USS Enterprise (eventually) on Discovery?

[Groppler Zorn]

Most any explanation would include time travel/alternate universes, which they don't want to bring up. Because it would indicate this and TOS aren't the same universe.

Well, any plausible explanation yes. They could just call it a refit and I'd be fine with it. Starfleet ships are modular - so goes the popular lore - so it shouldn’t be too difficult to swap out bits like nacelle pylons and engine pods and the ships neck and saucer and secondary hull. They did a whole stem to stern refit in 18 months so they could do the same to the ship in DSC. I just want it acknowledged so that I don’t have to make believe TOS and DSC are the same.

Because my brain keeps saying “doth mine eyes deceive me?”

Also the Klingons need to do more Shakespeare on this show.

 

[BillJ]

Because my brain keeps saying “doth mine eyes deceive me?”

They don't. Its a reboot. *shh*

 

[Groppler Zorn]

They don't. Its a reboot. *shh*

But but but prime...

 

[Mad Jack Wolfe]

Most any explanation would include time travel/alternate universes, which they don't want to bring up. Because it would indicate this and TOS aren't the same universe.

Odds are they can't come up with a better justification than, "But ain't it kewl?"

Nah, it ain't.

 

[BillJ]

Odds are they can't come up with a better justification than, "But ain't it kewl?"

Nah, it ain't.

I would be less disinterested in this version of they had left the pylons straight and left the curve on the underside of the saucer. Once they changed those, I no longer cared.

 

[Mad Jack Wolfe]

I would be less disinterested in this version of they had left the pylons straight and left the curve on the underside of the saucer. Once they changed those, I no longer cared.

Or reduced the outer thickness of the primary hull to maybe two decks. I'm sure they'll address some of their missteps in season 2. But then again, they lost me the middle of season 1.

 

[Groppler Zorn]

I would be less disinterested in this version of they had left the pylons straight and left the curve on the underside of the saucer. Once they changed those, I no longer cared.

Or reduced the outer thickness of the primary hull to maybe two decks. I'm sure they'll address some of their missteps in season 2. But then again, they lost me the middle of season 1.

I’d have forgiven all of it - if it weren’t for the window.

Seriously I don’t care about the changes - if they’d have left the ship the same as it was in the prime universe, it would have looked totally out of kilter with the rest of the DSC continuity. The rest of the look is wrong so the Enterprise needs to look how it does to look anything like it belongs in the same universe.

 

[fireproof78]

They don't. Its a reboot. *shh*

It's both. And that's ok

 

[BillJ]

Seriously I don’t care about the changes - if they’d have left the ship the same as it was in the prime universe, it would have looked totally out of kilter with the rest of the DSC continuity.

I disagree. There should be room for multiple styles of ships.

 

[Groppler Zorn]

I disagree. There should be room for multiple styles of ships.

To be fair the tng era ships have a variety of styles - from the galaxy and nebula classes to the intrepid and sovereign classes, they do look quite distinct from each other.

I guess there’s just been such a limited range of styles from the TOS period that I feel like everything should be smooth and geometric shapes like the TOS designs of old.

 

[Mad Jack Wolfe]

I’d have forgiven all of it - if it weren’t for the window.

Seriously I don’t care about the changes - if they’d have left the ship the same as it was in the prime universe, it would have looked totally out of kilter with the rest of the DSC continuity. The rest of the look is wrong so the Enterprise needs to look how it does to look anything like it belongs in the same universe.

Yeah, the bridge window. There's not one iota of strategic, tactical, or intrinsic value to having the bridge viewscreen be a window as well. Past 25 miles at best in perfect conditions, the human eye is worthless in military operations.

My quibble with the ships of the DISCOverse is the largely nonsensical yet painfully unimaginative take on the Starfleet ships Eaves is guilty (again) of, and the overwrought, watercolours-caught-in-the-rain approach to the Klingon vessels.

My wife is, astonishingly, a bigger Trekkie than I am. She watched the first two episodes and said, "What the hell am I looking at? Turn it off. I'd rather watch The Food Network than this shit."

 

[BillJ]

My wife is, astonishingly, a bigger Trekkie than I am.

Sounds like you got a keeper!

 

[Groppler Zorn]

Yeah, the bridge window. There's not one iota of strategic, tactical, or intrinsic value to having the bridge viewscreen be a window as well. Past 25 miles at best in perfect conditions, the human eye is worthless in military operations.

