first episode where the ship lands in Discovery's bay, it folds up to fit inside.

However, in the last couple episodes of the season, they just shrunk the CG model instead of folding her up for those shuttlebay shots.

Clearly referencing Voyager, here.

 

[Timo]

Huh so STO's model for Book's ship isn't scaled up.
If you watch the first episode where the ship lands in Discovery's bay, it folds up to fit inside.

However, in the last couple episodes of the season, they just shrunk the CG model instead of folding her up for those shuttlebay shots.

Hmh? In order to dive in, the ship clearly folds, to 1/3 of her usual width, in "There Is a Tide...". The ship then remains compact, largely by virtue of remaining in (now twisted) pieces.

It appears to be a slightly different type of folding that first allows the ship in, in "People of Earth". In "Scavengers", we cut before we get the folding-and-entering scene. And in "The Sanctuary", movement in and out of the bay is merely implicit and not shown at all.

No shrinking going on that I can see.

EDIT: Okay, now I found it: the final zoom-out of "Unification III". Elsewhere, she's neatly folded up. And for all we know, the "Unification III" scale has always been the correct one, and "People of Earth" is in error; the only contradictory shot would come from the introduction of the vessel in "That Hope Is You Pt I", and she doesn't appear much larger there.

Timo Saloniemi

 

[Tuskin38]

STO's Crossfield Refit model

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

 

[Markonian]

STO's Crossfield Refit model

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

That confirms that the Crossfield-class refit is not receiving a dedicated subclass name. Unlike the 25th century Glenn class, and the Janeway-subclass of the Intrepid class. Perhaps a thousand years later, they'll call it the Saru- or Burnham-class?

 

[Tuskin38]

The Janeway isn't a subclass, the STO devs didn't call it an Intrepid Class because they didn't want to confuse it with the existing Intrepid Class already in the game.

It was a practical choice, not a lore choice. Maybe in the STO's 32nd Century Timeline it was just called Janeway instead of Intrepid if you want a head canon for it.

Considering this one is still referred to as a Crossfield Refit, I imagine it won't be a complete separate ship from the existing Crossfield variants in the game.

 

[Markonian]

The Janeway isn't a subclass, the STO devs didn't call it an Intrepid Class because they didn't want to confuse it with the existing Intrepid Class already in the game.

It was a practical choice, not a lore choice. Maybe in the STO's 32nd Century Timeline it was just called Janeway instead of Intrepid if you want a head canon for it.

Considering this one is still referred to as a Crossfield Refit, I imagine it won't be a complete separate ship from the existing Crossfield variants in the game.

"Subclass" is a term used by Memory Beta. The Enterprise-subclass is officially also just the Enterprise-class. Ships of that configuration can easily be called Constitution class. Presumably it's the same with the Janeway-class variant of the Intrepid-class.
Another example is how the mid-2150s Columbia-class is also NX class.

 

[Tuskin38]

Presumably it's the same with the Janeway-class variant of the Intrepid-class.

It's not a variant though. It's the 32nd Century Intrepid, as I said Cryptic only changed the name.

Memory-Beta is just making shit up lol

 

[Markonian]

It's not a variant though. It's the 32nd Century Intrepid, as I said Cryptic only changed the name.

You could say the same about the 2270s Enterprise class in relation to the Connie.

 

[Tuskin38]

You could say the same about the 2270s Enterprise class in relation to the Connie.

...no? The 32nd Century intrepid isn't a refit of the 24th Century intrepid.

 

[Markonian]

...no? The 32nd Century intrepid isn't a refit of the 24th Century intrepid.

Ah! Sorry, I failed to make the connection. Given the centuries distance between the 2370s-era Intrepid class and the ships active from 3064 to 3189, we cannot presume that the Janeway class is the result of centuries of continuous refitting.

 

[F. King Daniel]

...no? The 32nd Century intrepid isn't a refit of the 24th Century intrepid.

There is a chance it is 10 generations of refits later. They have magical future tech, they add suffixes with refits too now. It's possible Voyager-J is in some way the same vessel Janeway commanded (albeit likely in a Ship of Thesius-kind of way)

 

[Tuskin38]

There is a chance it is 10 generations of refits later.

I doubt it.

they add suffixes with refits too now

We don't know when they started doing that.

 

[F. King Daniel]

I doubt it.

Why not? It sounds ridiculous but there's nothing to stop it being true. Just look at the USS Discovery NCC-1031-A.

We don't know when they started doing that.

Some time between Picard and Discovery season 3

 

[Mr. Laser Beam]

Why not? It sounds ridiculous but there's nothing to stop it being true. Just look at the USS Discovery NCC-1031-A.

Other ships have been refitted as much, or more so, than Discovery was, and their numbers didn't change.

No, I'm sticking with the story that they changed the registry number so Starfleet could claim, to the general public, that it's a different ship (because time travel is illegal).

 

[Markonian]

Other ships have been refitted as much, or more so, than Discovery was, and their numbers didn't change.

No, I'm sticking with the story that they changed the registry number so Starfleet could claim, to the general public, that it's a different ship (because time travel is illegal).

Agreed. The non-canon DSC novel Wonderlands includes plenty of references where Burnham has to make up stories so the truth about her time-displacement is not revealed to the wrong people.

Registry-suffxing aside, the Janeway-class may either be a brand-new type deliberately made retro, like the VW Kaefer and the New Beetle. Or the Intrepid class kept being upgraded over centuries - which doesn't require 2370s-era ships to survive all the way to the 3060s. In STO, new ships are launched in the 25th century that progress the old Constitution-class design, without needing an uninterrupted lineage.

 

[Agony_Boothb]

Maybe the intrepid design is like the McRib of starfleet getting a re-release every few decades.

 

[Dukhat]

Other ships have been refitted as much, or more so, than Discovery was, and their numbers didn't change.

The only canon ship known to have changed its entire shape after a refit was the TOS Enterprise. And that was the mid-23rd century, not the 32nd. We have no idea if Starfleet changed its policy with suffixes over a 900 year time period. But the fact that Discovery was given a suffix even though it’s the same ship, and dialogue indicating that the Tikhov-M was the same ship as the original 23rd century Tikhov, indicates that the policy changed.

 

[Tuskin38]

Some more images

 

[Markonian]

I am soooo gonna get this ship!

Curiously, the nacelles appear attached in all images. If that's the ship's default, it means GamePrint can theoretically print that model (unlike the Janeway class).

For comparison, this is STO's existing interpretation of the Crossfield-class, its 25th century refit (Glenn-class), and the ISS Crossfield prototype variant: https://www.arcgames.com/en/games/star-trek-online/news/detail/11364713