Discussion in 'Star Trek: Discovery' started by INACTIVEUSS Einstein, Nov 18, 2017.
Something something respect.
Mike Okuda, Doug Drexler, Andy Probert, Matt Jeffries... none of them are involved anymore. Their designs have been remade, reimagined, retconned. I had all the technical books and size comparison charts, the unofficial deck-by-deck floorplans of the ships too and I still love them... but I get it doesn't matter. Today's Trek is a semi-reboot playing by different rules. The Enterprise is 442m not 289, the Klingon D7 is 503m not 216m. The sets are different, the actors are different, the costumes are different and the sizes are different.
I'm all onboard with it. But, no matter what, somehow rebooting it is just disrespectful to all that stuff you said, even though it quite honestly isn't. It isn't trying to say "ignore that stuff; only our stuff matters." It is offering a different take on this world.
Diversity of ideas on a productions designs and interpretation of classic designs; not just for Shakespeare anymore.
I mean even Drexler upscaled the TOS Connie for his cross section so the corridors could fit.
So go with Doug's upscaling?
He is Drexler. He cannot be questioned.
Everyone else must be!
Is the Crossfield-class a trendsetter, in terms of 23rd-century era aft shuttlebays using a forcefield?
Crossfield-class (late 2250s)
Miranda-class (2285; entered service in 2267 according to TOS)
Memory Alpha seems to have restrictions against hotlinking- your images aren't showing up for me.
It happens with all Fandom wikis.
Reupload the images somewhere else.
I don't think we ever had on-screen evidence of exactly when the Miranda class entered service - certainly not mentioned in TOS, since the first time we ever see one is in TWOK, and the list on the "Court Martial" chart doesn't actually mention Reliant by name. In fact, the assertion that "NCC-1864" is even shown on that chart, while possible, is not at all 100% clear, nor confirmed via official sources, to my knowledge. Can anyone confirm this? I know there was a discussion about it a couple of years back, but I don't know that anything definitive was successfully concluded.
Possibly this thread?
I guess it could possibly be 1864, but it could also be 1664, 1964, or some other combination thereof. ChallengerHK in that thread mentioned that a clear view of the number may be an artifact of the image enhancement process.
It could also be looked at from the opposite direction. Is there written (or even anecdotal) evidence that the builders of the Reliant miniature at ILM intentionally use that number from "Court Martial" to maintain a kind of connective continuity between TOS and TWOK? Was that chart even clear enough to see back then in any footage available at the time to give them that number? Or was it just mere coincidence that is now being connected via head-canon?
I would go out on a limb and say that it was either just a coincidence, or whoever labeled the model got the number from a source (i.e. Fran Joseph et. al) who also used the number coincidentally.
Head canon that stuff until we know for sure. And that might not ever happen.
I uploaded the images from elsewhere. Hope you can see them now.
I wonder how old this thing really is supposed to be, in-universe. Forcefields of that sort are a novelty in ENT "Vox Sola", but they're something Starfleet was on the verge of achieving n 2151 already, and of course they could have purchased from just about any vendor after Archer started visiting places.
It probably wouldn't be out of place to give the Daedalus stern this blue glow, either. Too bad we never saw any rear ends from that general era.
STO's model of the Jovian Raider, which I'm going to be honestly completely forgot appeared in Season 3
Ditto! I wonder if we should treat those as repurposed... Mining vessels? The Titan outpost probably couldn't have built dedicated warships. But what use would it have had for vessels of this design originally?
(Also, why is it a "Jovian" raider? Yeah, technically Saturn would be a Jovian, but if the folks in charge of naming these ships know they come from the outer Sol planets, they no doubt would know precisely they come from Titan, too.)
No, what is quoted on that diagram is different from what is seen on screen, is the point. The S31 ships aren't twice as big as Pike's, not even the larger ones. The Qugh isn't a giant. The "real" sizes are a feature of having the ships share the same space, and for some reason the measurements the CGI folks punch in do not produce ships that would be as big as the diagram suggests.
An alternate way to deal with it would be to say that Pike's ship is twice as long as what the diagram claims. But we can choose between the two options easily enough: there are scale-establishing features on Pike's ship. As in fact there are on the S31 ships, which as said are just rearrangements of the original intel cutter, with the same central hull detail, same impulse engines (even if spread out), same bow (even if inverted for extra length), same window rows... The combination favors declaring the quoted numbers wrong on the S31 ships, rather than on Pike's.
Separate names with a comma.