Totally agree. It’s obvious that many here don’t mind you - and I don’t think the great window debate is going to ever be resolved - but bridge windows have bugged me since 2009.

My quibble with the ships of the DISCOverse is the largely nonsensical yet painfully unimaginative take on the Starfleet ships Eaves is guilty (again) of, and the overwrought, watercolours-caught-in-the-rain approach to the Klingon vessels.

I largely agree. Eaveses ships seem to look more at home in the 24th century than the 23rd. I give them a pass for at least looking like starfleet ships - saucers and nacelles and deflector dishes and whatnot - but they don’t suggest the TOS aesthetic from the original series to me. Generally I like Eaves’s design work - just not for this time period.

My wife is, astonishingly, a bigger Trekkie than I am. She watched the first two episodes and said, "What the hell am I looking at? Turn it off. I'd rather watch The Food Network than this shit."

I don’t blame her
I got to that point around halfway through s1 and gave up watching it weekly. I waited til the series ended then watched the rest in one go. That approach didn’t help.

 

[Longinus]

Please, not the bloody window discussion again! The whole fucking ship is completely different shape. The shuttlebay for example is about half smaller than on the original. It is much more different from TOS Enterprise than the refit was. The window is actually a thing that could easily be added or removed, the hull shape isn't.

 

[Groppler Zorn]

Please, not the bloody window discussion again! The whole fucking ship is completely different shape. The shuttlebay for example is about half smaller than on the original. It is much more different from TOS Enterprise than the refit was. The window is actually a thing that could easily be added or removed, the hull shape isn't.

Haha no I don’t want to open that can of worms again - or do I mean I don’t want to open the window of worms? Whatever it’s just a window it’s been an issue for me for nearly a decade and it ain’t gonna get solved any time soon!

Is the shuttle bay smaller now? I thought the whole ship was bigger (thus betterer) than before so the shuttle bay could be massive now?

Don’t get me wrong I don’t like the discoprise but I’d happy enough if they just explained that the nacelle struts, secondary and primary hulls, engine pods, deflector, and neck section were all just modules that could be replaced as easily as swapping the case on your iPhone. It’s the 23rd century and they can make holograms that can interact with rooms light years away somehow so they can make a modular ship. Maybe it’s made of Lego? Probably not but the modular explanation would be ok with me.

 

[Longinus]

Is the shuttle bay smaller now? I thought the whole ship was bigger (thus betterer) than before so the shuttle bay could be massive now?

It is much smaller if we assume that the versions of the ship are roughly the same size, which you obviously have to assume if you're going to pretend any sort of refit explanation for the changes.

 

[TrickyDickie]

Certs....with Retcon.

 

[Mad Jack Wolfe]

Sounds like you got a keeper!

Yeah, after 25 years, I'd say the relationship might work out.

 

[Belz...]

TOS yes. Tng? The four feet model is a bit Shonda comparered to the six foot, but it’s not really the same thing is it.
1979 had them writ an eighteen month refit into TMP so we knew why the ship was different.

And we have no idea why the 1701-D changes completely, proportions included, from one shot to the next. If you think every change requires an explanation in-universe, it must drive you mad. If you're more like me, you just chalk it up to them having two models but being too cheap to re-shoot previous effects shots.

In the case of the 1979 model, there is NO WAY the TOS model can be refit into that one. The proportions are all different. In fact, the ship is 100% different. I'd buy the refit into the Discoprise, actually, but not that one. But it's still not an issue because there is no need to explain all of that in-universe. They redesigned the Enterprise, and that's all there is to it.

Secondly there have been explanations given for visual changes in Trek before so there’s a precedent - hence a current need.

That doesn't follow. Also, there haven't always been explanations. Sometimes it just happened for no in-universe reason; like the changes in uniforms from the 3rd season of TNG onward. Again, not everything needs an explanation unless you think Star Trek isn't a work of fiction.

 

[TrickyDickie]

In the case of the 1979 model, there is NO WAY the TOS model can be refit into that one. The proportions are all different. In fact, the ship is 100% different. I'd buy the refit into the Discoprise, actually, but not that one.

The TOS Enterprise is Voq and the TMP refit is Ash. It's pretty much the same level of reconfiguring, in both cases.