Spoilers ST Picard - Starships and Technology Season Two Discussion

[Mark_Nguyen]

Terry's answer is.. an answer, but even he leaves it open to interpretation. Like Gene's own starship design "rules", they aren't gospel and shouldn't be taken as such. So for me, off to the realm of headcanon it goes...

Mark

 

[Dukhat]

Terry's answer is.. an answer, but even he leaves it open to interpretation. Like Gene's own starship design "rules", they aren't gospel and shouldn't be taken as such. So for me, off to the realm of headcanon it goes...

Mark

I simply don't see how a ship the size of Picard's Stargazer could be refit into a ship the size of Rios's, unless Matalas has no concept of the scale difference.

I think Terry's answer is better.

Terry's answer makes no logical sense. He even implies that in his response.

 

[Spike730]

I think Terry's answer is better.

So you really think „it‘s the same ship from the early 24th century, just refitted to 25th century and with Borg technology, just way bigger“ is the better answer than „it‘s a new ship with the same name“?

 

[fireproof78]

So you really think „it‘s the same ship from the early 24th century, just refitted 25th century and Borg technology, just way bigger“ is the better answer than „it‘s a new ship with the same name“?

Yes.

It feels like a very Star Trek answer.

 

[Spike730]

Yes.

It feels like a very Star Trek answer.

I’ll probably get a ban for saying this but then you‘re a moron.

 

[fireproof78]

I’ll probably get a ban for saying this but then you‘re a moron.

How so? And feel free to PM me to explain my shortcomings so we don't derail the thread too much.

I'm stating a personal preference. Not an engineering opinion.

 

[Spike730]

Well, it‘s just not economical to do so. And scale simply doesn‘t support it. The new Stargazer is way bigger than the old one. Sure, they could‘ve molten the duranium of the old one to build the new one, but that‘s about it. But my main point is that if you want to know something about the ship then ask the person who designed it.

 

[fireproof78]

Well, it‘s just not economical to do so. And scale simply doesn‘t support it. The new Stargazer is way bigger than the old one. Sure, they could‘ve molten the duranium of the old one to build the new one, but that‘s about it. But my main point is that if you want to know something about the ship then ask the person who designed it.

I shall ask the person designed it then.

But, this is a story about history and revisiting the past. The writer is about themes which is more important to me than engineering feasibility. It reminds me of TMP's refit.

 

[Spike730]

Thank god we live in an age where we can do so.

 

[fireproof78]

Thank god we live in an age where we can do so.

Well, I do. Daily.

 

[Ronald Held]

Could the original Stargazer have been reconned to be larger?

 

[Dukhat]

It reminds me of TMP's refit.

The TOS to TMP refit made minimal changes to the overall design of the ship. The biggest change was the swept back pylons. Everything else was just basically the same.

Now, even if we disregard the blatant difference in size between the two ships, there's really nothing that looks at all the same between the two Stargazers, other than the basic concepts that both ships are saucers with four nacelles. So I see nothing that reminds me of the TMP refit in terms of using one ship to build upon another.

Could the original Stargazer have been reconned to be larger?

Not scaled to its bridge dome.

 

[F. King Daniel]

Regarding the Stargazer, Terry Matalas had this to say over on TrekMovie:

Ummmm Picard himself says "not this Stargazer" when discussing his old ship.

But hey, if Pike's Enterprise in SNW is Kirk's Enterprise in TOS and starships are hollow and bigger on the inside, why not?

 

[fireproof78]

The TOS to TMP refit made minimal changes to the overall design of the ship. The biggest change was the swept back pylons. Everything else was just basically the same.

Now, even if we disregard the blatant difference in size between the two ships, there's really nothing that looks at all the same between the two Stargazers, other than the basic concepts that both ships are saucers with four nacelles. So I see nothing that reminds me of the TMP refit in terms of using one ship to build upon another.

The shapes from TOS to TMP are different. The size is different. All of it doesn't work taken as a whole.

 

[David cgc]

Well, it‘s just not economical to do so. And scale simply doesn‘t support it. The new Stargazer is way bigger than the old one. Sure, they could‘ve molten the duranium of the old one to build the new one, but that‘s about it. But my main point is that if you want to know something about the ship then ask the person who designed it.

The novel "Ship of the Line" had a beat where it was said that fixtures and metal salvaged from the Enterprise-D were incorporated into the Enterprise-E, so it could be a similar case, though I'm always sad when any ship is scrapped. She could've been made into a museum.

 

[Dukhat]

The shapes from TOS to TMP are different.

No, they're really not. You've got a round saucer, a tubular secondary hull with a deflector in front and a shuttlebay in back, and two nacelles on pylons (and even the swept-back pylons are no longer a thing with the DSC Enterprise.)

The size is different.

289 meters long as opposed to 305 meters long.

All of it doesn't work taken as a whole.

What?

 

[fireproof78]

No, they're really not. You've got a round saucer, a tubular secondary hull with a deflector in front and a shuttlebay in back, and two nacelles on pylons (and even the swept-back pylons are no longer a thing with the DSC Enterprise.)



289 meters long as opposed to 305 meters long.



What?

I don't have the picture handy but I will find it and show how the TMP size and shape are not correct to the TOS Enterprise.

Which is fine, but it fits in to my general attitude that size doesn't matter in Trek ships; the themes and the writing do.

 

[Dukhat]

Which is fine, but it fits in to my general attitude that size doesn't matter in Trek ships; the themes and the writing do.

But we're not talking about themes and writing; we're talking about Terry Matalas's vague answer to the question of whether the new Stargazer is actually the old Stargazer.

 

[fireproof78]

But we're not talking about themes and writing; we're talking about Terry Matalas's vague answer to the question of whether the new Stargazer is actually the old Stargazer.

He admits as such it doesn't make sense but likes the spirit of the idea that the bones of the new Stargazer are part of the old Stargazer.

And I love that. It's pretty. It's not logical, rational, factual, realistic or whatever. It's just fun and feels good.

 

[Dukhat]

He admits as such it doesn't make sense but likes the spirit of the idea that the bones of the new Stargazer are part of the old Stargazer.

And I love that. It's pretty. It's not logical, rational, factual, realistic or whatever. It's just fun and feels good.

That's great. But installing a computer or some wiring from the old ship does not a 'refit' make.