(*Pops corn*)
My warp plasma coil vibrates with anticipatory fequencies!
My warp plasma coil vibrates with anticipatory fequencies!
USS Enterprise (eventually) on Discovery?
- Thread starter EJD1984
- Start date
Such language. Do you always have to work blue?
Ask my Andorian mistress!
People say windows are a structural weakness, but when has combat in Star Trek shown that it even matters?
One photon torpedo or energy weapon to an unsheilded bridge would take it out regardless if there was a window or not. Year of Hell and Enterprise showed us that. (And I think Nemisis?)
Having the bridge exposed on top of the ship is even worse then the window.
Plus they still have forcefields
One photon torpedo or energy weapon to an unsheilded bridge would take it out regardless if there was a window or not. Year of Hell and Enterprise showed us that. (And I think Nemisis?)
Having the bridge exposed on top of the ship is even worse then the window.
Plus they still have forcefields
Given that the windows are made of metal I’m inclined to agree with you insofar as it’s not a structural weakness in the traditional sense.
I also agree that having the bridge on the top is tactically unsound as it’s like painting a target on the hull...!
My issue with the window is from a narrative perspective. I don’t agree with the notion that it makes the show more visually dramatic or whatever and it seems to contradict the logic of the Star Trek universe by going from ships with screens that rely on sensory equipment to transparent apertures that rely on eyeballs.
Don’t get me wrong, I can see the advantages of the window from a narrative perspective. If you have writers who don’t realise that starfleet ships have a screen and assume it’s a window then it’s just easier than having them learn a tech manual by just making the screen a window. It must be easier for non trekkers to grasp as well I suppose. I just don’t think it was a necessary addition to the canon from 2009 onwards.
But maybe we’ll see the blast shield in action for s2 - maybe it’s so that water doesn’t get in when the Enterprise hides in the ocean?
When Vengeances window was smashed, it look to be at least a foot thick of woven or textured crystalline material, several layers thick. So what looks like a simple transparency is some kind of processed polymetallic supermaterial printed in layers until it's a massive piece lowered into place. Probably with circuitry printed or interlaced into it on a nano level.
That could make it as strong or stronger than many of the single metal pieces used to make the bridge structure.
That could make it as strong or stronger than many of the single metal pieces used to make the bridge structure.
How is my statement trolling anyone?? Its my opinion. So, is this how it works now? If you see an opinion you don't like, just call it trolling, and that makes it No longer valid. Or is this just another tool to shut down opinions some don't like? Wow..how about engaging, rather then smearing and trying to shut someone's speech down that you don't agree with? Isn't that tactic something that Free countries are supposed to oppose?
I'm not a fan of the STD Enterprise redesign. And yes it looks like the NX class, the refit and elements of TOS all wrapped up into a new Aztec pattern monstrosity. And mostly it looks like the NX and Refit. That's not the Constitution class of the TOS universe. This series is a visual reboot and yes, the presentation matters if this is supposedly the prime universe. It is not.
I just don't understand what it takes away or changes
I think this is particularly the case when you look at the nacelles. They look very similar to those of the NX-01 of nearly a century earlier.
Now, I have to admit I think the nx-01 didn’t look enough like a retrograde step from the 1701 on the outside. I love the overall design but the aesthetic looked more modern than the ship it was supposed to precede (I’d have made it a Daedalus class ship if I’m honest but it is what it is)
The thing with the DSC Enterprise is that yes it looks more “up to date for television etc etc” but why have nacelles that look a hundred years old (in-universe)? That goes against the logic of the apparent update of the design to me...
See, I don't have a problem with the design lineage traversing like that. If the Disco Enterprise looks like it uses elements of the NX-01 and the TMP refit doesn't that imply common design in universe? As in, more consistency? Is the argument that the Disco Enterprise looks too much like other ships in Star Trek?
No worriesI just don't understand what it takes away or changes
If we proceed from the assumption that the Enterprise is basically a submarine in space (not the 1701D which is a Marriott convention centre, but ships like the 1701 and the defiant-class defiant), and that space is big and dark (not tiny and blue as DSC and Kelvin would have us believe hehe!) then a window makes less sense than a screen in-universe ... to my mind. It shatters (no pun intended) the illusion (to me) of the submarine image to have a windshield that the crew can peer out of - it’s like they’re missing the wooden wheel and the tricorner hats with the window - but that’s just me.
If starships are hundreds of thousands of kilometres apart in space (when they look close on screen), they’d be tiny out a window but magnified on the screen. Now I know they can magnify the image with the window overlay but why would you bother? What purpose does the window serve other than to remind you that you’re in a very precarious position inside a pressurised tin can floating through the cold cold vacuum of space?
As I said, this is a personal opinion and from the submarine perspective I’m citing episodes like “balance of terror” and Star Trek II as that’s how those scenarios come across to me - no doubt others may argue that it’s more like ships on the high seas battling each other but in space. Each to their own. I hope that explains more where I’m coming from?
