The New USS Discovery....

[publiusr]

Fingers crossed Eaglemoss ends up making both versions of Discovery (teaser and final). Would love to weigh them side by side.
Also wonder if Cryptic Studios will get access to the design after the series launch.

I hope so.

 

[Tuskin38]

Also wonder if Cryptic Studios will get access to the design after the series launch.

It will probably be easier for them then the KT stuff.

 

[F. King Daniel]

Here's a close-up of the Discovery from the latest poster. I'm not sure if any changes or differences count for much more than artistic licence. Remember also that the Beyond posters used the ST'09/ID Enterprise rather than the modified Beyond version.

 

[Jackson_Roykirk]

The bridge window thing always baffled me as an issue. Even ignoring the bridge window on the early model - the entire bridge has a glass window on top of it! At least the Kelvin bridge window has a function. The original just seemed to show bad guys where the captain was sitting

Silly boy -- The glass dome over the bridge was so that they could see the stars and use their sextants to navigate!

 

[Gary7]

Actually makes far greater sense not to have a huge window, but instead some camera ports that project the forward view to the bridge. Glass = vulnerability, where front view screens are concerned. And they can have multiple cameras, in case one is blown out.

 

[Gepard]

I predict fans will like it much better except for one major detail which they will continuously complain about.

Is it the periscope for underwater dives?

 

[dahj]

Glass = vulnerability

It's not made of glass.
It's made of invulnerable space glass.

 

[Gary7]

It's not made of glass.
It's made of invulnerable space glass.

Transparent aluminum!

Well, we do see it shattered in some Star Trek episodes, notably in VOY. And in Generations, there's a lot of broken glass after the saucer section crash lands on the planet.

 

[dahj]

Well, we do see it shattered in some Star Trek episodes, notably in VOY. And in Generations, there's a lot of broken glass after the saucer section crash lands on the planet.

That's in the future when they go back to regular glass, because with superior future technology they find out that the invulnerable one is actually harmful to squirrels or something.

 

[Jackson_Roykirk]

That's in the future when they go back to regular glass, because with superior future technology they find out that the invulnerable one is actually harmful to squirrels or something.

No. The reason they had to go back to regular glass was due to legal issues.

Starfleet once owned the patent rights to transparent Aluminum, but after the Enterprise returned to the 23rd century from 1984 after the whale incident, it seemed that history was rewritten so that this guy's family suddenly had the patent rights:

-----------------------------------------

 

[fireproof78]

Actually makes far greater sense not to have a huge window, but instead some camera ports that project the forward view to the bridge. Glass = vulnerability, where front view screens are concerned. And they can have multiple cameras, in case one is blown out.

Well, if you want to get technical about vulnerabilities:

 

[BillJ]

Actually makes far greater sense not to have a huge window, but instead some camera ports that project the forward view to the bridge. Glass = vulnerability, where front view screens are concerned. And they can have multiple cameras, in case one is blown out.

Having a bulkhead there didn't help the Enterprise in Star Trek: Nemesis.

 

[RAMA]

Here's a close-up of the Discovery from the latest poster. I'm not sure if any changes or differences count for much more than artistic licence. Remember also that the Beyond posters used the ST'09/ID Enterprise rather than the modified Beyond version.

That's pretty much it, with some warp distortion. I have the new design in a comparison shot (from the top) and the differences are fairly significant, though the idea that the ship in the SDCC teaser was a "direction" is very much in evidence.

 

[RAMA]

It's not really much more vulnerable than any other spot on a starship, as any ship without shields is pretty much a sitting duck.

Well, if you want to get technical about vulnerabilities:

 

[MadMan1701A]

That's pretty much it, with some warp distortion. I have the new design in a comparison shot (from the top) and the differences are fairly significant, though the idea that the ship in the SDCC teaser was a "direction" is very much in evidence.

Man, you're killing me. I'm dying to see this picture!



-Ricky

 

[Mad Jack Wolfe]

It makes sense to have your command crew at a high vantage point on a seagoing ship. They need as much visibility as they can get. But on a starship? Nope. That's what I already like about the Shenzhou. Sling the bridge underneath the saucer and thereby provide it with significant physical shielding. Of course, this only matters since combat in the Star Trek universe is restricted to the highly restrictive 3-D "pizza box" model with a clear up and down that everyone slavishly adheres to.

 

[Captain of the USS Averof]

That's what I already like about the Shenzhou. Sling the bridge underneath the saucer and thereby provide it with significant physical shielding.

The bottom of a saucer is just as exposed as the top. And without shields, with the weapons used in Star Trek, there's no such thing as significant physical shielding no matter where you're sitting.

 

[Mad Jack Wolfe]

The bottom of a saucer is just as exposed as the top. And without shields, with the weapons used in Star Trek, there's no such thing as significant physical shielding no matter where you're sitting.

Which is why I qualified my statement with the last sentence of my post: "Of course, this only matters since combat in the Star Trek universe is restricted to the highly restrictive 3-D "pizza box" model with a clear up and down that everyone slavishly adheres to."

 

[Fandango831]

That's pretty much it, with some warp distortion. I have the new design in a comparison shot (from the top) and the differences are fairly significant, though the idea that the ship in the SDCC teaser was a "direction" is very much in evidence.

You have me super curious mate! Hopefully we'll get to see it soon. I'm starting to feel some John Eaves sovereign design in the wings (btw I love the Sovereign design). From the poster it looks to have an elongated saucer section, the neck looks to now be one with the secondary hull versus being two distinct sections, the nacelles look rounder but also much sleeker, and finally the deflector is really really starting to remind me of the Sovereign deflector (round but imbedded in the hull).

 

[Jackson_Roykirk]

Which is why I qualified my statement with the last sentence of my post: "Of course, this only matters since combat in the Star Trek universe is restricted to the highly restrictive 3-D "pizza box" model with a clear up and down that everyone slavishly adheres to."

I remember arguing this back in the mid-1970s with my dumb ol' brother (than whom I am supremely more intelligent ).

My assertion was exactly what you said: "How stupid is it that every ship they encounter seems to go through space in the same orientation as the Enterprise, instead of, for example, upside-down relative to the Enterprise...Or is always at the same 'level' relative to the galactic plane, instead of approaching from somewhere above them along a diagonal path?"

My brother's response was to rebut me with a scoff and say, "Why would another ship want to fly through space upside-down?"

Clearly he missed my point.