This meme needs to be altered. Not sure if it is strictly limited to Discovery and STO or all of Star Trek.
It applies to Star Trek in general.
The Iconians, their servants, and their technology, are responsible for, directly or not
-Elachi: ENT "Silent Enemy"
-Bluegill: TNG "Conspiracy"
-Destruction of the USS Yamato: TNG "Contagion"
-Destruction of Jouret IV colony: TNG "The Best of Both Worlds"
-Dyson Spheres: TNG "Relics"
-Solanae: TNG "Schisms"
-Attempted Dominion coup: DS9 "To the Death"
-Hobus Supernova: Star Trek 2009
And lets not even get into how the Iconians are offhandedly tied into the Temporal Cold War, which only happened because the Alliance tried to use time travel, the Iconians one weakness, to stop them, and ended up deleting the Tuterians, who would later become the Sphere Builders, from normal space, which would later cause the Krenim Noye to steal the Annorax, and start the time war. So basically all of Enterprise is the Iconian's fault.
Even the theme music? These TRIBBLE!
Mustrum "actually didn't mind the music, but a cliché can't be just ignored" Ridcully
Star Trek Online Advancement: You start with lowbie gear, you end with Lobi gear.
A Necro only occurs when its been more then 30 days, its been not even two
The thread has been alive for over 30 days and pretty active in that time so newplayerguy might have got confused on the rules of what a necro is. It is not over 30 days after the thread started, but over 30 days after the last post.
So Stamet's actor is the person involved with the whole Kevin Spacey scandal. If true, then Spacey deserves whatever is coming to him. Just goes to show why Synthehol was created by the mid 24th Century.
So Stamet's actor is the person involved with the whole Kevin Spacey scandal. If true, then Spacey deserves whatever is coming to him. Just goes to show why Synthehol was created by the mid 24th Century.
Obi Won's description of Mos Eisley best fits Hollywood to a tee.
I'm torn on my favourite Yeager now, this, the Yeager Class or the Sabre.
I'm really digging the designs as evolutions of the NX, Franklin, NV, etc. but I still can't see how they tie into the Kelvin, Newton etc. designs, or the TOS ones.
The Kelvin and Newton actually looked like reasonable predecessors to the TOS Conni. They had cylindrical nacelles, bronze, non-lit deflectors, under detailed hulls and simple shapes (well the Kelvin, Mayflower, and Armstrong did, the Newton was more out there).
The older DSC ships do look like evolutions of the ENT era ships and predecessors to the DS9 era ships but don't really (like the ENT ships as well) tie into the Kelvin era (not the KT), TOS, TOS films, or TNG.
Then there's the Dreadnought Class and the Crossfield Class. They don't look like anything of any era (other than each other).
And the Bonaventure and Daedalus Classes!? Just slightly post-ENT by all accounts and look identical to TOS designs.
Still, I do love these ships for what they are even if I can't work out a lineage yet. Especially the Hoover, Cardenas, and Malachowski Classes.
Norway and Yeager dammit... I still want my Typhoon and Jupiter though. JJ Trek The Kelvin Timeline is just Trek and it's fully canon... get over it. But I still prefer TAR.
#TASforSTO
'...I can tell you that we're not in the military and that we intend no harm to the whales.' Kirk: The Voyage Home
'Starfleet is not a military organisation. Its purpose is exploration.' Picard: Peak Performance
'This is clearly a military operation. Is that what we are now? Because I thought we were explorers!' Scotty: Into Darkness
'...The Federation. Starfleet. We're not a military agency.' Scotty: Beyond
'I'm not a soldier anymore. I'm an engineer.' Miles O'Brien: Empok Nor
'...Starfleet could use you... It's a peacekeeping and humanitarian armada...' Admiral Pike: Star Trek
Yes, I myself have massive problems with DSC's ships. It is no secret that every show created it's own designs to stand out, more or less, but those are too far off in both directions (towards ENT or towards TOS) in my opinion. I really miss the Kelvin designs or even Axanar's creations which looked reasonable ad even utilized the same tech we see now in DSC (pulse turrets specifically).
