USS Enterprise (eventually) on Discovery?

[BillJ]

You know what?
SInce they decided to have angled nacelle pylons on their iteration of the Enterprise anyway - They should have put THIS Enterprise on Discovery!

Would have blown SO many minds!

At least it would've looked like it belonged in TOS, compared to what we got.

 

[Infern0]

At least it would've looked like it belonged in TOS, compared to what we got.

You can't put 1960s visual designs on Hi-Def tv in 2018 and expect people to take it seriously.

Hardcores would love it but everyone else would be saying its cheesy as hell.

 

[Groppler Zorn]

Brannon Braga wasn't just a writer and producer on Enterprise. He was also the co-creator of the show. If a staff writer's word is good, a co-creator's word should be something akin to gospel.

Thus ENT is in a different timeline/universe to TOS and as ENT has been reference by DSC many times, DSC is also in the same ENT continuity.

I didn’t coin the term but I’m gonna use it:

prime adjacent

 

[BillJ]

You can't put 1960s visual designs on Hi-Def tv in 2018 and expect people to take it seriously.

General audiences likely couldn't tell the difference. Or care. Besides it is clear that the show is aimed at those hard core fans you dismiss.

 

[Groppler Zorn]

Hardcores would love it but everyone else would be saying its cheesy as hell.

I disagree here - I’m not sure why people hold this view. The only argument (if you can call it that) I’ve seen on here and elsewhere for not using the prime Enterprise design is that it was featured on a tv show in the 60s. That is, the design is old therefore it’s dated.

Since the original enterprise is iconic of Star Trek (moreso than the TMP refit) I don’t understand why the entire DSC aesthetic wasn’t designed around it.

Yes the production values of the original show were cheesy - I.e. the velour unis and the materials used in some of the set construction. But the design of the Enterprise hasn’t dated at all imho.

I think many are confusing the connotations with TOS with the Enterprise design and the two aren’t mutually inclusive - the one can be divorced from the other without embarrassment.

 

[jaime]

You can't put 1960s visual designs on Hi-Def tv in 2018 and expect people to take it seriously.

Hardcores would love it but everyone else would be saying its cheesy as hell.

Aztec the heck out of it and it would probably be fine. The Kelvin was basically this exact thing. Few gloweys and slightly jazzed fonts and markings. Job done.

 

[Tuskin38]

Remember also that you’ve argued a window would be helpful in the mutara nebula situation...

People made compelling arguments against the window being useful in the nebula battle. So I don’t understand how that effects Spock.

 

[Groppler Zorn]

People made compelling arguments against the window being useful in the nebula battle. So I don’t understand how that effects Spock.

So we’re agreed that a window is deficient over a viewscreen?

It affects Spock in the event that one argues a window is beneficial to a space ship and would be useful in contexts like the one in TWoK (the context most frequently cited in favour of having a window). Because in that case Spock should have presented it to Kirk as an option for defeating Khan.

If we agree that the window is worse than a screen then the DSC change is pointless (if it turns out to be a window) and only makes sense if you’re going to argue that a window is better than a screen (which I think we’ve conclusively shown that it isn’t - which is why Star Trek has used screens for decades until Abrams came along...)

If starfleet decides that windows are worse than screens then a line of dialogue addresses that. Ultimately the bridge window is a pointless change (if they have indeed made it) to bring the DSC continuity in line with the Kelvin timeline (which is also still prime if you think about it - you don’t need an ion storm to get there it’s just a different timeline - like ENT and probably DSC, but we’ll see come s2).

 

[Tuskin38]

If we agree that the window is worse than a screen

I’m not saying that

They’d both be inefficient in that battle.

The window isn’t just a window, it has overlays, it can probably do everything the screen can in the other series.

They’re both equal to me. I don’t care if they have one or not.

 

[Groppler Zorn]

The window isn’t just a window, it has overlays, it can probably do everything the screen can in the other series.

So what’s the point of changing* it? Unless we’re arguing that change for the sake of change is a good thing?

*edit: assuming they have changed it and it is a window... if it’s not and it’s just a light this whole discussion is moot...

