Spoilers Star Trek: Strange New Worlds 3x08 - "Four-And-A-Half Vulcans"

[Nyotarules]

Tell that to those who love "Matt Jefferies" TOS Connie design.

"Matt Jefferies" made the TOS Connies with a very specific defined set of dimensions.

Are you going to contradict his Connie with the SNW Connie that was made by "John Eaves"?

It does not matter what designs some fans love, present day TV productions are not bound by the designs of the past. That would be ridiculous.

 

[cooleddie74]

"cooleddie74" interjects with a statement of my own. What's with the quotation marks around actual names?

 

[Kamen Rider Blade]

It does not matter what designs some fans love, present day TV productions are not bound by the designs of the past. That would be ridiculous.

That's fine, I like the SNW Connie more than the older ones.
It's fine that it's larger than the TMP era Re-Fit Connie.

That doesn't mean you get to retro-actively change the past.

You understand where I'm coming from?

Change the future designs, go right ahead.

Don't try to Ret-Con the past.

"cooleddie74" interjects with a statement of my own. What's with the quotation marks around actual names?

Important names are worth quoting.

 

[Nerys Myk]

That doesn't mean you get to retro-actively change the past.

Last time I checked the SNW Connie hasn't been placed in TOS episodes. The past is secure.

 

[Sketcher]

Can't wait for the reaction to a Robert April series in 20 years, with an even larger and more advanced-looking Enterprise.

 

[fireproof78]

Last time I checked the SNW Connie hasn't been placed in TOS episodes. The past is secure.

Indeed. The stories remain unaltered. We can appreciate both without fear of replacement.

 

[Nerys Myk]

Can't wait for the reaction to a Robert April series in 20 years, with an even larger and more advanced-looking Enterprise.

I for one welcome our holovision show Star Trek: April .

 

[Detached Nacelle]

I for one welcome our holovision show Star Trek: April .

By such time seasons will have gotten so short they could air it all in the month of april

 

[fireproof78]

By such time seasons will have gotten so short they could air it all in the month of april

April-a-thon

 

[Nerys Myk]

By such time seasons will have gotten so short they could air it all in the month of april

Trek month 2045 here I come!!!

 

[Kamen Rider Blade]

Last time I checked the SNW Connie hasn't been placed in TOS episodes. The past is secure.

Not when it comes to the Length of the TOS Connie.

There are folks here who want to Ret-Con that little factoid into the history books.

 

[Noname Given]

Not when it comes to the Length of the TOS Connie.

There are folks here who want to Ret-Con that little factoid into the history books.

You can't retcon a dimension that was never stated on screen in any TOS episode or feature film.

 

[Nerys Myk]

Not when it comes to the Length of the TOS Connie.

There are folks here who want to Ret-Con that little factoid into the history books.

So, if I watch TOS I'm gonna see dialog or an image referencing the SNW Connie's size? How about you actually TOS and let me know if that's true?

Why would a history book reference the length of a fiction starship? Any book about the franchise would mention all sizes and designs.

 

[Kamen Rider Blade]

You can't retcon a dimension that was never stated on screen in any TOS episode or feature film.

Most fans who care, already know the dimensions of the TOS Connie.

For the past 50+ years, they took the dimensions from Matt Jefferies diagrams and used that as the basis.

Now you want to over-ride his design doc dimensions?

So what if it wasn't on screen in explicit stated #'s.

50+ years of the fans knowing should count for something.

 

[Detached Nacelle]

You can't retcon a dimension that was never stated on screen in any TOS episode or feature film.

Ah ha but don't you see all illegible or freeze frame graphics in the background are gospel. Everything must be fact, especially the contradictions.

 

[Kamen Rider Blade]

So, if watch TOS I'm gonna see dialog or an image referencing the SNW Connie's size?

Obviously not, you know they don't mention the size verbally.

How about you actually TOS and let me know if that's true?

Why would a history book reference the length of a fiction starship? Any book about the franchise would mention all sizes.

Not according to some folks here.

They want to over-ride past historical data.

 

[Noname Given]

Most fans who care, already know the dimensions of the TOS Connie.

For the past 50+ years, they took the dimensions from Matt Jefferies diagrams and used that as the basis.

Now you want to over-ride his design doc dimensions?

So what if it wasn't on screen in explicit stated #'s.

50+ years of the fans knowing should count for something.

If such fans want to hold to such non-canon numbers they're free to do so. But canonically the size of the USS Enterprise 1701 has been conclusively stated on screen for the first time in 59 years.

 

[Nerys Myk]

Ah ha but don't you see all illegible or freeze frame graphics in the background are gospel. Everything must be fact, especially the contradictions.

Thank you Mister Garak.

 

[Kamen Rider Blade]

If such fans want to hold to such non-canon numbers they're free to do so. But canonically the size of the USS Enterprise 1701 has been conclusively stated on screen for the first time in 59 years.

Again, that's going to start pointless conflict in the fandom.

 

[Nerys Myk]

Obviously not, you know they don't mention the size verbally.


Not according to some folks here.

Like who? Has anyone said the older dimensions should be struck from any book about Star Trek's development over the decades?