The Franklin dates to before Enterprise. It may not have been mentioned, but it was clearly before Nero’s intervention.
I think it’s safe to assume that the JJVerse is not a altered timeline but a different universe. One where they use water for their warp engines and all ships have breweries in them. The Franklin simply doesn’t work in the Prime as they went from the warp 2 testbed to Henry Archer’s warp 5 engine. If you include the novels there were in fact 2 different warp 5 engines being designed with the other being added to a Daedalus ship, correcting the continuity errors with that one.
Isn’t what? I don’t know why people are so against the idea of it being a separate universe. It means they could do things without worrying about continuity.
Not that it matters whether Franklin is Prime or not, but... Coolant. In "Yesterday's Enterprise" and Generations, the Enterprise-D is ultimately destroyed by a coolent leak in the warp core, which manifests by the pipe behind the core itself angrily belching steam which fills engineering. Is that the same novels which pretend the Romulan ships exploded off-screen immediately after "Minefield" in order to fix continuity regarding cloaking devices and switched to low-tech TOS interfaces and technology to prevent Romulan tampering?
There was only one shipwith the cloaking device but I thought because of power issues that using it long term wasn’t feasible.
It's weird to hear people arguing that the Franklin couldn't have existed because it wasn't mentioned in Star Trek: Enterprise, when people used to argue that Star Trek: Enterprise couldn't have existed because it wasn't mentioned in the previous shows and movies. If one can accept the retcon of ENT as a whole, one should also be able to accept the retcon of the Franklin.
They were doing that fine already without it being a separate universe. The timeline was altered 30 years before TOS starts.
I like how they switched up the TOS Enterprise being on Earth, now its Assignment:Earth scene not the usual Tomorrow is Yesterday. I was wondering how many more interpretations of that scene we will get. Perhaps a whole calendar's worth, maybe the 2020 calendar will be just the Enterprise and the F-104.
Aaanywho, back to the original topic, no matter how canon discovery is, I sort of laugh to myself when they make the enterprise look...well, honestly, more awesome and in 10 years its going to look like it did in the 60's; what, did starfleet have budget problems and they had to downgrade some ships?
The people making Star Trek in the '60s never intended us to believe that a 23rd-century starship would actually look like it was made in the '60s. They were just making the closest approximation they could manage with their limited resources, and they trusted their audience to use their imaginations to take it the rest of the way. That's the whole reason Roddenberry had everything redesigned in ST:TMP -- it was meant to be a closer approximation, made possible by having better resources to fake it with. He literally asked fans to pretend the Klingons had always had ridges but TOS just hadn't shown them correctly. The differences between '60s Trek technology and 2010s Trek technology are differences in the ability of the filmmakers to depict it, not actual in-universe differences. In the same way that the recasting of a role like Saavik or Cochrane or Ziyal is not meant to be an in-universe change. There's a difference between the literal surface we see onscreen and the underlying idea it's meant to represent.
It has cracked me up for a while now that the 1960's design is entirely TOO DATED. But so much of the design language of even the JJ-prise is rooted in TMP from the advanced age of 1979. To be fair, Disco is actually moving farther away from that.
When the timeline is altered it also changed the time travel incidents yet to happen in the future. That changes the past, which changes the future more and this cycle continues until the new timeline stabilizes. Thus Nero changes the past, and the past timeline adjusting happens instantaneously from his and our perspective.