"Enterprise" too advanced for 22nd Century

[johnar]

I don't intend to bring 'real world' debate into a forum about science FICTION...

But even time itself has most peculiar properties. We assume it proceeds everywhere the same. It does not.
Even Stargate SG-1 points this out in the episode where a team gated to a world being devoured by a black hole.
Time in its most basic definition is "progression."

Never mind the God particle, Time is what keeps the trains running on schedule (so to speak).

 

[johnar]

By the time of TOS, nobody gave much though to Cochrane except as a historical figure. Do we really sit down and discuss the tales of the Wright brothers every time we board a 747?

I would say that the casual way Kirk comes to the conclusion that they are in a time warp in Naked Time suggests that time warps are always a possibly with warp engines, even if they are rare these days.
Perhaps in the early days of human FTL exploration many vessels were hurled back in time due to improperly balanced warp engines? If they went on to colonise planets in the distant past, it would certainly help to explain all the exactly human-like aliens that the TOS-E used to encounter.

Good point.

Space without time is universal concrete. Nothing moves. Nothing can occupy the same space at the same time... so space and time cannot be understood independently (except as parts of the other). Space-time. To proceed even at the speed of a walk is to travel through time. In photography, the light traveling from the background to the lens is past while the foreground light is more recent. The variation is far too small for us to perceive it. It all seems constant contemporaneous.

Trip in ENT referred to the warp reactor as a semi-time machine (or something fairly similar).

Going from fiction to non-fiction for a second.

Actual space travel may involve time variations so great that it will be only a one way trip (leaving behind everything we ever knew here on Earth for ever).

 

[Kor]

Why? Zefram Cochrane was never even mentioned in TOS outside of "Metamorphosis," except for a throwaway reference to the "Cochrane deceleration maneuver" in "Whom Gods Destroy." TNG and DS9 contain exactly zero references to Cochrane as a person, only to the occasional thing named after him (e.g. shuttles, measurement units, and institutions). He was referenced only four times in Voyager, one of which did, in fact, reference the time travel from FC.

Here's the dialogue exchange about it from ENT: "Regeneration":



Even Archer, who had known Cochrane personally, had trouble tracking down this mostly-forgotten anecdote. It was barely mentioned in the history books because it was dismissed as a drunken fantasy and was retracted by Cochrane himself. Given the hagiographic approach later history took to the man, they surely glossed over his drinking and his eccentricities, so most people learning about Cochrane in school would never have heard this story.

Interesting, given today's tendency to dig up as much unflattering dirt as possible on anything and anybody well known. Humanity really does change in the future.

Kor

 

[Christopher]

Interesting, given today's tendency to dig up as much unflattering dirt as possible on anything and anybody well known. Humanity really does change in the future.

On the other hand, there are probably still more Americans today who believe the myth about Christopher Columbus "proving the Earth was round" than there are who know about the atrocities he inflicted on Native Americans. Cultures need mythic founder figures, so they glorify and elevate the people they consider responsible for their beginnings.

 

[Mr. Laser Beam]

Interesting, given today's tendency to dig up as much unflattering dirt as possible on anything and anybody well known. Humanity really does change in the future.

Cochrane would be absolutely roasted alive on social media. Hell, maybe that's why he drank like a fish.

 

[Prax]

Well, someone like Cochrane would be more than famous. If it were all real, he'd trump all other famous discoverers. Im sure there are many, many other famous people who have nice clean reputations and legacies that were in fact some of the most despicable people imaginable. I can think of a few from the 20th Century.(I, of course will not name them) Cochrane was a pretty swell guy, I thought.

Hopefully, WW3 destroyed or at least reset the whole mega media, news media, advertising, PR monster that lives today.
Maybe it purged all the cultural clutter, like media oversaturation, leaving the following generation in a more naive, more culturally innocent state.

 

[BobR]

In the case of the main Trek universe an awful lot is supposed to have occurred socially between now and mid-21st Century. That could easily have played out as technological progress changes from that point onward as well.

I suppose I am saying that Enterprise didn't leave me uncomfortable at all. I could see a big Human Reset coming in the next decade or two the way we are going right now.

 

[Saul]

Cochrane saw the Enterprise E through a telescope and in space before the first jump to warp speed (with two future passengers).
.

Yep, that's why I thought we got a more standard saucer design starship earlier than we were supposed to in Trek and the ship was named 'Enterprise' instead of Dauntless.

EAS: Yelling at clouds since 2001.

Voicing the opinions of fans who felt Trek had lost it's way since 2001.

He also hate-watches things because of the website.

He hate watches nothing. He gave balanced and fair reviews.

Hes going to sit through Discovery only because he needs to for the website, even though hes been very vocal about his extreme dislike of what hes seen so far

Also wrong, he has even said that he has less time to do updates and adding updates is going to be very demanding on what spare time he has.