^ Memory Alpha.org is not canon. It's a open wiki with arbitrary rules. Only what can be cited from an episode is. ^
"No. Men do not roar. Women roar. Then they hurl heavy objects... and claw at you." -Worf, son of Mogh
"A filthy, mangy beast, but in its bony breast beat the heart of a warrior" - "faithful" (...) "but ever-ready to follow the call of the wild." - Martok, about a Targ
"That pig smelled horrid. A sweet-sour, extremely pungent odor. I showered and showered, and it took me a week to get rid of it!" - Robert Justman, appreciating Emmy-Lou
Have saucers, have nacelles, have something in-between. Looks like Starfleet to me.
Yes, the shapes are less cylindrical and the colors are darker. The ships look more modern (unavoidable with modern technology and the audience wanting something fresh AND familiar). And?
You probably don't want to know what the Enterprise would have looked like if Gene Roddenberry would have just started to conceptualize Star Trek today. Even worse, without Matt Jeffries or Andrew Probert!
^ Memory Alpha.org is not canon. It's a open wiki with arbitrary rules. Only what can be cited from an episode is. ^
"No. Men do not roar. Women roar. Then they hurl heavy objects... and claw at you." -Worf, son of Mogh
"A filthy, mangy beast, but in its bony breast beat the heart of a warrior" - "faithful" (...) "but ever-ready to follow the call of the wild." - Martok, about a Targ
"That pig smelled horrid. A sweet-sour, extremely pungent odor. I showered and showered, and it took me a week to get rid of it!" - Robert Justman, appreciating Emmy-Lou
Like the ship from Avatar I'd assume. The Conni is based on a UFO and rocket parts is it not?
Norway and Yeager dammit... I still want my Typhoon and Jupiter though. JJ Trek The Kelvin Timeline is just Trek and it's fully canon... get over it. But I still prefer TAR.
#TASforSTO
'...I can tell you that we're not in the military and that we intend no harm to the whales.' Kirk: The Voyage Home
'Starfleet is not a military organisation. Its purpose is exploration.' Picard: Peak Performance
'This is clearly a military operation. Is that what we are now? Because I thought we were explorers!' Scotty: Into Darkness
'...The Federation. Starfleet. We're not a military agency.' Scotty: Beyond
'I'm not a soldier anymore. I'm an engineer.' Miles O'Brien: Empok Nor
'...Starfleet could use you... It's a peacekeeping and humanitarian armada...' Admiral Pike: Star Trek
Like the ship from Avatar I'd assume. The Conni is based on a UFO and rocket parts is it not?
The basic idea behind the design of the Enterprise was to create something that's "different" from what was rather common for sci-fi back in the day (so stuff that looks like jets, planes or rockets with wings). Without Matt Jeffries, Roddenberry wouldn't have had a clue though. When Roddenberry first saw the finished model it was upside down, and he even wanted to keep it that way...
^ Memory Alpha.org is not canon. It's a open wiki with arbitrary rules. Only what can be cited from an episode is. ^
"No. Men do not roar. Women roar. Then they hurl heavy objects... and claw at you." -Worf, son of Mogh
"A filthy, mangy beast, but in its bony breast beat the heart of a warrior" - "faithful" (...) "but ever-ready to follow the call of the wild." - Martok, about a Targ
"That pig smelled horrid. A sweet-sour, extremely pungent odor. I showered and showered, and it took me a week to get rid of it!" - Robert Justman, appreciating Emmy-Lou
Have saucers, have nacelles, have something in-between. Looks like Starfleet to me.
Yes, the shapes are less cylindrical and the colors are darker. The ships look more modern (unavoidable with modern technology and the audience wanting something fresh AND familiar). And?
You probably don't want to know what the Enterprise would have looked like if Gene Roddenberry would have just started to conceptualize Star Trek today. Even worse, without Matt Jeffries or Andrew Probert!
Probably similar, maybe a Daedalus...if lucky. Don't really care for the 'let's paste all sorts of bits and junk on 'em for the hell of it!" mentality.
I LIKE the tos look. Sleek, smooth hulls, NO greebles, NO kibbles, NO gnarly bits and pieces all over them like one sees in Star Wars, Aliens, and so on.
