USS Enterprise (eventually) on Discovery?

[fireproof78]

I think with me, the biggest issue I have is: just why someone felt the need to make a new Star Trek series and have it be set ten years before TOS, while at the same time not really resembling TOS all that much. Seeing what I've seen so far, there really isn't much story-wise that needed to happen in the 2250's. Let's see:

1. Klingon war. Not sure why this subject couldn't have been done at any other point in ST history, especially since there's no indication in TOS that there was ever a war ten years prior.

2. Sarek being a foster parent to a human girl. Well, Sarek was still alive right up to the middle of TNG, so he could have fostered her any time between TOS and TNG, and probably would have been better off after TUC, instead of Spock having this sister throughout TOS that we never heard of.

3. A new super-secret star drive. Ok, kinda odd that no one ever heard of the spore drive before, which probably wouldn't have been as problematic if it was invented, say, post-Nemesis.

4. The Mirror Universe. Heck, I'm not even sure why it was necessary to even have this in DSC, other than to have duplicates of some dead crewmembers cross over to our side. Which again, could have been done at any point in ST's history.

Did I miss anything?

I don't know why either. I personally like the Klingon War (as a matter of fanon) as well as seeing more of Sarek. The rest of your points are all fair and well and good. As I said, if I were making a series set ten years prior it would look a lot different.

No, I don't know why they did it the way they did it. We probably never will know. And, frankly, I think Star Trek is struggling to keep up, so I am uncertain as to keeping it around. That said, the fact that I wouldn't do it is why I want to see more of DSC.

 

[fireproof78]

Sorry for the doublepost but I had formatting issues.

Oddly relevant, I saw a reader board that had the quote "If size doesn't matter why aren't there 3 inch dildos?"

 

[GNDN18]

Vitalis. There.

Was that slick or what?

A little dab’ll do ya.

 

[F. King Daniel]

listen, i have a lot of problems with this:

I feel sorry for whoever's job it was here to try and reconcile Disco with the rest of Trek. Here, they've been forced to pretend "The Cage" simply doesn't exist. If there's ever another Star Trek Encyclopedia, it's gonna be a mess.

It's like they're trying to pretend the Christian Bale's Tumbler is refit into Adam West's Batmobile...

scaling doesn't bother me since it wasn't canon in the first place.

Fits better with the set heights anyways.

It's sad that the most ardent Discovery continuity defender on the site has to ignore all licenced materials (current ones like this, not only the 45 year old ones discussed previously) in order to make sense of the show and ignore the massive size discrepancy spelled out on the comparison chart.

We really are in X-Men movie continuity territory now.

 

[cooleddie74]

Were the DSC Enterprise officially, say, 340 meters long instead one could argue that about one hundred cumulative feet of length would be removed at some point between DSC and "Where No Man Has Gone Before(TOS)," theoretically doable if you install shorter warp nacelles and remove extra hull plating from the primary hull that would extend the diameter from bow to impulse engines by, say, one or two bus lengths. At that point and at that CBS-approved size a refit back into the TOS appearance is feasible and we could more easily swallow it.

But if she's almost as long and large as an Excelsior-class starship from 30 years later? Uh...yeah, that's gonna be a lot harder to rationalize short of a complete rebuild and downscaling after the current season on DSC. That's just not believable without the kind of cognitive gymnastics that argued that the D7 in Season 1 was supposed to be the same ship as the D7 in the rest of the franchise. So, yeah...I'm ignoring it and hoping the producers eventually forget about it themselves or decide to make her roughly the size she's been in every other incarnation of the franchise going back to 1964.

 

[Belz...]

And I fail to see how I'm missing the point.

How can you fail to see it when I just explained it to you? You talked about budget; that's not what I was talking about at all.

You're saying that reproducing the original sets, props, uniforms and ships would be doomed from the get-go, and I never said that I wanted that. All I said was that if I was in charge of producing a show set ten years before TOS, it wouldn't look like DSC.

Humour me: what would things looks like, were you the designer? Let's see if my response to what you originally said holds.

Take it from me, making factual 'Guesstaments' before the fact, almost always results in having to eat ones words around here.

Well, again, you should read what I posted, since I've explained why it's not a guess. They went through the trouble of designing the 1701 for DSC. I see no reason for them to alter the ship afterward, except in panic because of fan reactions.

 

[Belz...]

I'm at peace with and don't mind the DSC Enterprise but damn, does that upscaling get on my nerves. I'm just going to actively ignore it and pretend she's about 300 meters long or else I'll sigh my vocal cords numb.

As Tuskin said, the 300m figure was never stated on screen. Plus, if you take the model and sets and try to match them together, I don't think you can end up with anything south of 375m.

I like how the author doesn't even bother to note the size discrepancy when writing about the history of the Enterprises.

Or, maybe, they don't think the size is as important as _you_ think. Or maybe they think, correctly, that the size of the Enterprise was never stated on screen.

 

[DaveyNY]

How can you fail to see it when I just explained it to you? You talked about budget; that's not what I was talking about at all.



Humour me: what would things looks like, were you the designer? Let's see if my response to what you originally said holds.



Well, again, you should read what I posted, since I've explained why it's not a guess. They went through the trouble of designing the 1701 for DSC. I see no reason for them to alter the ship afterward, except in panic because of fan reactions.

