Well, then, we might have to look at Trek from a different framework than what is likely to occur, if it is already invalidated.
This is something that I think would have to be done. Trek did draw from real life science and technical understanding at first, however, a lot of the stuff we saw there (such as high tech use of Maglev for example, complete socio-economic revamp without money, cleaning up stuff in a short period of time [well, in less than 10 years for us, not in a day or so like we saw in Trek], building with technical efficiency, sustainability and problem solving in mind) was already largely possible since 1974... Trek merely removed existing 'cost efficiency' (and monetary) constraint which we artificially limit ourselves with presently. A lot of the stuff we saw in Trek (technology-wise) was fairly small-scale and limited in scope (sans a rare case when the writers DID showcase larger scales)... despite the fact that automation and technology/science would have advanced considerably by late 21st and early/mid 22nd centuries already... so I was surprised we hadn't seen pre-Federation Starfleet (aka by the time NX-01 launched) building a Dyson Swarm (when we could have started building ours in real life since 1990 or 2000 at the latest). So, there's no real need in rewriting Trek... just 'adding' a few things in dialogue, and scaling it up progressively from one century to the next and actually SHOWING it. Like I said, Discovery could do this, but it would probably play havoc with how the S3 story progressed... but then again, if done right, then I think it could be re-integrated (starting with TW beaming), building Dyson Swarms (or heck, actual Spheres would be doable by 32nd century), clearing up the TW conduits from debris using self-replicating automated bots which travel the TW corridors and harvest the debris for resources (disassemble them and then say construct outposts near the conduits with new ships), etc. Plus, ignoring some obvious plot points is not exactly new to Trek.. so, if Disco S4 and 5 consider doing this, they could just 'ignore' some facets of S3 story and go forward with far greater consistency and far less plot holes (or preferably none... but that may be asking a lot, so some minor errors are allowed, but a team of writers should be able to cover most if not all of the bases). Seeing use of QS version 2 (10 000 Ly's per minute) and much higher Warp velocities (with accurate time travel times) would be good... no more stupid limit on benamite crystals as that thing was already addressed in Voyager and would have been solved in less than 10 years after Voyager returned. Make up some excuse that needed facilities weren't available and with the strain on the Federation from the Emerald chain they couldn't viably construct new facilities [which SF HQ would realistically have at the HQ and every other facility or planet for centuries up until that point] and any ship and outpost would be able to make them on a whim with next to nothing in terms of energy/resource expenditure, and they wouldn't degrade). But apart from Strange New Worlds, Prodigy, Picard and Lower Decks, I don't think we will see much of those eras anymore... and I doubt that those shows would try showing like that as their story-telling doesn't involve such additions/changes (but we'll see). Discovery could use Season 4 as a 'catching up' scenario (science and technology-wise) with a broader story in mind, and then as the seasons progress (assuming how long it stays on the air), It gets progressively updated in accordance to what we know and extrapolated/advanced enough for such a collection of societies. It would be like envisioning maximum (or close to it) technical/scientific potential we can do in real life and then apply theoretical concepts of say Type III and Type IV civilizations we conjured up into the mix (with Trek technologies and science) to progress it even further. This would inevitably have to push the writers also to come up with better stories that take advantage of the setting and the drama works with it in turn.
Start with explaining Type III and Type IV civilizations to the writers. And again, all of this sounds highly technical with no interest in the human aspects. It sounds cool-in the abstract. But, we are dangerously close to being so advance that it is unrelatable, save for the select few for will be able to parse out the technical language, and what the longer term implications of such developments would. Mainly that technology will be so all powerful that problems won't exist as we understand them. So, if we can't understand their problems in terms of size and scope then there is the risk of losing the general audience. Technological advancement and realistic depiction is great and all but this isn't a technical manual that's being presented here.
There are waaaaaay too many people who want Star Trek to be "real" and a completely plausible future that they can suspend all disbelief on and imagine actually living there. It's the same crew who complain about the show being too Earth / human-centric. It's a fictional construct designed to entertain the masses. Nothing more, nothing less.
I guess so. While being a part of our world is definitely a prime understanding of Star Trek's idea, but making it a perfect reality? Or perfectly realistic? That breaks my own suspension of disbelief. If I wanted the real world would I be watching the show with the rocketships and ray guns?
Precisely. I'm also personally not someone who cares about all the worldbuilding, technology, and politics. I am a much bigger fan of Star Trek when it's small human stories played in a (fairly) consistent scifi setting. Even though I really liked DS9, I hate how that show set a lot of fans mindset and expectations that Star Trek is somehow "GoT in Spaaaaccce," for example. Whatever, different strokes I guess.
