USS Enterprise (eventually) on Discovery?
- Thread starter EJD1984
- Start date
I cannot refute that the 1701 launched in 2245, is not the same vessel we see in The Cage or in WNMHGB. I cannot see it being trival to build Constitution class ships in the mid 23d century,so a badly damaged April Enterprise would more likely be repaired.
G
Gonzo
Guest
These are the same arguments I have seen again and again when they really have nothing to do with the issues at hand.
I never said anything about technological advancement.
Nor did I say about anything about science vessels in particular.
I am talking about starship design lineage as a whole and how disjointed it seems in the show, I loved seeing all the different Starfleet classes in the pilot as they all clearly shared a design lineage, the less said about the Klingon ships the better.
Starship design evolves naturally as different ideas are attempted and adopted or discarded depending on their success or failure.
I am not seeing that gradual evolutionary curve that should be there.
If they had made all the ships similar in texture and overall design as what we saw in the pilot then that would be fine, with the Walker class before and the Nimitz class after there is a clear path, then the Enterprise is plonked in the middle and it just doesn't fit.
Never had this issue with the films or the earlier TV shows.
Like I said its probably to do with all the chicanery that went on during production.
Every source I've seen (admittedly Star Fleet Battles and FASA) have called the Connie a heavy cruiser or command cruiser.
G
Gonzo
Guest
Yeah the Constitution class started as Heavy Cruisers but are then dropped down the order as newer ships like say the Enterprise B is launched.
The D was classed as an Explorer I believe, The C was a Heavy Cruiser though.
If the Enterprise really is the same size as the original it certainly can't be considered a heavy cruiser any more as most of the Starfleet ships we saw during the battle looked larger and newer due to the similar design lineage shown.
Even the Walker is considerably larger and is much older.
It makes sense for there to be some variation in design lineage, rather than one through line, at least to me
G
Gonzo
Guest
Oh absolutely, as different designs and possibilities are explored it stands to reason there will be a degree of variation with the winning designs becoming more prevalent across the fleet as time passes.It makes sense for there to be some variation in design lineage, rather than one through line, at least to me
It still doesn't really explain the Enterprise though, just sitting there in limbo looking so different in texture and nacelle shape to the rest of the fleet which includes both newer and older designs.
For example, if the round nacelle design was superior then why is the Enterprise the only ship that has it, if the more square shape is the better more effective design why doesnt the Enterprise have it if it is such a cutting edge ship even now, wouldn't be hard to refit it.
I think they wanted to change the Enterprise to have for instance a similar nacelle design to the other Starfleet ships we saw but someone had a brain fart and stopped them.
Which was stupid, better if they had made all the other Starfleet ships somewhat match the Enterprise like we saw in the films and early TV shows.
Just another strange decision like the new Klingon ships.
Fair enough, I suppose. I personally always took the Constitution class as being quite unique, and is even referenced as such in TOS. It stands out among its contemporaries and that might be on purpose.
... while giving no evidence that the Crossfield and the Constitution actually SHARE a lineage, even while you imply that they should. Again: Why? Other than the fact that Starfleet owns them, there's no evidence that the Crossfield and the Walker are even REMOTELY related, let alone that they're both related in some way to the Constitution class, let alone that the Constitution -- IF it were related to either of them -- should be a particular size as a middle step.
That's like saying the F-117 doesn't fit in the "design lineage" between the F-16 and the F-18. Which is true, it DOESN'T. The question is, why would you expect it to? It's a completely different type of aircraft designed for a completely different type of mission.
Why would there be a gradual evolutionary curve between starships that are developed by completely different designers for completely different purposes? To repeat again: why doesn't the F-117 show a "gradual evolutionary curve" between the F-16 and the F/A-18?
For that matter, why doesn't the A-10 Thunderbolt show a gradual evolution between the A-6 intruder and the A-12 Avenger?
Seriously? John Eaves is ON RECORD saying that he specifically designed these starships to show exactly what you claim they DON'T show: a gradual progression in starship design decade after decade, with Shenzhou being one of the oldest designs and the Kerala being one of the newest.
It probably has more to do with you not knowing what design evolution actually looks like apart from the TNG era kitbash models.
FWIW, the understanding of "design progression" that fans have latched on to seems to have been codified by Andrew Probert when he designed the Enterprise-C. His logic was, in its entirety, to take the profiles of the Excelsior and the Galaxy, put them side by side, and average the features. He originated the "evolutionary" view of design and I suspect it's what people still take as the high water mark for the franchise, thanks to how outspoken and passionate Probert has been about the worldbuilding logic behind his work.
Way back, the classic Enterprise was considered a Heavy Cruiser (it appears on screengraphics in STIII, which were pages from the old Star Fleet Technical Manual). I guess she's a 289m light cruiser in DSC's world of 750m behemoths.
It was called a Light Cruiser in STO about 2 years before Discovery came out.
STO Takes place in the 2400s so there are ships bigger then her. As I suggested above she was probably reclassified.
G
Gonzo
Guest
This is why I don't involve myself in these discussions very often.
My purpose was not to trigger an argument with you or anyone else, I simply placed my thoughts on the forum like everyone else.
Ultimately I was ok with the first season but feel opportunities were missed and some decisions were a little strange in hindsight, it seems others were able to post reasonable responses both agreeing and disagreeing without getting on their high horse, or perhaps they felt I was attacking the show yet wisely decided to just move on past my post instead.
I had hoped that the thread had finally calmed down and viewpoints could be aired without pointless defensive posts like yours appearing, you don't have to defend the show or this thread from me as I am not its enemy nor yours.
I wont respond to your individual points as they don't really deserve it and most of what you have posted is your own opinion, not fact, same as my own.
I really had hoped the forum had moved past this, there is always one I guess.
I still think the shape itself is menacing regardless of colour. Of course black makes it moreso.
I can. I'd give real money to see his Prime universe counterpart.
I agree; Trek hasn't considered the ship a character since Generations. Maybe Voyager.
I think that's deliberate.
G
Gonzo
Guest
Yeah I would like to see Prime Lorca but for now he is dead, not sure what his contract terms were, that would give a clear indication of whether he would be coming back or not if his contract is for more than one year.
I think it's entirely the fault of the design teams on Trek. They made the Reliant with parts identical to those of the Enterprise, and made sure to build the Excelsior with similar parts to give the whole fleet a sense of unity. Come TNG, they made the 1701-C a middle step between the B and D, and we've come to expect that. I don't mind thinking that the Federation designs their ships with this sort of thing in mind, as a projection of their culture and philosophy, but one has to allow for variety and odd designs here and there.
Which is odd, considering how much of the Walker is apparent in the Shepard.
G
Gonzo
Guest
I see what you did there.Mirror Lorca is dead. Prime Lorca _might_ still be alive. Kelvin Lorca, I don't know.
Similar threads