You don't work for the production company (that I know of), so YES it is a Guess on your part.
It my be an educated guess based on what you believe, but it's a GUESS none the less.

And my explanation as to why They might make changes again, is just as valid a guess as yours.
(which you practically acknowledge as being likely with your last sentence)

Also, you don't need to constantly remind folks to re-read your posts, it doesn't validate what you've typed and if we hadn't read it, we wouldn't be typing out and reply anyway.

 

[DaveyNY]

Vitalis. There.

Was that slick or what?

Or maybe this...

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

 

[Belz...]

You don't work for the production company (that I know of), so YES it is a Guess on your part.

Just because there are other possibilities does not mean that they are all equal. It's possible that they change the design, but extremely unlikely as it's both unnecessary and they've already done the design work for the series. Just because you or others think they should, doesn't make it more likely, and just because you disagree, doesn't make mine a guess. I've explained why I think it won't.

How about you make a case for why you think it will? And not one based on your personal wish, but on reasons why _they_ would do it. If you think they'll do so because of the negative reactions of a small subset of the audience, then you think they are idiots. I don't.

Also, you don't need to constantly remind folks to re-read your posts

I clearly do, since the replies show that the posts weren't properly read. For example, Dukhat's reply to me about budget had literally nothing to do with what I wrote, since I didn't mention budget, but rather target audience.

 

[valkyrie013]

I haven't said much on Enterprise size in a bit. .soo.
Tos: 289 meters, end.

And the arguement that "it hasn't been said on screen" is crap.. Pretty much NO ship is said to be "this long" on screen.. from star trek to star wars to B5.
Its all put to rest in the designers notes, and series bibles..
There are plenty of references out there that had the Enterprise as 289m.. Motion picture, ST 3, Tng and plenty of other stuff that the effects people used. Them lengthining the Disoc Prise is just them wanting to increase the sizes like the Kelvin Universe becuse they have size envy for Star Wars and there Km long ships..

 

[Belz...]

I haven't said much on Enterprise size in a bit. .soo.
Tos: 289 meters, end.

Tell me how tall those saucer rim decks would be if the ship really is 289m long. See if you can make sense of it. So if the model and the sets on screen contradict the figure NOT on screen, which would you go with? I don't know why some fans give more weight to stuff that's never been seen, mentioned or used on the show than to stuff that has.

And the arguement that "it hasn't been said on screen" is crap..

It's not crap; it's true.

Pretty much NO ship is said to be "this long" on screen.. from star trek to star wars to B5.

And? That actually helps my point.

Its all put to rest in the designers notes, and series bibles..

Bibles are references but can be contradicted on screen at any time.

There are plenty of references out there that had the Enterprise as 289m.. Motion picture, ST 3, Tng and plenty of other stuff that the effects people used.

What references?

Them lengthining the Disoc Prise is just them wanting to increase the sizes like the Kelvin Universe becuse they have size envy for Star Wars and there Km long ships..

I love that. You have zero idea of what goes on in their minds but somehow you just know. Did you not consider that, maybe, they designed the ship, then measured the damned thing and ended up with that size?

Look at my signature. I've got a few Enterprise designs myself, and with a 3m floor-to-floor deck size I ended up just short of 400m. I can't help it, it's just the way the ship was designed. Star Wars has nothing to do with it.

 

[TrickyDickie]

Downsizing, over time, is not without precedent. I'll offer another example from the auto world, because I think the parallel is apt, considering the shipyards and all.

We went from the larger Ford Mustang Mach 1 in 1971, like this one from the James Bond film Diamonds Are Forever, to the smaller Mustang II which had a role in the original Charlie's Angels.

 

[Ar-Pharazon]

Downsizing, over time, is not without precedent. I'll offer another example from the auto world, because I think the parallel is apt, considering the shipyards and all.

We went from the larger Ford Mustang Mach 1 in 1971, like this one from the James Bond film Diamonds Are Forever, to the smaller Mustang II which had a role in the original Charlie's Angels.

They're not the same, y'know, physical cars. The Enterprise is the same ship on some level from construction up til STIII.

Slightly smaller would be reasonable. A hundred or more feet shorter? Not likely. I'll go with "she was that long the entire time, and we just never got a proper line of dialogue either way".

 

[TrickyDickie]

They're not the same, y'know, physical cars. The Enterprise is the same ship on some level from construction up til STIII.

I compare the situation with the Enterprise to Ford's 'Fox' platform, for example....which had quite a range of sizes, from the Mustang up to the LTD, etc.

We don't know all of the fine details of how the shipyards build the ships. We can't take something of today and assume that it can't be done much differently somehow several hundred years from now. That's what sci-fi is all about....not limiting our imaginations.

 

[Tuskin38]

Didn't the most popular length for the Enterprise originate from an early design that only had 1 deck thick saucer?

 

[CorporalCaptain]

Didn't the most popular length for the Enterprise originate from an early design that only had 1 deck thick saucer?

No.

 

[Tuskin38]

Someone posted it here at one point, I remember it.

 

[CorporalCaptain]

Someone posted it here at one point, I remember it.

Link?

 

[Ronald Held]

Short of resizing, I am hoping for more refits over the seasons, so the 1701 looks like it should in WNMHGB.