Honestly, what will always bother me is the need to distance the human elements from it. If we insist upon the larger worldbuilding then we leave less time for the characters. Now, for a brand new franchise that is setting out its own rules and development? Go for it. Some of my favorite authors one ones who sit down and map out their worlds and construct them in a realistic manner. But, that isn't Star Trek. Star Trek has started out as a very character driven piece, making alien species relatable on some levels, while acknowledging irreconcilable differences in other beings. TOS deliberately avoided the technical speak because it was supposed to be normal, every day stuff, to the characters. The writer's bible calls this out specifically that the tech wasn't the center focus. Now, maybe that is a bit of a unbalanced point of view, and the tech needs some development. But, when they are working on a limited time table the tech side will come at a cost.
I think my biggest "WTF" security feature was in TNG's Brothers where apparently complete control of the Enterprise D can be turned over simply by Picard's voice command without any kind of secret codeword or biometrics scan, thereby allowing Data to simply switch to speaking with Picard's voice and he has complete control of the ship. Hmm, one wonders why Lore never tried that?
Cool. I like his movies. I could do without his TV shows. Improvised missiles, I suppose. But, even if they are attached the enemy is still going to target the nacelles. So, attached, unattached, once the fields are gone it's bye-bye birdie.
Seems to me detachable nacelles -- preferably ones capable of warping away independently of the ship, under the control of one or two crewmembers and/or an AI -- could be a tactical advantage. Pre-emptively detach the nacelles at the start of a battle, the nacelles warp away to prevent the enemy from targeting them, you keep hitting the enemy so they can't pursue. This takes away the enemy's ability to destroy your warp capability by destroying the connecting struts (such as we saw done to the Kelvin Timeline Enterprise in Star Trek Beyond). If you pre-emptively detach, you can thwart any attempt to nullify the electromagnetic connection and then re-attached at your leisure once the battle is over. (The one downside I could see is if the enemy pursues the nacelles at warp and leaves the rest of the hull hanging... But then the sensible thing would be for the nacelles to be programmed to return to the rest of the ship for protection.) I would imagine it would also be possible to re-attach the nacelles along different points of the hull if for whatever reason the original connection point has been damaged or destroyed.
My guess would be that 32nd Century warp engines channel their energy to the warp coils through a medium other than charged plasma, presumably a non-physical medium.
Nacelles have always been an unnecessary point of failure. The Enterprise D blew up in 'Cause and effect' from a glancing blow to one of it's nacelles. Voyager managed to destroy one of the Equinox's nacelles and force it out of warp. They are an inherent weak spot regardless of whether they are attached or not.
I always liked the in-universe justification for the separate placement of the nacelles -- that nacelles just emit so much radiation that it's not safe for them to be integrated into the hull. It's a nice bit of flavor that implies certain things about the cultures that use this technology -- that cultures like the Federation and the Romulans are willing to risk being more vulnerable in a firefight to avoid regularly dosing their crews with dangerous levels of radiation; that some cultures like the Klingons are willing to put their crews at greater risk for tactical advantages vis-a-vis the integrated warp nacelles in the bird-of-prey classes; that the Federation considered fighting the Borg to be important enough to risk crews' lives in the name of being less vulnerable in battle vis-a-vis the Defiant class.
Why bother with physical conducts when transporters have been a thing for over a millennia? I expect for them to be extremely efficient and reliable by now. Instead of conduits that can be damaged and of taking some time to circulate the plasma can be constantly beamed in and out of nacelles as required.
Imagine trying to explain wifi or Bluetooth to someone fifty years ago, hell even twenty years ago! Bluetooth charging by a phone just being in range of a power pad is pretty neat tech it still blows my mind I can watch an episode of Star Trek, on my phone, out in the wilderness on 3/4G, with the sound coming through headphones that aren't in any way attached. It's magic. So how do detached warp nacelles work? Well, they just do. It's even the fact that their detached state is their default state; they only connect when going into warp or spore drive, so it may even be that technology is so far advanced that the 'connection', or whatever it is that is keeping them in balance with the rest of the ship, is as fail safe as the gravity plating and life support is in the 24th century. Discovery still has a 'warp core', but we've learnt nothing about how the reaction chamber works or even if plasma is still a thing; maybe the plasma is now charged through a quantum subspace, akin to 21st century wifi, and just 'loads' the nacelles with a constant data stream of particles. Maybe the transporter comes into play and the connection between the core and nacelles is an 'open transport beam' supplying them? If you think how in-ship beaming is occurring in a split second, it could the ship is in a constant transport bubble and everything just beams instantly inside it, a bit like how a computer is on standby mode and doesn't need booting up or 'energising' every morning. I actually think all this detached ship components is one of the more positive moves of the writers thinking about the 32nd century; it's given us something in the 21st century that everyone back in the 1960s probably thought about with the transporter- it's magic, and yet, potentially possible.
maybe in the 24th century. Did you miss the fact that transporters are now so common place and developed that the whole device fits into the new badges (when they beam now they don’t rely on the ship’s transporters’: it’s all the the badge!)?