Nacelle design hypothesis

[Crazy Eddie]

I'm not entirely sure Eaves actually knows how to draw a cylinder. I need proof.

Now that you mention it...

 

[The Mighty Monkey of Mim]

"Explicit?" That implies someone actually said anything even remotely like this during TOS. That never actually happens though. The closest thing we get is Kirk saying "There are only twelve like her in the fleet." That doesn't tell us they're "very special vessels" at all, just that they're twelve that are similar to the Enterprise in some way.

Along with the TOS Enterprise being the flagship, being the LARGEST Starfleet ship, being the most advanced or most powerful Starfleet ship, or Spock being the first/only/most famous vulcan in Starfleet, these are things fans have assumed forever but were never actually mentioned in the series.

"Bread and Circuses" (TOS):

MERIK: He commands not just a spaceship, Proconsul, but a Starship. A very special vessel and crew.

Yes, the exact definition of "starship" was left a little vague and got muddled and retconned as things went along. But the original intent, a couple of notable inconsistencies aside, was that it referred specifically to the Enterprise's design.

-MMoM

 

[Crazy Eddie]

"Bread and Circuses" (TOS):
MERIK: He commands not just a spaceship, Proconsul, but a Starship. A very special vessel and crew.

Yes, the exact definition of "starship" was left a little vague and got muddled and retconned as things went along. But the original intent, a couple of notable inconsistencies aside, was that it referred specifically to the Enterprise's design.

-MMoM

It's the muddling, retconning and notable inconsistencies that make that quote a) far from explicit and b) no longer relevant. It no longer makes sense to say that the Enterprise is a very special vessel because it is a starship. Every ship at the Binary Stars was a starship. If they are indeed "very special" it's not because they're similar to the Enterprise in any meaningful way.

 

[The Mighty Monkey of Mim]

It's the muddling, retconning and notable inconsistencies that make that quote a) far from explicit and b) no longer relevant. It no longer makes sense to say that the Enterprise is a very special vessel because it is a starship. Every ship at the Binary Stars was a starship. If they are indeed "very special" it's not because they're similar to the Enterprise in any meaningful way.

Already covered this in response to @King Daniel Beyond above. All I'm saying is that if they've elected in DSC to depict all other vessels as looking significantly different in appearance from the TOS Enterprise, that's not out of line with the original text of TOS and the intent behind it—i.e. the original source material—even though those got somewhat modified later by other shows. Nor is it an unreasonable post hoc interpretation of the uniqueness ascribed to the Enterprise and her sisters therein, given how the term "starship" broadened in meaning in the interim.

In fact, taking everything into account, that might well be among the most eminently reasonable of such interpretations from the standpoint of today. It's quite possible they've hit upon that very idea themselves, and that's precisely why they've reserved the use of certain TOS aesthetics—specifically round nacelles—for the inevitable occasion when a Connie appears on DSC. (I just hope they also remember that the design was supposed to be twenty to forty years old at the time of TOS, and don't portray it as some brand new development coming in! But from all indicators, I'd bet they've done their due diligence, so I'm not too worried.)

-MMoM

 

[fireproof78]

Because the same design philosophies and technologies that influenced the Constitution class would probably influence other classes. It seems unlikely that they would just throw out everything and start completely over with every ship design.

Given that the exact age of the Constitution class is unknown, there is no guarantee as to which one was the predecessor of the other.

 

[Tuskin38]

Well, Discovery is brand new, is newer then the Connie, and uses nacelles similar to the other ships we've seen.

 

[Ithekro]

Ships that we also don't know how old they are. The evidence that USS Discovery us new as oppose to a refit on an existing design is incidental. The shuttle bay has no scuff marks on it. I would hope they would fit her out with a new bay if they took the majority of her previous one with Spore Drives and storage compartments for said drive/forest of fungus. She's the most advanced ship in the fleet, well so was the USS Enterprise (NCC-1701) when her refit was finished under Captain Decker. The ship and USS Glenn were in service six months after the start of the Klingon War. That sounds more like a massive refit operation that a newly built ship.

Plus if the design is focused on the Spore Drive, you could fit any reliable nacelles to it for the warp drive.