Probably similar, maybe a Daedalus...if lucky. Don't really care for the 'let's paste all sorts of bits and junk on 'em for the hell of it!" mentality.
Wrong. I said "without Matt Jeffries or Andrew Probert".
The concept for the Daedalus was one of the original Enterprise-concepts made by Matt Jeffries. And it was also Matt Jeffries who didn't want external modules slapped on a starship. He was a mechanical artist and found that external modules would make ships too vulnerable for space.
Same principle goes for the Enterprise-D, which was mostly conceptualized by Andrew Probert.
Gene Roddenberry was basically just supervising, but he didn't do the actual work. The question I raised was what we would have gotten if Roddenberry would have had NO Jeffries or Probert, but the budget and technology behind Discovery.
Personally I believe it would be horrible. Like a child baking. Way too much of everything it likes slapped into an awful chimera of a cake.
Heh, It's fun to ponder just how much of what made Star Trek great was actually Gene Roddenberry.
The franchise or TOS? Because most of TNG and all of DS9 were post GR, as were ST II and VI.
Norway and Yeager dammit... I still want my Typhoon and Jupiter though. JJ Trek The Kelvin Timeline is just Trek and it's fully canon... get over it. But I still prefer TAR.
#TASforSTO
'...I can tell you that we're not in the military and that we intend no harm to the whales.' Kirk: The Voyage Home
'Starfleet is not a military organisation. Its purpose is exploration.' Picard: Peak Performance
'This is clearly a military operation. Is that what we are now? Because I thought we were explorers!' Scotty: Into Darkness
'...The Federation. Starfleet. We're not a military agency.' Scotty: Beyond
'I'm not a soldier anymore. I'm an engineer.' Miles O'Brien: Empok Nor
'...Starfleet could use you... It's a peacekeeping and humanitarian armada...' Admiral Pike: Star Trek
Roddenberry had the badic idea bit much of what he wanted was universally rejected by the people he worked with xD
^ Memory Alpha.org is not canon. It's a open wiki with arbitrary rules. Only what can be cited from an episode is. ^
"No. Men do not roar. Women roar. Then they hurl heavy objects... and claw at you." -Worf, son of Mogh
"A filthy, mangy beast, but in its bony breast beat the heart of a warrior" - "faithful" (...) "but ever-ready to follow the call of the wild." - Martok, about a Targ
"That pig smelled horrid. A sweet-sour, extremely pungent odor. I showered and showered, and it took me a week to get rid of it!" - Robert Justman, appreciating Emmy-Lou
The TOS look was a bit weird... Apparently part of why it was simple is that hey couldn't afford to make it complex.
Not really. More advanced would look simple and sleek. Everything is INSIDE the ship. The NX looks more primitive, and showed it...where guys had to serve systems on the outside the ship, very dangerous and inefficient. I feel sorry for anyone on a star wars or aliens ship. I like the simple, sleek look. 'complex' does not mean advanced.
~holds up her chica's smart phone~ sleek, smooth....one button. ~holds up a mobile phone from 1995~ clunkier, covered in buttons and more 'complex looking'. Look at a 1957 'vette. covered in details and complex. 1997 'vette, smooth, sleek, simple.
Something does not have to be peppered with 'details' like a Star Destroyer or Red Dwarf (the Dwarf is covered in greeble, and it's rust bucket) to be advanced. Hence I love TOS.
The TOS look was a bit weird... Apparently part of why it was simple is that hey couldn't afford to make it complex.
Not really. More advanced would look simple and sleek. Everything is INSIDE the ship. The NX looks more primitive, and showed it...where guys had to serve systems on the outside the ship, very dangerous and inefficient. I feel sorry for anyone on a star wars or aliens ship. I like the simple, sleek look. 'complex' does not mean advanced.
~holds up her chica's smart phone~ sleek, smooth....one button. ~holds up a mobile phone from 1995~ clunkier, covered in buttons and more 'complex looking'. Look at a 1957 'vette. covered in details and complex. 1997 'vette, smooth, sleek, simple.
Something does not have to be peppered with 'details' like a Star Destroyer or Red Dwarf (the Dwarf is covered in greeble, and it's rust bucket) to be advanced. Hence I love TOS.
