Starship design history in light of Discovery

[Christopher]

the reason i cited pegg and not the okudas is that pegg co-wrote the last kelvin timeline film. his, doug jung's, and justin lin's intentions - being the last people to shepherd that storyline - are most relevant.

Pegg referenced the Okudas' idea a few days after the film came out, in defense of the apparent change in Sulu's sexuality (although he was in error, because he incorrectly assumed Sulu was born before the timelines diverged). So the fact that he referenced it after the movie's release reveals nothing whatsoever about his intentions in co-writing the script. He was just using it as a convenient handwave to respond to the canon purists and homophobes complaining about gay Sulu. He'd probably recently read a draft of the Encyclopedia or had a chat with Mike Okuda or something.

The thing is, of all three Bad Robot movies, Beyond is the one that has the least need for the "retroactive time ripples" handwave, because it meshes much more smoothly with previous Trek canon than the two Abrams-directed films did. The characters feel much more like their TOS selves, the depiction of interstellar travel isn't as bizarrely instantaneous, there's no depiction of Earth or any previously established Federation species to introduce inconsistencies, and the story is trying very hard to respect and make use of ENT-era background, allowing for the slight variances in detail that are inevitable between any two different sets of creators' approaches to the same concepts. It's clear to me that Pegg, Jung, and Lin were trying harder than Abrams, Kurtzman, and Orci to keep their movie consistent with Prime Trek. So the idea that Pegg was the one seeking license to diverge more just doesn't add up. That's why I think the Okudas came up with the idea to rationalize some of the reinterpretations seen in those first two films.

i wasn't suggesting this is definitive, just the best explanation for why the kelvin timeline films' specific starships likely won't be showing up or being mentioned in star trek: discovery. it's possible they'll throw in a reference to the kelvin or the franklin, but until they do, their total absence from the prime universe productions is easily explained as absence from the prime universe itself.

There are countless things from the Prime universe that are seen in one production and totally absent from others. We never saw a Tellarite in the 24th century, or a Denobulan in the 23rd. We never saw any of the TMP background aliens outside of TMP, or the new TVH background aliens outside of TVH. "Wolf in the Fold" had sensor chairs that were infallible lie detectors and psychotricorders that could reconstruct people's memories, but neither technology exists in the 24th century. And of course, as I said, nobody ever mentioned NX-01's existence in any of the 23rd- or 24th-century series. If such absences required alternate universes to "explain" them, we'd have to treat Prime Trek as several dozen separate universes already. The explanation is simply that Trek continuity has never been as seamless as fans like to pretend it is.

 

[The Mighty Monkey of Mim]

We never saw a Tellarite in the 24th century

Tiny, tiny, tiny, insignificant nitpick that I mean more humorously than anything:

Thanks to the re-uses of an exterior shot of the Starfleet Command/UFP Council complex from TVH in "Conspiracy" (TNG) and "Non Sequitur" (VGR), we technically did.

Tellar was also mentioned as a Dominion target in "In The Pale Moonlight" (DS9).

(Very much agree otherwise, though.)

 

[pst]

Pegg referenced the Okudas' idea a few days after the film came out, in defense of the apparent change in Sulu's sexuality (although he was in error, because he incorrectly assumed Sulu was born before the timelines diverged). So the fact that he referenced it after the movie's release reveals nothing whatsoever about his intentions in co-writing the script. He was just using it as a convenient handwave to respond to the canon purists and homophobes complaining about gay Sulu. He'd probably recently read a draft of the Encyclopedia or had a chat with Mike Okuda or something.

The thing is, of all three Bad Robot movies, Beyond is the one that has the least need for the "retroactive time ripples" handwave, because it meshes much more smoothly with previous Trek canon than the two Abrams-directed films did. The characters feel much more like their TOS selves, the depiction of interstellar travel isn't as bizarrely instantaneous, there's no depiction of Earth or any previously established Federation species to introduce inconsistencies, and the story is trying very hard to respect and make use of ENT-era background, allowing for the slight variances in detail that are inevitable between any two different sets of creators' approaches to the same concepts. It's clear to me that Pegg, Jung, and Lin were trying harder than Abrams, Kurtzman, and Orci to keep their movie consistent with Prime Trek. So the idea that Pegg was the one seeking license to diverge more just doesn't add up. That's why I think the Okudas came up with the idea to rationalize some of the reinterpretations seen in those first two films.