 

[WarpFactorZ]

It no longer makes sense to say that the Enterprise is a very special vessel because it is a starship.

Merik was being sarcastic and bitter. Also, it wouldn't matter what class of ship he defined it as to someone who has never seen a starship. He knew exactly why Kirk's ship was special, compared to the bucket to which he was assigned that demonstrated his failure as a captain. He just didn't want to go into details.

 

[Ithekro]

Commodore Stone also mentions the high status of being Captain of a Starship in "Court Marshal".
The Romulan Commander in "The Enterprise Incident" indicates that Enterprise is one of Starfleet's best ships.

The Klingons taunt the Enterprise crew in the bar over Kirk, and how old the ship is, but Koloth did want to fight Kirk in battle.

Kirk and Scott have a lot of pride in the Enterprise, but it is their ship.

 

[zar]

Poor world building, and John Eaves.

Machines operating on the laws of physics will of course look similar—no one gets to make square turbofan fans, for reasons that should be obvious for anyone that comprehends the nature of spinning objects. And the most efficient means of exploiting physics leads few ways of doing things because why waste time and effort? There isn't a lot of variation in electric motors, cyclotrons, or phased array antennas.

Mass and energy bend spacetime. There may be different ways exploiting this to bend spacetime to our liking, but in nature there is one most efficient way, gathering mass in one spot. There may be many ways to produce the energy equivalent of mass to warp space, but there is only going to be one very efficient way of doing it—the least energy for the most curvature. Before that means is found, technology will be on the path toward that greater efficiency, so even fictional systems such as warp drive should be based on a fictional and consistent idea of how it's done, and what that tech looks like. If your warp drive is based on unwavering principles of operation, then everyone's warp drive will look similar, just like their electric motors, internal combustion engines, turbofan engines, LED flashlights, and neon lighting will look the same. Even fictional physics should be across the board. Even if there are twenty ways to warp space for propulsion faster than light, there is only going to one best efficient way to do it, and everyone will use that way eventually.

Flat nacelles should be advanced warp, even if the Klingons had it in TOS. Should have been slimmer in TNG. But anything goes instead.

Okay. But...

Spoiler

^ Those are all from the same company and year, even.

I agree that "even fictional systems such as warp drive should be based on a fictional and consistent idea of how it's done, and what that tech looks like." But... it already is. Has been for 50 years, still is. It doesn't preclude different shapes and configurations. There can be reasons for that other than being entirely different technology. They clearly are warp nacelles.

"Flat nacelles should be advanced warp" - Why?

 

[Shawnster]

Along with the TOS Enterprise being the flagship,

TOS never stated the Enterprise was a flagship or the flagship.

Okay. But...


^ Those are all from the same company and year, even.

Those are fan casings. We call the whole device a fan but the little spinning fan blades inside each of those casings are very similar if not identical. Blades, usually 3, curved or angled the same degree, designed to spin around a central axle and create airflow. The axle mount may be different, but not radically so.

 

[The Mighty Monkey of Mim]

TOS never stated the Enterprise was a flagship or the flagship

That was his point.

Those are fan casings. We call the whole device a fan but the little spinning fan blades inside each of those casings are very similar if not identical.

And why shouldn't we think the very same applies to nacelles, round, square, or whatever shape?

-MMoM

 

[DaveyNY]

TOS never stated the Enterprise was a flagship or the flagship.




Those are fan casings. We call the whole device a fan but the little spinning fan blades inside each of those casings are very similar if not identical. Blades, usually 3, curved or angled the same degree, designed to spin around a central axle and create airflow. The axle mount may be different, but not radically so.

Actually, those are all Space Heaters, only two of which have moving parts.
The first is a Baseboard Heater and relies entirely on convection of the air passing through it.

 

[zar]

Those are fan casings. We call the whole device a fan but the little spinning fan blades inside each of those casings are very similar if not identical. Blades, usually 3, curved or angled the same degree, designed to spin around a central axle and create airflow. The axle mount may be different, but not radically so.

Nope. These are space heaters. They come in different shapes and configurations. Some have fans, some don't. One of them has a spiral element, another has flat fins. But all of them operate on the same basic principle of converting electricity into heat and distributing it.

Round and flat nacelles are fine.