So you know what is even sleeker than your phone? A polished rock. Sleek and plain do not automatically mean more advanced. The sleek and barely instrumented canvas aeroplanes are nothing compared to modern aircraft. Turns out greebles are there for a reason.
The fact the Conni is made out of cardboard and plastic makes it far more primitive than any other ship outside of TOS.
Norway and Yeager dammit... I still want my Typhoon and Jupiter though. JJ Trek The Kelvin Timeline is just Trek and it's fully canon... get over it. But I still prefer TAR.
#TASforSTO
'...I can tell you that we're not in the military and that we intend no harm to the whales.' Kirk: The Voyage Home
'Starfleet is not a military organisation. Its purpose is exploration.' Picard: Peak Performance
'This is clearly a military operation. Is that what we are now? Because I thought we were explorers!' Scotty: Into Darkness
'...The Federation. Starfleet. We're not a military agency.' Scotty: Beyond
'I'm not a soldier anymore. I'm an engineer.' Miles O'Brien: Empok Nor
'...Starfleet could use you... It's a peacekeeping and humanitarian armada...' Admiral Pike: Star Trek
The TOS look was a bit weird... Apparently part of why it was simple is that hey couldn't afford to make it complex.
Not really. More advanced would look simple and sleek. Everything is INSIDE the ship. The NX looks more primitive, and showed it...where guys had to serve systems on the outside the ship, very dangerous and inefficient. I feel sorry for anyone on a star wars or aliens ship. I like the simple, sleek look. 'complex' does not mean advanced.
~holds up her chica's smart phone~ sleek, smooth....one button. ~holds up a mobile phone from 1995~ clunkier, covered in buttons and more 'complex looking'. Look at a 1957 'vette. covered in details and complex. 1997 'vette, smooth, sleek, simple.
Something does not have to be peppered with 'details' like a Star Destroyer or Red Dwarf (the Dwarf is covered in greeble, and it's rust bucket) to be advanced. Hence I love TOS.
So you know what is even sleeker than your phone? A polished rock. Sleek and plain do not automatically mean more advanced. The sleek and barely instrumented canvas aeroplanes are nothing compared to modern aircraft. Turns out greebles are there for a reason.
The fact the Conni is made out of cardboard and plastic makes it far more primitive than any other ship outside of TOS.
Star wars and aliens sure look primitive to me. And using modern air crafts as a comparison for space ships in the future...don't make sense to me. And,
Captain: "hey, our sensor array is down!"
Me: "No problem, I'll nip down to the access panels on deck 12, grab a spanner and fix 'em while finishing my salad!"
Captain: It's outside, Mel....
me: "WHAAA!!!!?!"
Captain: The sensor array is on the outside of the ship...that big, boxy thing , next to the missile launcher.
Mel: but I gotta suit up and go OUTSIDE....and there's a Zargon warships blasts about!!!!
Captain: but it's more advanced this way!!!!
Mel: ~slams knee into the captain's groin~ You're on your own, dude. ~swipes a fighter from the hanger deck and leaves~
The TOS look was a bit weird... Apparently part of why it was simple is that hey couldn't afford to make it complex.
Not really. More advanced would look simple and sleek. Everything is INSIDE the ship. The NX looks more primitive, and showed it...where guys had to serve systems on the outside the ship, very dangerous and inefficient. I feel sorry for anyone on a star wars or aliens ship. I like the simple, sleek look. 'complex' does not mean advanced.
~holds up her chica's smart phone~ sleek, smooth....one button. ~holds up a mobile phone from 1995~ clunkier, covered in buttons and more 'complex looking'. Look at a 1957 'vette. covered in details and complex. 1997 'vette, smooth, sleek, simple.
Something does not have to be peppered with 'details' like a Star Destroyer or Red Dwarf (the Dwarf is covered in greeble, and it's rust bucket) to be advanced. Hence I love TOS.
Heh, Form follows function. Details that make sense make it look awesome. Star Destroyers have meaningful detail. They have bumps on the hull where weapon turrets are mounted, etc...
There's been at least one movie where the aliens used a ship that was a featureless metallic sphere.... showing how people were supposed to enter the thing was... interesting, to say the least, especially since it literally had no doors.