There are countless things from the Prime universe that are seen in one production and totally absent from others. We never saw a Tellarite in the 24th century, or a Denobulan in the 23rd. We never saw any of the TMP background aliens outside of TMP, or the new TVH background aliens outside of TVH. "Wolf in the Fold" had sensor chairs that were infallible lie detectors and psychotricorders that could reconstruct people's memories, but neither technology exists in the 24th century. And of course, as I said, nobody ever mentioned NX-01's existence in any of the 23rd- or 24th-century series. If such absences required alternate universes to "explain" them, we'd have to treat Prime Trek as several dozen separate universes already. The explanation is simply that Trek continuity has never been as seamless as fans like to pretend it is.

i really don't think the origin of the statement makes it any less applicable to our understanding of the kelvin timeline. in light of so little information about that particular corner of the universe, we have to rely on what the writers tell us, regardless of whether it can be dismissed as an excuse.

to your point about the NX-01 never being mentioned in the 23rd or 24th centuries: star trek nemesis gives a little nod to archer. the kelvin timeline films straight up mention archer, show models of the NX-01 and NX-alpha, and reference the xindi "war". the productions after star trek: enterprise reinforced that show's presence in the continuity. if star trek: discovery was interested reinforcing the kelvin films' contributions to the prime universe, seems like the producers would've striven to incorporate its design ethic rather than disregarding it. yes it's still early, but the choice of uniforms, the designs of the starships, all supposedly contemporaneous with star trek 2009 don't really jibe.

it's difficult to believe while they're trying to reconcile this show's relationship to TOS, they'll also reconcile it with the kelvin films' depiction of the prime universe. if they're even allowed by their arrangement with paramount to do so.

 

[Ithekro]

It would be interesting if, in a later season, USS Discovery either goes out for exploration duty, or gets sent after some of the deep space efforts to back them up or find out what happened to them. Similar to what the various Enterprises do. But on this particular mission they catch up to a long range explorer/colony ship that was sent far from known space....and its USS Kelvin, or one of her class of ships. And its still very large with the huge shuttle bay and 800 plus people on board.

 

[Christopher]

i really don't think the origin of the statement makes it any less applicable to our understanding of the kelvin timeline.

But I think people go too far in how they interpret it. People who want an excuse to treat the Kelvin films as completely unconnected to the Prime continuity leap on it as their justification, but they're taking it much farther than it was intended. It wasn't saying that absolutely everything was required to be different, just that a few pre-2233 details potentially could be different, if some future film wanted to establish something that conflicted, or as a fix for any continuity issues in earlier films that were hard to reconcile otherwise. For the most part, the intention has always been that whatever gets established as part of the Trek universe in the Kelvin films should also be presumed to exist in the Prime universe, albeit perhaps in a slightly different form.

to your point about the NX-01 never being mentioned in the 23rd or 24th centuries: star trek nemesis gives a little nod to archer.

Yes, obviously any Trek production made after ENT was going to reference ENT. That goes without saying, because that's how retcons work. But there are multiple pre-ENT productions that say the original Enterprise was Pike and Kirk's ship -- "Relics," "Trials and Tribble-ations," not to mention the various Enterprise dedication plaques and the E-D and E-E's observation-lounge displays that conspicuously do not include NX-01. Obviously an idea can't be referenced before it's created in the real world. So when a prequel introduces something new about the past of the universe, like NX-01 or the Franklin, we have to be philosophical about the absence of any references to it earlier.

if star trek: discovery was interested reinforcing the kelvin films' contributions to the prime universe, seems like the producers would've striven to incorporate its design ethic rather than disregarding it.

Disregarding it? What are you talking about? I see a lot of similarities between the Kelvin and Discovery design ethics. After all, John Eaves is doing designs on both, and Alex Kurtzman has been a producer on both and thus his aesthetic sense probably has an influence. Both versions of the 2250s introduce a number of new Reliant-ish starship classes, even if the details are different. Both versions have windows on the bridge instead of viewscreens, and rather cluttered, graphics-heavy console displays. The Discovery transporter room looks strikingly similar to the Kelvin Enterprise transporter room, with a raised piece in the center of the platform. The shuttlecraft designs are similar, large and long with lots of side windows. The phasers in both versions glow blue for stun and red for kill. The Klingons in both versions are bald and more alien-looking than in prior incarnations. And the blue uniforms of the 2250s in DSC look like they could be a descendant of the blue command tunics of the 2230s Kelvin uniforms.