 

[ITDUDE]

Why not? They played around with time so much, why would Nero's time travel be the only one with any impact?

I'd think Cochrane seeing the 1701-E might have an effect on early starship designs, for instance. Like the NX-01.

Which is why ENT IS in the different timeline compared to Prime

 

[ITDUDE]

No window? No problem:

 

[Tuskin38]

So what’s the point of changing* it? Unless we’re arguing that change for the sake of change is a good thing?

I dunno, I don’t care.

 

[Groppler Zorn]

I dunno, I don’t care.

Fair do’s. Trekkers get excited about different aspects of the franchise I guess. I reckon the discussion will all be for naught in the end based on the recent images of the ship discussed elsewhere where it looks like there’s not a window anyway...

 

[Groppler Zorn]

No window? No problem:

Int. enterprise bridge. Captain Pike enters. He walks to the viewscreen.

PIKE: Tyler! Stop sticking this to the viewscreen! I don’t care that you think you can see outside through it, it’s not a window!

TYLER: [giggles]

Number one: Captain, some shenanigans with the uss Discovery

[shenanigans ensue]

*star trek theme plays*

 

[fireproof78]

So what’s the point of changing* it? Unless we’re arguing that change for the sake of change is a good thing?

*edit: assuming they have changed it and it is a window... if it’s not and it’s just a light this whole discussion is moot...

Why not change it is my question? It strikes me as such an odd point of contention when you can have an alternate way to see outside the ship in an emergency.

 

[Jadeb]

Considering the prevalence of screens already (and the increasingly gargantuan size of TVs), windows will probably be considered quaint by the time we get to Trek's time. Instead, most every surface could be a screen, so that walls can be "transparent" or opaque or project anything you want at any time. Redecorating will be really easy.

Or the screens will be implanted in our eyeballs.

 

[Groppler Zorn]

Why not change it is my question? It strikes me as such an odd point of contention when you can have an alternate way to see outside the ship in an emergency.

Tape delay... solar winds...

But seriously there have been several arguments made regarding the negative aspects of a window - most extensively by @lawman so I’m not going to repeat it all.

For me the cons include the fact that space is dark, and ships are far the heck away from each other in space - to the point where an eyeball wouldn’t be able to see them until the enemy was right on top of you (how often did we hear “they’re 10,000 km off our bow” - that’s a long way - but the ship was massive on the screen). And if the window can magnify the image then why not keep it a screen?

Also as I’ve argued previously - if the screen is advantageous (it isn’t, but let’s assume it is) then Spock is negligent or incompetent in his role as XO of the Enterprise in TWoK for not presenting it as an option to Kirk. And I prefer to keep Spock as a competent officer rather than a bumbling fool who forgot his ship used to have a windshield

 

[Tuskin38]

then Spock is negligent or incompetent in his role as XO of the Enterprise in TWoK for not presenting it as an option to Kirk.

It wouldn't work in the mutara battle.

And why would he suggest it if the bridge doesn't have one?

 

[fireproof78]

Tape delay... solar winds...

But seriously there have been several arguments made regarding the negative aspects of a window - most extensively by @lawman so I’m not going to repeat it all.

For me the cons include the fact that space is dark, and ships are far the heck away from each other in space - to the point where an eyeball wouldn’t be able to see them until the enemy was right on top of you (how often did we hear “they’re 10,000 km off our bow” - that’s a long way - but the ship was massive on the screen). And if the window can magnify the image then why not keep it a screen?

Also as I’ve argued previously - if the screen is advantageous (it isn’t, but let’s assume it is) then Spock is negligent or incompetent in his role as XO of the Enterprise in TWoK for not presenting it as an option to Kirk. And I prefer to keep Spock as a competent officer rather than a bumbling fool who forgot his ship used to have a windshield

I feel these are rather extremes of the argument, but fair enough. I just don't see it fraught with the downsides that lawman and others have argued. It simply is another tool, and not necessarily one that is present on every starship. It's absolutely odd and baffling to me to assume that all starships have that or that things don't change. I was not aware all starships were identical...