For my part, insofar as it doesn’t look like the TOS era as previously established in continuity, I’d say that argument holds, yes. I’m all for consistency in the design. But, the logic of “updating the design” is contradicted by using nacelle designs that are very close to those of a century earlier in my opinion. The nacelles on the prime enterprise design are distinct enough from those on the nx-01 to imply a century of development (despite the overall aesthetic of the nx-01 looking more advanced and rather similar to the Akira design... as much as I like Enterprise, the show created more continuity issues than it solved in my opinion).See, I don't have a problem with the design lineage traversing like that. If the Disco Enterprise looks like it uses elements of the NX-01 and the TMP refit doesn't that imply common design in universe? As in, more consistency? Is the argument that the Disco Enterprise looks too much like other ships in Star Trek?
Then why have windows at all? Why not just scenic overlays for the crew to forget they are seconds away from death?
Yes, it did. Because you are taking a fictional technology that is already far more advanced than current understanding and trying to create a more primitive version of it. Also, with respect to Starfleet,they use designs for a long time, like the Excelsior for 80+ years.
If I regard TOS Constitution class as anything its that these twelve ships were uniquely redesigned to be pristine and long range to support representing the Federation at on the final frontier. When the refits happened they just brought them back in line with the rest of the fleet. Of course, that's head canon.
Well if you look at TOS we don’t see very many windows at all - especially in the crew quarters. There are windows on the model, sure, but not where the crew seem to live. Maybe for that reason?
Ok it’s for budgetary reasons in real life, but that all adds to the submarine vibe for me. The same is true for the defiant class defiant as well.
Also Bones wins!
That’s why I wish they’d gone with the Daedalus class on ENT rather than the NX. Much as I like the elegance of the NX design, it wasn’t retrograde enough for me.Yes, it did. Because you are taking a fictional technology that is already far more advanced than current understanding and trying to create a more primitive version of it. Also, with respect to Starfleet,they use designs for a long time, like the Excelsior for 80+ years.
If I regard TOS Constitution class as anything its that these twelve ships were uniquely redesigned to be pristine and long range to support representing the Federation at on the final frontier. When the refits happened they just brought them back in line with the rest of the fleet. Of course, that's head canon.
And I like your head canon idea that the connies were like the prestige motors of the starfleet. That’s a nice idea - again it’s a shame we never got to see other TOS designs in TOS to confirm that.
...
Which is where DSC could step in with a line of dialogue.
Problem is (for me at least and remember that I’m awkward and obstinate when it comes to this issue haha!) they’ve changed the Enterprise to look like the DSC continuity so it doesn’t look as prestigious as it could have done had they stayed a little closer to the prime design...! But it is what it is, window and all.
But, is it really a problem is my question? I mean, think about it. If the TMP refit happened within two to three years (by some estimates) then is it really that difficult to imagine the, changing the look to the Constitution again prior to Kirk's mission? Updated to reflect a new era of peace and exploration? I mean, if the window bothers you that much then they installed bulkheads over it. Problem solved. I struggle with the idea that all these designs are immutable.
I like the submarine feel as well, but (and call me weird-it's ok) I have always thought that submarines could do with a window or two. Now, I get that underwater is dark and so is space. But these are supposed to be advanced starships with state of the art technology. I have no doubt there is a way to illuminate or have "enhanced windows" or something. But, that might come from growing up reading 20,000 Leagues Under the Sea.
Ultimately, no, it’s not a problem. Starfleet changes their uniforms more often than the CinC changes their underwear so frequent tech upgrades and refits etc don’t pose a problem for me.But, is it really a problem is my question? I mean, think about it. If the TMP refit happened within two to three years (by some estimates) then is it really that difficult to imagine the, changing the look to the Constitution again prior to Kirk's mission? Updated to reflect a new era of peace and exploration? I mean, if the window bothers you that much then they installed bulkheads over it. Problem solved. I struggle with the idea that all these designs are immutable.
I like the submarine feel as well, but (and call me weird-it's ok) I have always thought that submarines could do with a window or two. Now, I get that underwater is dark and so is space. But these are supposed to be advanced starships with state of the art technology. I have no doubt there is a way to illuminate or have "enhanced windows" or something. But, that might come from growing up reading 20,000 Leagues Under the Sea.
I’m one of the few who thinks that the changes were only necessary to bring the Enterprise into line with the DSC continuity - wherein the problem lies with the fact that I think the DSC visuals should have been more subtle updates of TOS so the problem is more with the DSC aesthetic overall rather than with the Enterprise herself. But that’s a whole nother can of worms...!
And maybe I’m not giving JJ enough credit with the submarine window - perhaps it was a reference to 20,000 Leagues this whole time? I guess I’m thinking more “hunt for red October” with my subs than Jules Verne haha!
P.s. I should just clarify too - I understand that the TOS visuals had to be updated for modern tv. I’m not advocating 60’s production values for one second. My issue with the DSC aesthetic is the way they were updated and the direction they went in - not “it don’t look like TOS I hate it!” I would have preferred a softer, more subtle visual reboot as opposed to the harder, more radical reboot we’ve got. But it’s not a dealbreaker for me.
I'm genuinely thinking they might move it more towards an update TOS over time. Ten years is a long time.
Similar threads