 

[The Mighty Monkey of Mim]

i really don't think the origin of the statement makes it any less applicable to our understanding of the kelvin timeline. in light of so little information about that particular corner of the universe, we have to rely on what the writers tell us, regardless of whether it can be dismissed as an excuse.

The writer in this case told us that he doesn't consider them to be beholden to anything from the Prime Timeline that they don't want to be beholden to, not that nothing in the films may also be taken as applicable to the Prime Timeline. Those are two different things.

to your point about the NX-01 never being mentioned in the 23rd or 24th centuries: star trek nemesis gives a little nod to archer. the kelvin timeline films straight up mention archer, show models of the NX-01 and NX-alpha, and reference the xindi "war".

But by your own argument, shouldn't those references be discounted, because they're in the Kelvin Timeline?

But there are multiple pre-ENT productions that say the original Enterprise was Pike and Kirk's ship -- "Relics," "Trials and Tribble-ations,"

Still very much with your general thrust, but can't resist the urge to glibly and shamelessly nitpick you again:

The line in "Relics" (TNG) specifically concerns "Federation ships with that name" and the one in "Trials and Tribble-ations" (DS9) involves explicit disagreement over exactly how many there were and ultimately specifies the one in question as "the first Enterprise, Constitution-class" (of the two that we know there were). The NX-01 was clearly a retcon, but it's one that just manages to skirt the pre-existing references without creating discontinuity. (Again, not that this takes anything away from what you're really getting at, with which I do concur.)

not to mention the various Enterprise dedication plaques and the E-D and E-E's observation-lounge displays that conspicuously do not include NX-01.

But I thought "background details like that aren't meant to be binding canon"?

-MMoM

 

[pst]

Disregarding it? What are you talking about? I see a lot of similarities between the Kelvin and Discovery design ethics. After all, John Eaves is doing designs on both, and Alex Kurtzman has been a producer on both and thus his aesthetic sense probably has an influence. Both versions of the 2250s introduce a number of new Reliant-ish starship classes, even if the details are different. Both versions have windows on the bridge instead of viewscreens, and rather cluttered, graphics-heavy console displays. The Discovery transporter room looks strikingly similar to the Kelvin Enterprise transporter room, with a raised piece in the center of the platform. The shuttlecraft designs are similar, large and long with lots of side windows. The phasers in both versions glow blue for stun and red for kill. The Klingons in both versions are bald and more alien-looking than in prior incarnations. And the blue uniforms of the 2250s in DSC look like they could be a descendant of the blue command tunics of the 2230s Kelvin uniforms.

i'll give you a couple of those, the view screen/window is certainly a direct lift from the kelvin films. but no, i'm not really seeing much commonality between ryan church's designs and john eaves' stuff. or the uniforms, just because they're predominantly blue.

the point is, whether by design or by mandate by the studio, star trek: discovery is set in the prime universe. the series coopted a lot of the visual language and superficial aesthetics established by the kelvin timeline films, but is clearly thoroughly divorced from that continuity, even as it presented the prime universe. if we see some hanging cities on vulcan, or get a mention of the franklin or the kelvin, i'll be pleasantly surprised and have reevaluate my position. but as it pertains to starships and starship design history, if the stuff established in the kelvin films stays firmly there, then i maintain it's more reasonable to conclude they're products of the split in the timeline than that they're there, we just don't see any evidence of them.

But by your own argument, don't those references not count, because they're in the Kelvin Timeline?

no, i'm saying that it doesn't go both ways. kelvin timeline films freely incorporated what they wanted from the prime universe, but the current prime universe won't do the same, even when it's applicable to the setting.

 

[The Mighty Monkey of Mim]

i'll give you a couple of those, the view screen/window is certainly a direct lift from the kelvin films.

but as it pertains to starships and starship design history, if the stuff established in the kelvin films stays firmly there, then i maintain it's more reasonable to conclude they're products of the split in the timeline than that they're there, we just don't see any evidence of them

i'm saying that it doesn't go both ways. kelvin timeline films freely incorporated what they wanted from the prime universe, but the current prime universe won't do the same, even when it's applicable to the setting.

No offense, but you basically just disproved your own argument, there.

 

[Christopher]

the point is, whether by design or by mandate by the studio, star trek: discovery is set in the prime universe. the series coopted a lot of the visual language and superficial aesthetics established by the kelvin timeline films, but is clearly thoroughly divorced from that continuity, even as it presented the prime universe.

