USS Enterprise (eventually) on Discovery?

[Belz...]

Just like when Lucas went back and made changes to the original Trilogy: sometimes it's unnecessary and even unwanted to update old things when they were fine just the way they were.

Unnecessary to whom?

That might sound like entitlement, but hey, I’m the consumer Lucas is selling his product to.

Have you considered that perhaps you are, in fact, not the target audience?

But it doesn’t fit the Chart. How can that not bother you?

Presumably because that poster is not quite as obsessed with continuity.

The idea that the TOS ship was also bigger ultimately runs into the TMP version, which was laid out in much more detail at 305 meters

Again, never stated on screen and taking measurements of the sets and the model would make 305m extremely cramped. 380-420 would be better.

 

[Boris Skrbic]

It would have to be proven that such an increase in length makes a lot more sense for most features on the TMP ship (including shuttlebays, docking ports), not just a few interior/exterior outliers that can be dismissed as bloopers; then, the proof would have to published on a visible and fairly permanent site so its conclusions can be reproduced and eventually applied to licensed publications.

 

[Dukhat]

Sorry, I'm trying to wrap my head around your wording here.

Are you saying you think they'll change the -D and -E if they do flashbacks, or are you saying you don't think they'll change them?

The latter.

Unnecessary to whom?

I already answered that question.

Have you considered that perhaps you are, in fact, not the target audience?

If I’m not the target audience, please tell me who is.

 

[valkyrie013]

My 2 cents.. well probably 1.2543 cents..
All this talk of "It wasn't said in the show" is crap.. why?
Here's an example:
The Millininum Falcon.. ( among others on Star Wars..)
That ship is the ultimate Tardis.. that isn't the Tardis.. there's now way in hell that the interior sets can fit inside the size of the full size ship they use.. at all.. but that doesnt stop them from putting in new stuff like an engine room, Lando's quarters. etc. I mean.. where do you store cargo? It is a Cargo ship! and there is No on screen person saying the MF is say 38.5 meters long.. or the Star destroyer is 1.5 Km..
There are tons of ships that there size isn't referenced, or is referenced badly on the screen..
But with the Enterprise's 1701 - E there are a ton of references to size from the material they used in Tmp, WoK, and especially SFS and Tng.. ALL of the behind the scense references say 289m for the Tos, and 305 for the Refit.. so they have been using that size for 30 years.. So it doesn't fit to well.. Owell! It isn't the first or last that ship that has done that..

I get bent out of shape because I build the AMT Models, and for the past 30 years they have produced ship sets that are set to scale with each other.. and just because some guy has size envy with other shows.. means I have to toss out my models??? ugh..
Rant over..

 

[Ar-Pharazon]

I don't care if the Disco enterprise is bigger or smaller or whatever it still looks beautiful and doesn't bother me.

Size doesn't matter to me either (that's not what she said) But If they'd gone with straight pylons and left off that row of windows on the top of the saucer, I think it would be perfect.

It's absolutely 100% the Enterprise from certain angles that don't show those two features.

 

[Tuskin38]

meshweaver has posted a couple galleries (here and here) of nice shots of discovery-verse ships, including the enterprise:

Looks like the USS Discovery's bridge design is in the window. But if you look at the close up renders of the bridge dome in the model's booklet, it looks like a different bridge design. Different models?

and left off that row of windows on the top of the saucer

They're lights not windows.

 

[pst]

Different models?

i don't think the model that shows the bridge interior in eaglemoss' booklet is a finished asset, i think it's a concept model. and the meshweaver model has been retextured from the original, so it also doesn't represent the actual ship we see on screen.

 

[Ar-Pharazon]

They're lights not windows.

Awfully big and numerous to be lights. The TMP refit accomplished the same effect with much less.

Either way, a detail that could've been omitted.

 

[Tuskin38]

Awfully big and numerous to be lights. The TMP refit accomplished the same effect with much less.

Either way, a detail that could've been omitted.

Big? They're not a big at all. Unless we're talking about different things. They're very thin spot lights.

There are similar ones on several of the other DSC ships.

 

[pst]

Big? They're not a big at all. Unless we're talking about different things. They're very thin spot lights.

they're fairly narrow, as seen in "such sweet sorrow" with what i assume is a human-sized DOT-7:

 

[Tuskin38]

they're fairly narrow, as seen in "such sweet sorrow" with what i assume is a human-sized DOT-7:

Hm that light design also appears in that bridge dome render from the booklet, for the lights around the base of it.

 

[Ar-Pharazon]

Big? They're not a big at all. Unless we're talking about different things. They're very thin spot lights.

There are similar ones on several of the other DSC ships.

OK, not "big" as in large windows, but overall. I don't think they needed to be as noticeable to light the registry, plus the notch they reside is again, very obvious.

Not necessary to bring the Enterprise into the DSC aesthetic.

 

[F. King Daniel]

Looks like the USS Discovery's bridge design is in the window. But if you look at the close up renders of the bridge dome in the model's booklet, it looks like a different bridge design. Different models?

If you follow the links pst posted you'll see it says many of the models are reproductions for Eaglemoss' magazines and model collection and not the original CG assets used on the shows.

 

[Jadeb]

Those lights are awful, and there’s no reason they require that huge notch in the saucer. My least favorite aspect of the design.

 

[valkyrie013]

Read an article recently, on the TMP Enterprise, and how the effects were done. In it the head effects guy said that he purposeflly lighted the enterprise, and planned out the light levels in the shots, dark if no lights or sun, etc. He lighted the enterprise because.. well if he didn't you wouldnt be able to see it! Space is dark!
Now, the Discoprise.. yeah.. no idea why it has a lip in the saucer for 20 lights.. didn't need that for the Refit or the Jar Jar Prise..

 

[Tomalak]

Yeah, those saucer lights are my least favorite feature too. I'm not wild about the split impulse deck with a docking port in the middle, but I can live with it.

I like the ship on the whole, but I'm with @Ar-Pharazon - ditch the lights and go with the originally intended pylons and she's perfect.

 

[Tuskin38]

The only thing I dislike about the design are the angled pylons. I didn't mind the angled ones, until I saw John Eaves' actual final design with the straight ones. I really prefer the straight ones now.

Jar Jar Prise..

...Really? People are still using that childish nickname?

 

[Ar-Pharazon]

The only thing I dislike about the design are the angled pylons. I didn't mind the angled ones, until I saw John Eaves' actual final design with the straight ones. I really prefer the straight ones now.

...Really? People are still using that childish nickname?

Yeah, I don't hate the angled pylons. If you go with the idea of ignoring the 1960's TOS version but "keeping" the TMP version, it fits really well (outside of the size).

Straight pylons and the simpler primary hull do still give it a TOS feel, if not a 100% accurate portrayal.

 

[cooleddie74]

Those lights are awful, and there’s no reason they require that huge notch in the saucer. My least favorite aspect of the design.

1. The pylons.
2. The notch and the lights.
3. The hull registry font.

 

[F. King Daniel]

3. The hull registry font.

Did you just bring back "wrong font!" after 10 years?