Were there other Enterprises between the NX-01 and the NCC-1701?

[evilchumlee]

Sure it does. I've been a Trek fan for 35 years and I have no problem whatsoever in connecting SNW with the rest of Trek. Does it occasionally require a little creative thinking on my part? Sure! But that's always been the case. It's half the fun of being a Trekkie.

Yes... but... the new stuff is increasingly difficult to connect. I do enjoy conjecture about some apparent continuity errors, but hot damn have they piled up.

I can accept ENT being before TOS, and TNG being after TOS.

It's much more difficult to create a world where DSC and SNW take place so close to TOS... they are inherently incompatible.

 

[HotRod]

I do enjoy conjecture about some apparent continuity errors, but hot damn have they piled up.

No worse than any other series.

 

[evilchumlee]

No worse than any other series.

We've gone to the TOS era a few times in other series.

TNG nailed it.
DS9 nailed it.
ENT nailed it.

DSC and SNW... did... not.

 

[FederationHistorian]

That seems incredibly unlikely. The holodeck was able to create a damn near perfect replica of the 1940's... which should be much more difficult, given that we know a good amount of historical data was lost prior to WW3.



So it can construct a perfect 1940's, but it has trouble with 2161?!

I’m pretty sure there were no Klingons in WW2, fighting alongside the French Resistance. Yet Klingons fought Nazis alongside the French Resistance in VOY. In the holodeck.

t didn't have the refit yet as of 2161, as per ENT "These Are The Voyages".



If the ship at the museum is NX-01, it received the refit AFTER the formation of the Federation, while no longer in Federation service.



Again, there's any number of potential, finagled reasons WHY, but those are the facts.

And there are a number of reason as to why the holodeck would not be an accurate representation of 2161.

Troi even implies that the ceremony depicted was not the actual birth of the Federation in 2161, but a different ceremony altogether.

 

[HotRod]

We've gone to the TOS era a few times in other series.

TNG nailed it.
DS9 nailed it.
ENT nailed it.

DSC and SNW... did... not.

They nailed it because they were going very specifically for nostalgia. That works great for the short term. That wouldn't work on a regular basis. A modern audience isn't going to watch a show that looks like a 60's vision of the future.

And again.... Strange New Worlds visual appearance isn't a continuity error. It's simply Star Trek with a modern visual aesthetic. A visual retcon.

 

[fireproof78]

They nailed it because they were going very specifically for nostalgia. That works great for the short term. That wouldn't work on a regular basis. A modern audience isn't going to watch a show that looks like a 60's vision of the future.

And again.... Strange New Worlds visual appearance isn't a continuity error. It's simply Star Trek with a modern visual aesthetic. A visual retcon.

Indeed, yes. The purpose of the appearance is very different and meant as a deliberate nod to the audience. And I'll confess, as a younger man, that the nostalgia worked on me to get me to watch DS9. I did not enjoy it at the time but found myself more interest in it after "Trials and Tribble'ations."

It's meant to tickle the ears of fans, not be anything with depth. From an external perspective, and a fan perspective, yeah it can work. But, to create a show with the same sensibilities as TOS would be, well, an exercise to appeal only to current fans. A small, but limited reach and pretty much guarantees the fan base can't grow beyond its niche.

 

[Dukhat]

I'm also curious if the New Jersey was just decommissioned while it was still in that configuration, or if the museum had "defitted" it back to that configuration.

There is no 'defit.' The ship always looked like that. It is a visual disconnect with the Discoverse (see below.)

Yes... but... the new stuff is increasingly difficult to connect. I do enjoy conjecture about some apparent continuity errors, but hot damn have they piled up.

I can accept ENT being before TOS, and TNG being after TOS.

It's much more difficult to create a world where DSC and SNW take place so close to TOS... they are inherently incompatible.

I agree with you.

I’m pretty sure there were no Klingons in WW2, fighting alongside the French Resistance. Yet Klingons fought Nazis alongside the French Resistance in VOY. In the holodeck.

Not meant to be historically accurate.

And there are a number of reason as to why the holodeck would not be an accurate representation of 2161.

Was meant to be historically accurate.

Troi even implies that the ceremony depicted was not the actual birth of the Federation in 2161, but a different ceremony altogether.

When did she say that?

They nailed it because they were going very specifically for nostalgia. That works great for the short term. That wouldn't work on a regular basis. A modern audience isn't going to watch a show that looks like a 60's vision of the future.

Not as depicted in TOS, no. But it is entirely possible to mimic the same style of TOS with updated production values and still have it look believable. What DSC/SNW did could accurately be described as 'TOS on steroids.'

And again.... Strange New Worlds visual appearance isn't a continuity error. It's simply Star Trek with a modern visual aesthetic. A visual retcon.

No, it would more accurately be called a 'visual disconnect.' Because other shows ostensibly taking place in the same universe do not follow this retcon.

 

[HotRod]

Because other shows ostensibly taking place in the same universe do not follow this retcon.

Because those shows already had a far more modern visual aesthetic than TOS. It's the same reason Star Wars shows can still emulate the late 70's approach to sci-fi.