I don't think that's clear at all. Hell, DSC's aesthetic looks far more like Kelvin than it does like TOS, even though it's supposed to be in the same timeline as TOS.

but as it pertains to starships and starship design history, if the stuff established in the kelvin films stays firmly there, then i maintain it's more reasonable to conclude they're products of the split in the timeline than that they're there, we just don't see any evidence of them.

As I said, we've already seen crossover. You conceded that the bridge windows are a common element. And yes, the exact starship classes are different, but the "bit player" starship classes in both are along very similar, Miranda-ish lines, which makes it very reasonable to conclude they share a common descent from designs that existed before the timeline split 20-some years earlier.

no, i'm saying that it doesn't go both ways. kelvin timeline films freely incorporated what they wanted from the prime universe, but the current prime universe won't do the same, even when it's applicable to the setting.

You're stating a speculation as if it were a proven fact. I can see reasons why the makers of DSC might prefer to avoid references to Kelvin elements that they might need to pay residuals for, but I don't know enough about the actual specifics of the contracts involved to know for sure if I'm right. So I'm not going to jump to conclusions without more information.

 

[pst]

No offense, but you basically just disproved your own argument, there.

well. i'm at work so i'm split between trying to explain my thoughts on the kelvin timeline, trying to fulfill my responsibilities, and trying to maintain consciousness. and not doing either one very well.

to clarify (maybe): the stuff the kelvin films established in the prime universe likely won't actually cross over into discovery's prime universe beyond small, non-specific, non-proprietary aesthetic choices.

viewscreen as window, check.

starships designed by ryan church and costumes designed by michael kaplan, probably never happening.

as such, we can explain their absence as simply products of the temporal split and not have to imagine that the USS kelvin is somewhere out there in the discovery prime universe.

You're stating a speculation as if it were a proven fact. I can see reasons why the makers of DSC might prefer to avoid references to Kelvin elements that they might need to pay residuals for, but I don't know enough about the actual specifics of the contracts involved to know for sure if I'm right. So I'm not going to jump to conclusions without more information.

yes, you're right, i'm operating under the assumption that this is a corporate rather than a creative choice to disregard the kelvin timeline. either way, i find it annoying.

 

[Christopher]

as such, we can explain their absence as simply products of the temporal split and not have to imagine that the USS kelvin is somewhere out there in the discovery prime universe.

The Kelvin was active in the 2230s. It could be retired by the 2250s. So just because it doesn't show up, that doesn't mean it wasn't around in this timeline. After all, the Constitution class never showed up in the TNG era, but it was still supposed to have been part of those shows' past.

 

[The Mighty Monkey of Mim]

as such, we can explain their absence as simply products of the temporal split and not have to imagine that the USS kelvin is somewhere out there in the discovery prime universe.

Well, just keep in mind what @Christopher rightly said to me before:

"Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence."

-MMoM

 

[pst]

The Kelvin was active in the 2230s. It could be retired by the 2250s. So just because it doesn't show up, that doesn't mean it wasn't around in this timeline. After all, the Constitution class never showed up in the TNG era, but it was still supposed to have been part of those shows' past.

true. but i think you understand the point i'm trying to make. this is a corporate vs. creative vs. continuity pretzel.

 

[Christopher]

true. but i think you understand the point i'm trying to make. this is a corporate vs. creative vs. continuity pretzel.

As I said, I think you're making that assertion with more certainty than is warranted. There could be contractual or licensing issues that could be a disincentive to such references, but that kind of thing isn't insurmountable if the will is there. Remember how adamant the CBS executives were that Supergirl would never cross over with the Arrowverse? It took less than a year for the first crossover to happen.

 

[Ithekro]

It still be an interesting nod if USS Kelvin or her class shows up at some point as an old Starfleet vessel, a ship sold to private individuals, or simply a ship in a scrapyard like the study model that USS Discovery is based in was seen as in TNG (as well as another ship in Spacedock in TSFS).

 

[Shawnster]

Various round vs square nacelle ships can exist simultaneously. In universe it can be explained as the ships coming from different design or engineering firms like present day contractors like Lockheed vs. Boeing.

Why do ships need to look like a common lineage? Is that how real life works?

This chart depicts US military units active at the same time. Do they all share a common lineage? Consider just the aircraft. Some are prop, others are jets, others are supersonic or stealth.
https://i.pinimg.com/originals/42/3f/59/423f5976381c33bcac1658ffdf53ded7.png

They're owned by CBS as they were made under the Star Trek license.

But I doubt they'll use any movie designs as to not confuse the viewers/timelines.

