I think it's an illusion as well.
But, it's a brief scene. Off to warp we go.
But, it's a brief scene. Off to warp we go.
Spoilers The Strange New Worlds Starship Thread™
- Thread starter Tuskin38
- Start date
Because of the long window tunnel (which is the entire length of the bridge set again), it would have been impossible to composit the bridge film with the CG at the angle they shot it. So they did a little cheat.
The Klingon battle cruiser in episode 9 is missing the new windows they added to the DSC model for episode 1
https://twitter.com/gaghyogi49/status/1687542670254555136?s=46&t=GJ4lIGndtLwuph_LJO2AJw
https://twitter.com/gaghyogi49/status/1687542670254555136?s=46&t=GJ4lIGndtLwuph_LJO2AJw
D-7 is close to the SS-6/R-7 Soyuz rocket.
D-7A Klolode…D-7M K’tinga.
I might call this D-7R..Kronos One as D-7Q and the ships from 09’s reboot D-7Y.
https://blog.trekcore.com/2018/06/review-eaglemoss-star-trek-2009-klingon-battle-cruiser-model/
D-7Z?
https://sketchfab.com/3d-models/sta...ttle-cruiser-52b41d2a19f9484a8b69fde81a441906
This a D-8
Last edited:
The same model was used in ENT: "Unexpected" set in 2151. Yet Disco S2 makes the D7 a new design in 2258. Yet there was another Klingon ship called the D7 the year before which looked entirely different.
If the TOS Enterprise and refit Enterprise can both be Constitution-class I suppose it's only fair that both the D7 and the K't'inga can be the same thing. We do have the B'rel-class Bird-of-Prey being referred to on-screen as a "D12" by Worf in Star Trek: Generations after all, so it seems likely the D(numeral) designations are just an internal Starfleet classification not used by the Klingons themselves.
There are equivalents to this in the real world; for example NATO came up with their own classifications for Soviet vessels during the Cold War – e.g. the Typhoon-class submarine, made famous by the titular vessel in The Hunt for Red October, was known in Russian as the Akula-class.
There are equivalents to this in the real world; for example NATO came up with their own classifications for Soviet vessels during the Cold War – e.g. the Typhoon-class submarine, made famous by the titular vessel in The Hunt for Red October, was known in Russian as the Akula-class.
Calling the Sech class in DSC "D7" can be explained away. The shuttle identified the signature of the tractor beam as D7. Perhaps the Sech just had a D7-class tractor beam emitter installed. Solved (not elegantly, but solved).
DSC season 2, the D7 was called a D7 in Klingon. ‘Day Soch’
In DS9 the D7 flying around K-7 was updated to have some K’t’inga style hull details.
Yes, well. Given all the bald/squashy/big head nonsense I'm inclined to take a very broad brush approach to anything DIS says about Klingons...
Near where the neck connects to the secondary hull? Maybe the Klingons turn off the lights when they leave a room?
Last edited:
No no no. All species know lights must be on for display purposes. Like when 5 people flew the Enterprise in Picard from the bridge but lights on all 42 decks were onNear where the neck connects to the secondary hull? Maybe the Klingons turn off the lights when they leave a room?
No no no. All species know lights must be on for display purposes. Like when 5 people flew the Enterprise in Picard from the bridge but lights on all 42 decks were on
Maybe some of the windows also double as radiators, and that's why so many are lit at any one time and why so many of them seem to be opaque from the outside... given how small the Enterprise-D's crew is for her size she must have had entire decks that were deserted even when fully manned.
Ship's computers are vain, how they arrange thier lights is like grooming and fashion to them. Heaven help you if you get assigned a room the computer would rather leave off as a beauty mark/s
Making up for the lack of lighting on the Titan.No no no. All species know lights must be on for display purposes. Like when 5 people flew the Enterprise in Picard from the bridge but lights on all 42 decks were on
Except SNW isn’t ignoring that
SNW arguably is also taking the broad strokes approach seeing as how we only see disco elements as reused footage, and not taking clear opportunities to actually use those assets to make new scenes.
I mean, that's always been in the Trek approach. Broad strokes in terms of ships, reuse of models, weapons, sets.
Or they opted to steer in to fan complaints and ignore the Klingons and update the make up (again) without reason. Again, the Trek approach.
It's very much ignoring the infamous DIS Klingon redesign and going for a much more classic look. As for everything else... just chalk it up to a lack of intelligence during an extended period of poor diplomatic relations.
Prefer more diversity to Klingons not less.
Disappointing.
Disappointing.
Similar threads
