Whenever I see those dual torp launchers, I am somehow reminded of this:
USS Enterprise (eventually) on Discovery?
- Thread starter EJD1984
- Start date
Exactly this.
Also, in TWOK, when they’re in the nebula (pay attention people who defend the window) as Spock served on the Enterprise in the good old days when she had a window, because it’s the same ship as in DSC, doesn’t that mean Spock was either incompetent or negligent in TWOK as XO of the Enterprise for not sending a crewman to a window?
Shouldn’t Spock have been like “jim, in my day we had a window up front there and it worked wonders” so Kirk would be “send ensign Ricky to the window mr Spock and coordinate with him and communicate with him regularly!”
But no - Spock stares steadfastly at his console in the nebula and Kirk even says:
“Look sharp everyone” as they’re staring AT THE VIEWSCREEN.
Spock never says “jim a window is logically the way forward here - we used to have a window back in the day - this is how we beat Khan”.
So as it’s the same ship, Spock is not the hero we all know him to be. No wonder admiral Morrow didn’t want Kirk to bother going to get him off genesis.
Agreed. I also thought the Probert version (the proto Ambassador class) was nice but looked too advanced to be a forerunner of the 1701D. Shame we only saw the Ambassador class in small doses. I was hoping DSC had been an anthology show and we’d have got a 1701C series...
That wasn't the argument. But, I see your point.Umm, I don't follow your reasoning here.Starfleet engineers: "Putting a window on the bridge instead of a viewscreen would do absolutely nothing to help the crew. What the heck, why not do it anyway?"
In fact, it could arguably subtract value. With a viewscreen, the bridge module is genuinely modular; a ship's captain can customize its orientation to fit whatever suits him (e.g., the infamous 36-degree offset of the TOS bridge). With a window, everything is stuck in a fixed position.
Was that on purpose? I just assumed it was a mistake between the set planning and model design.
Probert's Enterprise-C is another design that looks better from some angles than others, in my opinion:
http://www.modelermagic.com/?p=28446
http://www.modelermagic.com/?p=28446
The thread that discusses this design is here. judexavier was the designer and @MadMan1701A was building the mesh...Aside: Just came across this design. Said artist unknown:
Not "on purpose" from the very beginning, no; rather, the separate underlying components were all on purpose, and reconciling the exterior to the interior became an after-the-fact exercise.
Jefferies designed the exterior of the ship with the turbolift shaft directly behind the bridge module, along the ship's axis. However, the bridge interior was designed with the turbolift 144° (rather than 180°) away from the viewscreen, for (reportedly) two reasons: one, in-universe, it allowed the captain to be aware of who was entering the bridge without having to turn around completely, and two, IRL, it allowed camera positioning to frame the captain from a dramatic three-quarter view and simultaneously include characters entering from the turbolift.
The after-the-fact rationalizing involved inferring that the entire bridge module — and, within it, the position of specific workstations — was adaptable and swappable. (This also helps explain the difference between the taller bridge in "The Cage," and the shorter bridge in TOS proper.) That wasn't necessarily what was intended from the start, and of course it elicited no end of fan debate over the years, but at the end of the day it makes a lot of sense. With a window permanently positioned 180° opposite the turbolift shaft, however, this flexibility would be lost.
I'll be damned if Trekkies don't over-think stuff.
Or come up with things people can’t refute/explain... hehehe
Thing is, there's nothing to explain, in-universe. Things are changed in the real world, and they change in Star Trek. There's no in-universe explanation and no need for it unless you're expecting consistency from a franchise that is notorious for the lack of it.
A beautiful design, but it looks maybe too much like an exact cross between an Excelsior and a Galaxy, rather than an intermediate.
I know that probably doesn't make a lot of sense, but I think an intermediate should have echoes of the previous or the next, certainly some design cues, but not look like the two had an illicit liaison.
Nice image of Phase II from Eaglemoss....
Which is a nice answer if you don’t think an explanation is warranted... or you can’t explain it (although I’ll admit lack of a better explanation doesn’t make mine correct - I think a Vulcan once taught me that...!)
And while I agree Star Trek is a little wobbly with consistency, something as fundamental as the viewscreen has been in every iteration of Star Trek until DSC. It was even a plot point in TWoK.
And for everyone saying continuity isn’t affected etc etc. - it actually is because Spock’s character is done a disservice by him not recommending they look out a window like they did back in the old days.
Whether we want to admit that or not is by the by - but the viewer window makes Spock a less impressive character than he was before because of his negligence or incompetence in TWoK.
Yes we could write that off as me “taking it too seriously”, but if people didn’t take Trek seriously why did it survive and why is Spock such a beloved character?
Seeing as the DSC Enterprise is the same ship from TOS and Spock will be the same Spock because it’s all in the prime universe means that Spock really isn’t as much of a legend as we all thought he was because he made a really basic mistake in TWoK. Maybe he was so guilty he went down the engine room to end it all? Makes my favourite TOS film (Star Trek iii) seem a little less poignant now because captain Spock kinda caused the destruction of the Enterprise because of his error in the mutara nebula.
Because the DSC ship is the same ship as the one in TWoK. Starfleet must have had Ktarian egg on their face when they realised how stupid they’d been by taking out all the bridge windows. So they decided never again to make this mistake in light of the genesis fiasco and put windows on all ships that followed the Enterprise. As seen in TNG through VOY.
Which up until now, TOS to TnG through VOY were indeed consistent in their use of a viewscreen.
The only character worse off here is Spock. But he’s not important to Star Trek, right?
Spock is being slowly whittled down in Discovery. Michael Burnham has already done many of the things Spock had done over his career, in a single year. We also know that Spock simply doesn't know what he is talking about, witness his mistake where cloaking devices is concerned.
Nice image of Phase II from Eaglemoss....
I got one. It is very nice.
I have to say, much as I liked Enterprise, the cloaking device issue really annoyed me. Spock’s line in BoT was rendered inert by the frakking suliban (a pointless enemy given that the klingons were around in the 22nd century). That and the “simple impulse” line was ignored too.
And I agree about Michael. While I love the idea of a human raised on Vulcan by Vulcans, I also tend to think that making her adoptive father Sarek does Spock a disservice.
But as you say, Spock is being rendered less and less effective as a starfleet officer by the episode. Didn’t McCoy describe him as the best first officer in the fleet? No wonder starfleet was nearly conquered by the Klingons and only a mega super death bomb on Qo’Nos was able to stop them invading earth.
Yes, that is Star Trek.
I fail to see how one mistake "whittles down" Spock.
The most confusing aspect is that some how, in some way, if someone else does it first it takes away from another's story, even though Spock is unique in that he is actively trying to embrace the Vulcan way. He is constantly being challenged, and mocked, and continues forward to success, to the point that his father has to admit that he was wrong.
I fail to see how one mistake "whittles down" Spock.
Spock was supposed to be this exceptional character who prided himself on having the correct information, now we find out that he was in a war with cloaking devices yet still called them theoretical.
As far as Burnham goes... she was a first officer first, in line for her own command first, fought a war with the Klingons first, mutinied first, time traveled first, interacted with the Mirror Universe first, decorated as a hero of the Federation first...
Can't they come up with some firsts for her to accomplish that doesn't overrun Spock's character? At this point, Spock is just Michael Burnham's little brother.
Only the ones the Romulans used.
In Balance of Terror, the Romulan cloak was visually perfect, no flickers, completely invisable (except to motion sensors).
In DSC, at least on the "BoPs", the cloak wasn't perfect, you see it them some times as the cloak flickered.
Similar threads