Marvel owns X men yet neither they nor mutants can be mentioned on Agents of Shield due to licensing rights.

Same situation can exist in Star Trek in between current movies, old movies, previous series and DISCO

 

[STR]

There is a gap of five years between 2145, when Duvall broke the Warp Three barrier in the NX-Delta—which, by the way, if we want to speculate a hypothetical, it's even possible to think the Franklin was originally, before being donated to the MACOs by Starfleet in preparation for the inevitably-foreseen need of the United Earth Military in space, since that's not what Starfleet was supposed to be initially—and 2150, when the NX-01's keel was laid per "First Flight" (ENT). As for why Archer didn't specifically mention the Warp Four barrier being broken separately there, maybe he wasn't personally involved with that particular part of the project. Or maybe it only happened after NX-01's construction began, but before she was finished enough for engine trials and thus capable of Warp Four. Maybe a lot of things.

The whole point of "Enterprise" is that it's the first ship humanity has built that was remotely that fast. As a result, it's the first ship that's actually able to undergo exploration. Having a ship a couple years earlier that's only slightly slower utterly undermines the premise in nearly countless ways.

Why wasn't Franklin sent to Terra Nova? Why didn't the Franklin come across Andorians or Klingons? Enterprise came across all of that within weeks of leaving Earth. You're trying to justify this using a couple of flavor lines from one episode while ignoring the entirely of what that show was telling you.

 

[Nerys Myk]

Why do ships need to look like a common lineage? Is that how real life works?

Trekkie OCD. TOCD?

 

[Christopher]

Marvel owns X men yet neither they nor mutants can be mentioned on Agents of Shield due to licensing rights.

Same situation can exist in Star Trek in between current movies, old movies, previous series and DISCO

That's not the same situation. Marvel signed away its movie rights at a time when it was facing bankruptcy and was over a barrel, so it wasn't able to negotiate favorable terms. Also, the rights holders are an unrelated company, a competitor. In the case of Star Trek, the corporation formerly called Viacom and now called CBS Corporation was in full control when it chose to split off its movie properties into a separate corporation (which inherited the Viacom name). So it's a closer relationship, and I'm sure the terms of the license are more favorable for CBS.

The whole point of "Enterprise" is that it's the first ship humanity has built that was remotely that fast. As a result, it's the first ship that's actually able to undergo exploration and meet Having a ship a couple years earlier that's only slightly slower utterly undermines the premise in nearly countless ways.

The warp scale is logarithmic. Warp 5 is a major increase above warp 4. In the unofficial TOS-era warp scale, it's about twice as fast. And just because the Franklin was the first ship to reach warp 4, that doesn't mean it was able to do so repeatedly or regularly. As a prototype, it may not have been in steady use. It may have needed to be refitted afterward to become usable as a Federation Starfleet ship as seen in Beyond.

You're trying to justify this using a couple of flavor lines from one episode while ignoring the entirely of what that show was telling you.

And you're trying not to justify it. This is fiction, so there's no predetermined truth. It can be explained in whatever way the storytellers want to explain it. So if they want it to be in the same timeline, they can make it fit. Inconsistencies can be rationalized. Trek has had huge inconsistencies within it for 50 years, and its writers and its fans have spent lots of time either explaining away those inconsistencies or just ignoring them for the sake of pretending it all fits together. So it's a massive double standard to claim that an inconsistency like this -- which is actually pretty minor compared to a lot of the earlier inconsistencies in Trek canon -- can "only" be explained by a separate universe. Either that or it's a willful failure of imagination.

 

[fireproof78]

Various round vs square nacelle ships can exist simultaneously. In universe it can be explained as the ships coming from different design or engineering firms like present day contractors like Lockheed vs. Boeing.

Why do ships need to look like a common lineage? Is that how real life works?

This chart depicts US military units active at the same time. Do they all share a common lineage? Consider just the aircraft. Some are prop, others are jets, others are supersonic or stealth.
https://i.pinimg.com/originals/42/3f/59/423f5976381c33bcac1658ffdf53ded7.png

So it's a massive double standard to claim that an inconsistency like this -- which is actually pretty minor compared to a lot of the earlier inconsistencies in Trek canon -- can "only" be explained by a separate universe. Either that or it's a willful failure of imagination.

I feel the same way about the uniforms. If a show were to take place on a US Naval Aircraft Carrier and then on a submarine, by this logic they must be from different places.

I think the ships in Discovery work just fine, and that when Starfleet moved more out of a state of emergency, they were better able to smooth out the lines of their ships.