The amount of Star Trek info on his site is nothing short of trojan and the fan community would be poorer without it. Give the guy a break

 

[KirkusOveractus]

I'm sorry, I kind of glossed over a paragraph or two into that EAS page about NX-01 and Akira. Frankly, I get annoyed now at the millionth mention of the ship being called Akiraprise. Go out and find someone, a TV watcher who saw Enterprise, and ask them what the ship looked like to them. I'll bet almost all of them will say it looks something like the "old Star Trek ship".

 

[Christopher]

I'm sorry, I kind of glossed over a paragraph or two into that EAS page about NX-01 and Akira. Frankly, I get annoyed now at the millionth mention of the ship being called Akiraprise. Go out and find someone, a TV watcher who saw Enterprise, and ask them what the ship looked like to them. I'll bet almost all of them will say it looks something like the "old Star Trek ship".

Well, it is true that the producers specifically requested that its design be based on the Akira, for some reason. But on the other hand, the Akira class only appeared in one movie and 14 episodes, and never as a featured ship, just one part of a fleet or even just as a display on a screen. NX-01 was the featured ship in 98 episodes, so it is naturally much better known to the general public. So I'd say you're right -- it's transcended its origins by this point.

 

[KirkusOveractus]

Well, it is true that the producers specifically requested that its design be based on the Akira, for some reason. But on the other hand, the Akira class only appeared in one movie and 14 episodes, and never as a featured ship, just one part of a fleet or even just as a display on a screen. NX-01 was the featured ship in 98 episodes, so it is naturally much better known to the general public. So I'd say you're right -- it's transcended its origins by this point.

Thank you! And I apologize for the long post, but my point was what you summarized. The series had a ship of a certain design and she was named Enterprise. There wasn't a scene where Archer, Forrest and Tucker were looking at the plans and said, "Gee, why don't we take the Akira and flip it over!"

No, in-universe, it's the Enterprise from the start.

 

[Tuskin38]

According to the little booklet that came with the NX-Refit Eaglemoss model, the first Exec approved version of the NX-01 had a secondary hull and looked closer to a Connie, but then they changed their minds when they decided it shouldn't look that close to the Connie.

It also says the Akira idea came from a VFX producer.

 

[Captain Nebula]

I think the uniforms were very fitting.

Some of them looked like they fit very well.

 

[Saul]

I'm sorry, I kind of glossed over a paragraph or two into that EAS page about NX-01 and Akira. Frankly, I get annoyed now at the millionth mention of the ship being called Akiraprise. Go out and find someone, a TV watcher who saw Enterprise, and ask them what the ship looked like to them. I'll bet almost all of them will say it looks something like the "old Star Trek ship".

I'd agree with that. I think for the non casual fan it was a bit less so since they had chosen a fan favorite design. What was more surprising though was the fact that they were going to use the Akira model with zero changes. That would have really annoyed people.

 

[fireproof78]

I'm sorry, I kind of glossed over a paragraph or two into that EAS page about NX-01 and Akira. Frankly, I get annoyed now at the millionth mention of the ship being called Akiraprise. Go out and find someone, a TV watcher who saw Enterprise, and ask them what the ship looked like to them. I'll bet almost all of them will say it looks something like the "old Star Trek ship".

Username checks out

I also agree but I thought it was funny.

 

[Gingerbread Demon]

I love the NX01 design. I think its beautiful.

 

[Christopher]

I love the NX01 design. I think its beautiful.

I like the details, but I've always found the overall shape a bit unbalanced -- in profile, it has nothing going on below the centerline to balance out the stuff above it.

 

[Gingerbread Demon]

I like the details, but I've always found the overall shape a bit unbalanced -- in profile, it has nothing going on below the centerline to balance out the stuff above it.

Ah that doesn't bother me so much. I like the design, but there were things we never got to see on the show unless I missed them. Didn't they have arms on the saucer for loading cargo or something?

 

[Tuskin38]

Doug Drexler at least imagined there were arms that came out of the rear of the saucer to help with maintenance.

 

[Prax]

I think the NX looks great. I love the flat profile, as it seems to help add a little realism in the way it moves. Sometimes when switching to cgi models in trek, they made the ships movement a little too fluid, like making them do barrel rolls. That might work for Poe Dameron, but not a big starship.

I also like the retro look of it, as if its riveted together. Whenever they make repairs, you see them get out the welding torches. I don't care for the "refit" and am glad it wasn't made for the show.

There's also the Youtube channel ECHenry, creator of some kind of fan film or animation called "Pacifica" and he modified the NX to look more "TOS." His design looks fine, and it's not like I have the skill to create 3d models like that, but imo it is far inferior to the one on the show. I don't see a need to make the NX look closer to a ship that's supposed to be from 100 years later.

Right?