The TOS look was a bit weird... Apparently part of why it was simple is that hey couldn't afford to make it complex.
Not really. More advanced would look simple and sleek. Everything is INSIDE the ship. The NX looks more primitive, and showed it...where guys had to serve systems on the outside the ship, very dangerous and inefficient. I feel sorry for anyone on a star wars or aliens ship. I like the simple, sleek look. 'complex' does not mean advanced.
~holds up her chica's smart phone~ sleek, smooth....one button. ~holds up a mobile phone from 1995~ clunkier, covered in buttons and more 'complex looking'. Look at a 1957 'vette. covered in details and complex. 1997 'vette, smooth, sleek, simple.
Something does not have to be peppered with 'details' like a Star Destroyer or Red Dwarf (the Dwarf is covered in greeble, and it's rust bucket) to be advanced. Hence I love TOS.
Heh, Form follows function. Details that make sense make it look awesome. Star Destroyers have meaningful detail. They have bumps on the hull where weapon turrets are mounted, etc...
There's been at least one movie where the aliens used a ship that was a featureless metallic sphere.... showing how people were supposed to enter the thing was... interesting, to say the least, especially since it literally had no doors.
Something smooth, simple and sleek is more advanced. Jefferies had everything accessed from inside the ship, not need to suit up and head outside...they did THAT in Archer's time. And all those 'hull bumps' are perfect targets to get, you make the vicious lion a harmless furball without the claws and teeth. All those lumps and bumps are just Tim Allen level man grunting and beer guzzling. And, apart from TOS....some advanced ships in sci fi have been very simple. Look at Flight of the Navigator. Only SW ships I liked was the Naboo stuff.
The TOS look was a bit weird... Apparently part of why it was simple is that hey couldn't afford to make it complex.
Not really. More advanced would look simple and sleek. Everything is INSIDE the ship. The NX looks more primitive, and showed it...where guys had to serve systems on the outside the ship, very dangerous and inefficient. I feel sorry for anyone on a star wars or aliens ship. I like the simple, sleek look. 'complex' does not mean advanced.
~holds up her chica's smart phone~ sleek, smooth....one button. ~holds up a mobile phone from 1995~ clunkier, covered in buttons and more 'complex looking'. Look at a 1957 'vette. covered in details and complex. 1997 'vette, smooth, sleek, simple.
Something does not have to be peppered with 'details' like a Star Destroyer or Red Dwarf (the Dwarf is covered in greeble, and it's rust bucket) to be advanced. Hence I love TOS.
So you know what is even sleeker than your phone? A polished rock. Sleek and plain do not automatically mean more advanced. The sleek and barely instrumented canvas aeroplanes are nothing compared to modern aircraft. Turns out greebles are there for a reason.
The fact the Conni is made out of cardboard and plastic makes it far more primitive than any other ship outside of TOS.
Star wars and aliens sure look primitive to me. And using modern air crafts as a comparison for space ships in the future...don't make sense to me. And,
Captain: "hey, our sensor array is down!"
Me: "No problem, I'll nip down to the access panels on deck 12, grab a spanner and fix 'em while finishing my salad!"
Captain: It's outside, Mel....
me: "WHAAA!!!!?!"
Captain: The sensor array is on the outside of the ship...that big, boxy thing , next to the missile launcher.
Mel: but I gotta suit up and go OUTSIDE....and there's a Zargon warships blasts about!!!!
Captain: but it's more advanced this way!!!!
Mel: ~slams knee into the captain's groin~ You're on your own, dude. ~swipes a fighter from the hanger deck and leaves~
I'll keep smooth and simple, Artichoke.
Yeah, that dish is clearly easily accesed from the inside.
Star Trek Online Advancement: You start with lowbie gear, you end with Lobi gear.
The TOS look was a bit weird... Apparently part of why it was simple is that hey couldn't afford to make it complex.
Not really. More advanced would look simple and sleek. Everything is INSIDE the ship. The NX looks more primitive, and showed it...where guys had to serve systems on the outside the ship, very dangerous and inefficient. I feel sorry for anyone on a star wars or aliens ship. I like the simple, sleek look. 'complex' does not mean advanced.