 

[Dukhat]

Because those shows already had a far more modern visual aesthetic than TOS. It's the same reason Star Wars shows can still emulate the late 70's approach to sci-fi.

Yet they didn't feel the need to change the TOS aesthetic when they showed it on their more modern shows. And comparing the visual aesthetic of '70's/'80's SW to TOS is not a fair comparison. The SW visual aesthetic still stands up today. TOS doesn't.

 

[HotRod]

Yet they didn't feel the need to change the TOS aesthetic when they showed it on their more modern shows.

They showed it for minutes at a time. In what was a purposeful effort to beat you over the head with nostalgia. I agree that wouldn't work on a full time basis. Not in the 2020's.

 

[Dukhat]

They showed it for minutes at a time. In what was a purposeful effort to beat you over the head with nostalgia. I agree that wouldn't work on a full time basis. Not in the 2020's.

Don't get me wrong. I like the 'TOS on steroids' visual aesthetic of SNW. I just think that if they were going to make such a drastic change from what we've seen before (and not just the visuals, but the characters too), that they should have just made it a reboot like the Kelvin timeline. But they couldn't, because they had to work off of what DSC established, and they can't let go of their need to use TOS as a crutch and allow their show to just stand on its own.

 

[FederationHistorian]

Was meant to be historically accurate.

That doesn’t mean it was.

When did she say that?

1:10

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

 

[fireproof78]

They showed it for minutes at a time. In what was a purposeful effort to beat you over the head with nostalgia. I agree that wouldn't work on a full time basis. Not in the 2020's.

Agreed.

And SW is a different beast since it is not meant to connect to our future, and in fact the aesthetic is so disconnected from current times that people don't recognize the WW2 surplus stuff that is just put in without modification.

STAR TREK insists it is connect to our humanity's future and so the TOS aesthetic can be reflected as a 60s interpretation of that future, while SNW would be a 2020s interpretation of the same future. Neither are things I take literally.

 

[Dukhat]

That doesn’t mean it was.

It is as far as canon is concerned. Because no one in authority has stated that the holodeck program was anything but completely historically accurate, and Riker & Troi were treating it as completely historically accurate as well.

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

Huh? Troi says nothing of the sort. Her comment has to do with her personally wanting to tell the people that this ceremony will bring about the birth of the Federation, not that the program was historically inaccurate.

 

[David cgc]

Altbough we never see the exterior of the ship, there are bridge displays which clearly show the ship in its original configuration.

There are nearly more examples of ships where the bridge displays don't match up with the exterior than ones that do. TOS Enterprise, the proportions are all off on the turbolift map. The movie-era Enterprise, all the diagrams were of the Phase-II version, even in Discovery, there was a screen showing the concept art version of the ship and not the final design, and that's just one ship. There's also the AGT future-Enterprise, where the diagram next to the Ready Room door wasn't updated, the Defiant had this weird stubby thing, the Enterprise-E had the wrong nacelles on its displays, the Reliant and Grissom just covered up part of the (Phase II) Enterprise diagrams to almost make them fit the ship...

 

[Dukhat]

There are nearly more examples of ships where the bridge displays don't match up with the exterior than ones that do. TOS Enterprise, the proportions are all off on the turbolift map. The movie-era Enterprise, all the diagrams were of the Phase-II version, even in Discovery, there was a screen showing the concept art version of the ship and not the final design, and that's just one ship. There's also the AGT future-Enterprise, where the diagram next to the Ready Room door wasn't updated, the Defiant had this weird stubby thing, the Enterprise-E had the wrong nacelles on its displays, the Reliant and Grissom just covered up part of the (Phase II) Enterprise diagrams to almost make them fit the ship...

So? Drexler's version didn't even exist when TATV was being produced, so there's no way the displays could have been wrong. We also see the ship at the end of the episode and it's the original version.

 

[Tiran O'Saurus]

There is no 'defit.' The ship always looked like that. It is a visual disconnect with the Discoverse (see below.)

I think he means undoing TMP-era Constitution-II refits, not undoing the SNW Enterprise. Which, mind you, is before the TOS version, so it would require a 'defit' to turn the New Jersey into a SNW Connie.

 

[Dukhat]

I think he means undoing TMP-era Constitution-II refits, not undoing the SNW Enterprise. Which, mind you, is before the TOS version, so it would require a 'defit' to turn the New Jersey into a SNW Connie.

Oh, ok. Well, we have no canon proof that any TOS Connies were all refit to the TMP version other than the Enterprise. So as far as we know the New Jersey was never refit before it was decommissioned.

 

[HotRod]

so it would require a 'defit' to turn the New Jersey into a SNW Connie.

If you're expecting the SNW Enterprise to suddenly morph into the TOS Enterprise, I think you'll be sorely disappointed. By pretty much all accounts, they've shown us that the SNW Enterprise IS the TOS Enterprise.

 

[Tiran O'Saurus]

Yes, but I was trying to show that even assuming a hyper-literalistic "everything is canon" approach, it would still be wrong. I don't think the Enterprise will shrink 200 meters either.