it seems absurd to me as well, but they had another ship going for centuries and they refit the discovery with no issue…
PIC S3 Ships & Tech
- Thread starter NCC-73515
- Start date
Noting that this "New" USS "Intrepid" has basically the same upper decks and bridge dome as the Titan-A. Bodes well if we a shot of their bridge and it's the same as the Titan/Stargazer set. The Stargazer's dome and upper decks are also similar, with the notable exception of having a window port.
Similarly, this its the third on-screen ship of this series that has the same-ish nacelle design - the Titan-A, Intrepid, and Stargazer all have the same basic look. The shuttle in the trailer for this week's episode also has the same one, echoing decades of shuttle tradition, and we're soon to be granted a look at two-nacelled version of the Sagan-class which will continue this trend.
So, while we're arguing about refitting old ships into new ones, we're simultaneously being shown a sort of commonality in Federation starship design we literally haven't seen in decades in-universe or IRL. Maybe in-universe we can try to explain this sorr of thing as Starfleet, still recovering from the loss of its biggest shipyards, comes up with a school of thought around starship design that allows for older ships to be parted out and crammed into newer ones. Maybe these newer nacelle designs allow for this more easily, while everyone also gets a new upper saucer superstructure with common bridge modules for ease of production and familiarity of use. It would make more sense for a new Ops manager to get a console that's the same size and with the same number of blinkies, versus the completely different size and configuration of Ops stations we see between the Enterprise-D, Defiant, and Voyager to start with.
Mark
Similarly, this its the third on-screen ship of this series that has the same-ish nacelle design - the Titan-A, Intrepid, and Stargazer all have the same basic look. The shuttle in the trailer for this week's episode also has the same one, echoing decades of shuttle tradition, and we're soon to be granted a look at two-nacelled version of the Sagan-class which will continue this trend.
So, while we're arguing about refitting old ships into new ones, we're simultaneously being shown a sort of commonality in Federation starship design we literally haven't seen in decades in-universe or IRL. Maybe in-universe we can try to explain this sorr of thing as Starfleet, still recovering from the loss of its biggest shipyards, comes up with a school of thought around starship design that allows for older ships to be parted out and crammed into newer ones. Maybe these newer nacelle designs allow for this more easily, while everyone also gets a new upper saucer superstructure with common bridge modules for ease of production and familiarity of use. It would make more sense for a new Ops manager to get a console that's the same size and with the same number of blinkies, versus the completely different size and configuration of Ops stations we see between the Enterprise-D, Defiant, and Voyager to start with.
Mark
Okay, so that's obviously a Picarded version of Bill's USS Wasp:
....which is itself a version of Larry Miller's USS Hornet carrier design.
....which is itself a version of Larry Miller's USS Hornet carrier design.
Interesting design.Okay, so that's obviously a Picarded version of Bill's USS Wasp:
....which is itself a version of Larry Miller's USS Hornet carrier design.
More interesting is the fighter pod design on that link. That's quite the wing span...
I really like the idea of different classes having similar elements, in the tradition of the constitution/Miranda/constellation/oberth and galaxy/nebula, it’s something I really missed in recent years.
The Discovery was a brand new ship; it was just out of time. As for the Tikhov-M, the dialogue about it is subject to interpretation.
A 900 year old brand new ship that had been severely damaged…
With fewer shipyards, ships had to be repaired, refitted, or built with spare parts that were available?
They never said the Tikhov was 900 years old. Or are you talking about Discovery? Because it wasn’t 900 years old either.
I was talking about Discovery, which was a 900 year old design.
They upgraded a lot of systems and somehow made so that a 23th century ship could go against 32th century ones.
The C-in-C of Starfleet was concerned that the mere presence of the Discovery in the 32nd-Century was a violation of the Temporal Accords, but the refit into the Discovery-A was never said to be a deception. It seemed more like a case that the diminished Starfleet needed as many starships it could get its hands on and it was just a case of upgrading the Discovery and putting her into service as quickly as possible. By the time the upgrade with 32nd-Century tech and cosmetic changes to the outer hull were done, the Discovery-A was basically a new vessel.
Well, given the reasoning, utopia planetia destroyed, ship building in short supply. Wouldnt' it have been cheaper to repair the luna class than instead of parting her out to the new ship? I mean yes it looks bad from the concept drawing, but the they rebuilt the Enterprise E after its first 1/4 of the hull was missing.
That was the result of the refit, not the reasoning behind it.
Still, the Discovery wasn’t refit because it was old and damaged, as has been suggested. The ship was only a few years old, relatively speaking. Yes, its tech was 900 years out of date, but that wasn’t the ship’s fault.
I don't know who said all that, but it wasn't me. It just seemed logical to upgrade the ship to current 32nd-Century specs.
I have an issue with the destruction of Utopia Planitia being used an an apparent excuse for all this slapdash slipshod "half-rebuild, half-refit" starship recycling. Utopia Planitia wasn't even the only shipyard in Earth's solar system, never mind the Federation! Shipyards we know are still active during the time of TNG/DS9/VOY include: 40 Eridani A (AKA Vulcan), Beta Antares, Earth Station McKinley, Proxima, San Francisco, and Starbase 234.
i don’t think I follow your point…
We were discussing the 32nd century Starfleet's perceived penchant for refitting the same ships for almost a thousand years based on the Voyager-J being called an Intrepid class, and that the Discovery and the Tikhov are not cut-and-dried examples of this (and neither is the Voyager-J, for that matter.)
Well, they DID update the Discovery with modern technology, which must have been quite an effort, I don’t see why updating gradually ships from the 24th century would be more difficult.
Similar threads
