Yet somehow it still persists several years later. Twitter is particularly bad for it.
Prodigy is Confirmed Prime Timeline
- Thread starter Serin117
- Start date
Yet somehow it still persists several years later. Twitter is particularly bad for it.
I see nothing wrong with the design of the ship that looks out of place for 2384. The hull plating reminds me of the armor Voyager acquired from future Janeway in "Endgame."
I do get the confusion about which universe the show takes place in. The visuals, not to mention the Protostar's nacelles, look very Kelvin timeline. But the tech in the 23rd century KT exists because there was influence from the 24th century Prime timeline. So I don't see a problem.
I do get the confusion about which universe the show takes place in. The visuals, not to mention the Protostar's nacelles, look very Kelvin timeline. But the tech in the 23rd century KT exists because there was influence from the 24th century Prime timeline. So I don't see a problem.
V
Vale
Guest
That's an excellent point. For all we know the Protostar could be the origin of some of the warp drive tech the Kelvin timeline Enterprise was using – hence the look of the nacelles, and warp travel itself looking more hyperspace-tunnell-y than we're normally used to.
V
Vale
Guest
There's indications elsewhere that Starfleet's technological progress has been accelerating anyway. As a general rule of thumb, starship speeds increase by a fairly predictable, pedestrian factor of four every century; the NX-01 tops out at ~125c, the 1701 at ~512c, the 1701-D at ~1909c (yes, I know in each case the exceptional engineering skills of the crew and the fact that every hero ship was built when the shipyards were having "a very good day" means that under certain circumstances they each exceeded these speeds).
But suddenly we go from the Galaxy-class in the 2360s topping at at about 2000c to the Intrepid-class in the 2370s topping out at over double that with a canonical top speed warp 9.975, and the Prometheus-class and Sovereign-class being able to reach three times that by the 2380s if some sources are to be believed. Starship drive technology was already undergoing some sort of revolution when Voyager was being designed and built – indeed, Voyager herself seems to have been part of that revolution even before being lost in the Delta Quadrant.
I have no problems with a brand new ship in the 2380s having absurdly revolutionary engineering technology, because that's precisely the path that Star Trek has shown us starship technology was following through the 2360s and 2370s already. My current headcanon is that the Protostar is one of a series of small testbed ships built specifically for testing new engines.
Saw a clip on YouTube and was very surprised to see the Kelvinverse transporter effect used in Prodigy! Very nice, glad the swirly stuff lives on.
That "theory" is bullshit. It's not too advanced because it doesn't match your opinion on how advanced they must be in this timeframe. STO is irrelevant.
Obviously, you are a victim of Midnight Edge's (plus those other idiotic channels') alternative facts.
Yes, even though, as of yet, it's unclear whether the proto core is connected to the stuff Voyager had brought home, Aaron Waltke was addressing
Starfleet's own version of the Dauntless and its tech here.
https://trekmovie.com/2022/02/03/in...s-timelines-janeways-combadges-and-much-more/
https://trekmovie.com/2022/02/03/in...s-timelines-janeways-combadges-and-much-more/
It's not like the Federation hadn't developed/ attempted crazy shit by its own efforts (as far as we know) before: Genesis, reviving a dead star, the Manheim project, super humans with telepathy and telekinesis, the phasing cloak,...
It's regular warp, the new "tunnel" effect was a creative, aesthetic choice just like the varying effects in Disco's first 2 seasons and now PRO.
Apparently, the numbers here are based on formulas from old, non-canon writers' guides and Tech. Manuals, and indeed they got some canonical support like the warp chart from ENT and Disco's warp 1 = 1 c. However, there is a TON of dialogues and events negating this, a good example is ENT: "Broken Bow" which is heavily at odds even with itself. Warp 4.3 is stated to be 30 million km per second or about 100 c, it fits in with warp 5 = 125 c, but the ship goes from Earth to Kronos in four days. Assuming it can maintain warp 5 for four days (it can't), Kronos couldn't be further than like 1.36 light-years away, and that is absurd, it is impossible with Earth's closest (binary) star, Alpha Centauri at a distance of about 4.37 ly.
Some instances have speeds enabling ships to pretty much casually cross the entire Milky Way in TOS, TAS, TNG, VOY, and ST 5.
ST 5 - to the galactic centre and back before dinner
TNG - covering tens of thousands of ly with civilian ships and a shuttle within a reasonable time ("The Chase")
VOY - 0.6 ly in several seconds at warp 7, 3 to 4 millions c minimum ("Emanations")
TOS - 990.7 ly in 11.337 hours = 766,000 c ("That Which Survives")
TAS - sure there are in intergalactic space at least once, don't remember the ep.
At warp 7.3, the Ent-D covers 30 billion km in 40 or 50 seconds ("Emergence"), 2,000+ c, but 7.3 is hardly top speed. "Maximum warp" is 9,000 c in "Where No One Has Gone Before" with regular engines.
Voyager at "warp nine point nine [is] about four billion miles a second." (The 37's) = 21,472 c.
As to those "sources", all novels, guides,
EDIT - misspelling
Last edited:
V
Vale
Guest
Says you. The only thing definitely not canon here is your spelling of "manual"
Not a native english speaker.
I did not make that up, back in 2007, the person responsible for licensed ST products at that time, Paula M. Block, said,...
https://trekmovie.com/2007/07/22/dc-fontana-on-tas-canon-and-sybok/
Nothing has changed since then so far as I am aware. The official website, startrek.com, has a "database" with everything considered canon which comprises...
- TOS
- TAS
- all Berman era shows
- all movies
- Short Treks
- all current shows including the upcoming SNW
Last edited:
The database also has mistakes. It repeats the urban legend that Spock was the first Vulcan in starfleet. Something that was ever said on screen, nor can I find it mentioned in any TOS behind the scenes material.
His bio also hasn’t been updated to include his appearances on Discovery.
His bio also hasn’t been updated to include his appearances on Discovery.
I know, I wasn't referring to that in-universe-encyclopaedia part but only the listing of all canon products which is consistent with Block's definition.
in your opinion.
No, actually, it's a fact. It's literally what 'canon' means.
The whole thing is supposed to be one great, ongoing story (or multiple stories within the multiverse but prime for the most part). Writers generally need a common basis, something they can expand on.
More or less the same applies to forums like this, so we can discuss the prime (or Kelvin, MU,...) continuity. It goes without saying that the "great story" has accumulated quite a few dents and inconsistencies over the decades anyway, but with novels etc. there would be even more confusion and bickering. For instance, DSC obviously ignores the Sato Dynasty from some MU novels, PIC disregards the Destiny trilogy.
OTOH, sometimes elements from the "expanded universe" get canonized such as chimerium for Prodigy.
Seriously? No, it's not my opinion, as proved in the post almost right on top of yours (#71).
In this case at least, other franchises like Star Wars have different policies.
Don't confuse canon for quality. "Spock's Brain" is canon. The amazing novel "Prime Directive" is not.
Modern Trek has been happy to mine non-canon sources for details like no Trek before (Andorian names, Vulcan lore, planetary co-ordinates etc), which is a lot of fun.
And they even used a non-canon starship design for Lower Decks (Riker's Luna class Titan from the Pocket Books novels.) And a FASA Loknar class as a previous Titan
Similar threads
