Would you stop it? They criticize discovery all the time.
Spoilers Starship Design in Star Trek: Picard
- Thread starter pst
- Start date
Nope. No thanks. Demonstrate why or leave it out.
After just watching Picard.
I have to say I don't like all the steps to the command chair.
It's a trip hazard.
I have to say I don't like all the steps to the command chair.
It's a trip hazard.
Three steps means a decent elevation over the heads of the people at Conn and Ops. I’d be wondering more if the seats have belts or not, and what that means for all the people at the standing stations. We haven’t had a standing-sitting ratio this bad since the TMP Enterprise bridge.
Mark
Mark
I don't see what the big deal is with the Excelsior. Elnor is clearly still a cadet, and he's been assigned to the Excelsior -- looks like she's become a cadet training ship, same as the 1701 in TWOK. Seems appropriate for a ship that's about 115 years old. And she was clearly dispatched to the site of the Borg anomaly because, well, when it's the Borg you call in every ship you've got in the area as fast as you can. I don't see any plausibility issues.
Great to see STO ships in the fleet shots instead of that season 1 cut'n'paste Inquiry class bodge up. I'd imagine they'd never need tarting up beyond game resolution if all are fated to remain out-of-focus, background ships. I'm sure we'll be seeing better views of the Stargazer, but I'm really most intriqued with this new "Excelsior variant" we see beside the titular ship. It's almost certainly created for the show with detail appropriate for close in shots. Let's at least hope Eaglemoss steps up so we can get a better look at it.
V
Vale
Guest
We don't know what happened to NCC-2000, but we know from a graphic in TNG: "The Measure of a Man" that by the 2360s there's another USS Excelsior, NCC-21445, under the command of Captain Muriel Epstein. Presumably the Excelsior being mentioned in Picard is either this second Excelsior or some new third Excelsior.
where was it ever said the whole class was being retired. Or even the Enterprise for that matter, pre-battle anyways. Spock tells Valaris in TUC that he expects her to succeed him aboard the Enterprise as it’s his last mission as a crew member. Plus, the history of the 1701-A is murky. Was it a brand new ship being built that was given the name, or was it an existing ship that was rechristened. My guess is, had the ship not been beaten to hell she would have continued on with a mostly…or completely new crew.
I really like the idea of establishing a 23rd Century lineage for ships named Stargazer.
Jesus that ship is ugly.
This. Plus, there's a certain consistency: Both the 23rd Century-era shuttle seen in "The Star Gazer" and the 23rd Century-era ship seen in "Maps and Legends" were used to transport people from one point on Earth's surface to another. It seems quite plausible to me that a well-maintained century-old shuttle might only be used for intra-planetary transport.
I don't know why the PIC production team didn't just save money by depicting the admiral as beaming to Picard's house instead of spending the money rendering a shuttle landing.
I think the simplest explanation is just to assume that Seven was speaking inaccurately and that the Stargazer was one of the first couple of Sagan-class ships.
I mean, it's certainly possible that the NCC-21445 is of the same class as the NCC-2000 and that the one we saw in "The Star Gazer" was the 21445. However, I'm disinclined to accept barely-legible-on-high-def okudagrams from the era where onscreen displays weren't meant to be seen on standard def TVs as canonically binding. I'm more likely to consider onscreen displays that were designed to be clearly legible as binding, and we saw Elnor looking at a large display of an Excelsior-class starship prominently featuring the caption "NCC-2000" when he received his ship assignment. So I'm inclined to take this as retconning the 21445 out of continuity (if it was ever in continuity), and to interpret the Excelsior we saw in "The Star Gazer" as being Captain Sulu's ship.
V
Vale
Guest
The Enterprise required a major refit after the events of Star Trek II. It seems clear from Star Trek III that Starfleet wouldn't be decommissioning the Enterprise if it hadn't just had half its engineering hull destroyed by Khan, since the crew clearly expected it to be repaired. We also know that refit Constitution-class ships continue to be in service for at least another decade, including of course the Enterprise-A – we see reference to the Ahwahnee, Eagle, Emden, Endeavour, and Potemkin in Star Trek VI, all still fully operational in 2293, and capable enough to be included in a rescue mission in Klingon territory. Given that the Potemkin's registry of NCC-1657 is visible it's definitely the same ship as in TOS: "The Ultimate Computer", so it must be at least 25 years old, and possibly approaching 50.
Also – the in-universe justification is that we see Excelsiors and Mirandas in service up to and including the 2370s. Not just the occasional one-offs either, we see a LOT of them. I don't know why you're so intent on these logical contortions to deny the evidence of your own eyes. Clearly the ships last that long, because WE BLOODY SEE THEM LAST THAT LONG. The show clearly depicts that these ships can have extremely long service lives. We see a refit Constitution-class secondary hull in the Wolf 359 debris; that ship must have been at least 90 years old. Further, the production team were originally going to make Picard's Stargazer in TNG: "The Battle" a Constitution-class ship, so clearly they thought it perfectly reasonable that a Constitution-class might still be in service in the 2350s; and both the Constellation-class Stargazer and Hathaway are still functional in the 2360s even after years of neglect.
Also – Discovery's third season makes it quite clear that centuries old starships are not unknown. We see 23rd century ships in DIS: "Scavengers", clearly not in good condition but still functional; and Starfleet apparently considers a cover story for Discovery of it being really 900 years old with a generational crew to be plausible.
Why?
The evidence is clear, you just choose to deny it.
No, what is presented is after the fact rationalization. Which is fine for many. It isn't for me. The 23rd century ships look out of place, too old, with the Galaxy class. It strains my suspension of disbelief when watching episodes. It breaks the verisimilitude.
It's not rational. It's an emotional reaction and as much as I admire your write up none of it is supported on screen in dialog. In fact, the opposite is stated.
V
Vale
Guest
Bugger dialogue, we see the ships. With our eyes. On the screen. Doing things. Star Trek isn't a radio play.
When exactly is the opposite stated?
Well that's fair. But it doesn't bother me any. I kind of like the idea that the Excelsior is still out there, training future Starfleet officers.
The Republic mentioned in "Valiant(DS9)" was later all but confirmed by the producers to be the same starship Kirk and Ben Finney served aboard as Cadets around 2250. So there may well have been a starship at least 130 years old still in service as a cadet training vessel during the Dominion War.
Bugger those ships.
The Enterprise is 40 years old. We feel her day is over.
ETA: If someone gives me a line of dialog around ship hull life I'll be persuaded. Otherwise, it is just another painful reminder of the limits of 90s Trek.
Last edited:
V
Vale
Guest
So we're prioritising a demonstrably incorrect line concerning a single ship over the vast number of times we see multiple other ships doing the things you are adamant they can't do?
The dialogue is actually "The Enterprise is twenty years old. We feel her day is over," which is factually wrong. Both Kirk and Scott in particular seem to be taken aback by the idea that the Enterprise wouldn't be repaired. Kirk is clearly aware of the Excelsior's development given the little speech he makes about it while the Enterprise enters Spacedock but doesn't seem to think it means the Enterprise is for the axe. It seems to be a political decision more than an operational one.
Well, I am. I don't think you are and I'm sure others agree with you.
I don't. It's irrational but it is how I feel. But, I can accept it, just like Discovery era shuttles still being in use. Annoying but tolerable.
V
Vale
Guest
"The Cage" happens in 2254. The Enterprise's appearances in Discovery happen in 2258. How is this possible since the critical lynchpin of your entire argument is a single line of dialogue indicating that the Enterprise was apparently built in 2265?
