That does make sense. Of course, that’s probably not the scenario precisely because it makes sense
I’m still trying to figure out
where the Enterprise-D fits into all of this.
Terry Matalas answered this yesterday. Spoiler? maybe?
Picard Season 3 Teaser Trailer
- Thread starter Precious Tritium
- Start date
Terry Matalas answered this yesterday. Spoiler? maybe?
That's not a spoiler.
I finally know why I don't like the way the Titan looks. The front and back clash too much. The front looks nice, but the back looks hideous and waaaaaaayyyyyyy too busy. If the entire ship was busy-looking, it wouldn't be such a clash. Or if the entire ship was sleak-looking, again it would be uniform. It's like the front and back have two different design sensibilities going on. It needs to have one design sensibility, all the way around.
It's the same thing I don't like about the Disco Enterprise bridge, among other interiors, but especially the bridge. It's too busy-looking. They tried to jam two things together that don't fit: the TOS-style and the DSC-style. But somehow, despite that, the Disco Enterprise pulls it off better than the Titan-A, with its mashup of a TOS Movie ship in the front and a crazy overdone TNG Movie ship in the back.
It's like looking at a mullet.
It's the same thing I don't like about the Disco Enterprise bridge, among other interiors, but especially the bridge. It's too busy-looking. They tried to jam two things together that don't fit: the TOS-style and the DSC-style. But somehow, despite that, the Disco Enterprise pulls it off better than the Titan-A, with its mashup of a TOS Movie ship in the front and a crazy overdone TNG Movie ship in the back.
It's like looking at a mullet.
Last edited:
I think it doesn't look good because it looks like bad 90s CGI, similar to the Ent-E in the movies. It lacks the realism of a physical model, and doesn't have the high graphics quality that one would expect from a 20s big budget show.
They didn't have any TV shows in the '20s! Oh yeah, wait a minute, wrong '20s....
I don't care for it because it's clearly a TMP design that was minimally tweaked and upscaled into a 25th century ship for no real good reason other than the showrunners thought the original design was kewl (and it is kewl, but as a 23rd century ship.)
It looks 100 times better than any 90s CGI.
The original design was 294 meters, not sure if Bill up scaled the updated version for the TMP titan as well.
Last edited:
Maybe the museum is in those new parts on each side?
My hunch is we will still see it. this was just a short teaser
My hunch is we will still see it. this was just a short teaser
Obviously beauty is in the eye of the beholder so we don't have to agree but just my thoughts - I get where you are coming from that it is a throwback and seems to be nostalgiabait for fans rather than having an in-universe reason.
My thinking is that if you look at fashion, architecture, cars you often find designers harkening back to "golden eras" and integrating that into newer ones.
With so many Trek characters having significant interests in history then my logic is that one of the designers at Utopia Planitia or wherever it was designed was a 2300s junkie.
Not perfect, but at least uses real world convention to explain in universe choices.
This is similar to my thinking. If I am to treat Starfleet like a real organization then I would well imagine they would lean on their history in their designs rather than just an ever developing scale of newness.
Real organizations don't lean on history in designs, they lean on physics. Boats have looked like boats for a several millenia because that's the best shape that floats. Airplanes largely look identical, whether it's a model aircraft or the Antonov An-225 Mriya, because that's the shape required by aerodynamics. Unless that's what you meant by "history", which seems like an odd way to put it.
There is no logical reason why a starship from 2401+ would have a saucer section that looks 90% like a TMP Constitution class (heck, even the saucer window placement is exactly the same.) The prevailing trend from the Intrepid class onward was thinner, pointier hulls for whatever fictional technological reason. ‘Nostalgia’ simply doesn’t cut it. Even the newer Excelsior wannabes we’ve seen, the Obena and the Excelsior II classes, have elliptical saucers instead of round like the original Excelsior had.
There's no reason for hull shapes period. This isn't logical.
And what physics impact ship shape in Trek?
For whatever reason, Starfleet has decided on a certain hull shape for their ships. That hull shape has been consistent for the last 300 years. But that’s irrelevant. Im referring to the physics of the hull design. The hulls themselves exist, so making a statement that there’s no reason for hull shapes is a nonsequitor.
Obviously there is some reason why hulls went from round to elliptical to pointy, in that progression. Until now, that is. You’d have to ask the Starfleet R&D department.
I would love too! I would love to know the reason behind it rather than just assuming hull shape reflects the era. That's nonsensical to me. Especially when you have a lot of ships that break the mold, like the Defiant which irritates me to no end.
To me, this just reflects the assumptions made around hulls that they reflect an era rather than any real Starfleet reason. It comes down to aesthetics ultimately, and that's why it bothers me less.
Terry has said that the Stargazer won't be in S3.
I don't understand your argument. You suggest that a made-up organization has some rationale for why they design starships the way they do ("history"), as with real organizations. But then when I suggest that there are physical constraints for structure and design in real organizations, you scoff at the fact that I'm making that justification for a made-up organization.
Anyway, since you asked... off the top of my head:
Real world: extreme pressure differential environments, reinforcement for space debris impact, shielding for ultraviolet and ionizing radiation, impulse propulsion
In universe: warp field configuration (actually semi-"real world"), subspace mumbo jumbo, Ontarian manifold translations, etc...
If you think I'm scoffing then perhaps this is done.
I was asking a question and wanting to know what dictated ship design in Trek.
Thank you. Much appreciated, aside from the mumbo jumbo part.
Similar threads
- Poll