~holds up her chica's smart phone~ sleek, smooth....one button. ~holds up a mobile phone from 1995~ clunkier, covered in buttons and more 'complex looking'. Look at a 1957 'vette. covered in details and complex. 1997 'vette, smooth, sleek, simple.
Something does not have to be peppered with 'details' like a Star Destroyer or Red Dwarf (the Dwarf is covered in greeble, and it's rust bucket) to be advanced. Hence I love TOS.
Heh, Form follows function. Details that make sense make it look awesome. Star Destroyers have meaningful detail. They have bumps on the hull where weapon turrets are mounted, etc...
There's been at least one movie where the aliens used a ship that was a featureless metallic sphere.... showing how people were supposed to enter the thing was... interesting, to say the least, especially since it literally had no doors.
Not a featureless metallic sphere, but this ship certainly makes it interesting how to enter the ship. Also if done right, then simple and sleek looks more futuristic than functional.
Comments
Mustrum "actually didn't mind the music, but a cliché can't be just ignored" Ridcully
The thread has been alive for over 30 days and pretty active in that time so newplayerguy might have got confused on the rules of what a necro is. It is not over 30 days after the thread started, but over 30 days after the last post.
Obi Won's description of Mos Eisley best fits Hollywood to a tee.
I'm really digging the designs as evolutions of the NX, Franklin, NV, etc. but I still can't see how they tie into the Kelvin, Newton etc. designs, or the TOS ones.
The Kelvin and Newton actually looked like reasonable predecessors to the TOS Conni. They had cylindrical nacelles, bronze, non-lit deflectors, under detailed hulls and simple shapes (well the Kelvin, Mayflower, and Armstrong did, the Newton was more out there).
The older DSC ships do look like evolutions of the ENT era ships and predecessors to the DS9 era ships but don't really (like the ENT ships as well) tie into the Kelvin era (not the KT), TOS, TOS films, or TNG.
Then there's the Dreadnought Class and the Crossfield Class. They don't look like anything of any era (other than each other).
And the Bonaventure and Daedalus Classes!? Just slightly post-ENT by all accounts and look identical to TOS designs.
Still, I do love these ships for what they are even if I can't work out a lineage yet. Especially the Hoover, Cardenas, and Malachowski Classes.
Norway and Yeager dammit... I still want my Typhoon and Jupiter though.
JJ Trek The Kelvin Timeline is just Trek and it's fully canon... get over it. But I still prefer TAR.
#TASforSTO
'...I can tell you that we're not in the military and that we intend no harm to the whales.' Kirk: The Voyage Home
'Starfleet is not a military organisation. Its purpose is exploration.' Picard: Peak Performance
'This is clearly a military operation. Is that what we are now? Because I thought we were explorers!' Scotty: Into Darkness
'...The Federation. Starfleet. We're not a military agency.' Scotty: Beyond
'I'm not a soldier anymore. I'm an engineer.' Miles O'Brien: Empok Nor
'...Starfleet could use you... It's a peacekeeping and humanitarian armada...' Admiral Pike: Star Trek
Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!
Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!
Have saucers, have nacelles, have something in-between. Looks like Starfleet to me.
Yes, the shapes are less cylindrical and the colors are darker. The ships look more modern (unavoidable with modern technology and the audience wanting something fresh AND familiar). And?
You probably don't want to know what the Enterprise would have looked like if Gene Roddenberry would have just started to conceptualize Star Trek today. Even worse, without Matt Jeffries or Andrew Probert!
Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!
Like the ship from Avatar I'd assume. The Conni is based on a UFO and rocket parts is it not?
Norway and Yeager dammit... I still want my Typhoon and Jupiter though.
JJ Trek The Kelvin Timeline is just Trek and it's fully canon... get over it. But I still prefer TAR.
#TASforSTO
'...I can tell you that we're not in the military and that we intend no harm to the whales.' Kirk: The Voyage Home
'Starfleet is not a military organisation. Its purpose is exploration.' Picard: Peak Performance
'This is clearly a military operation. Is that what we are now? Because I thought we were explorers!' Scotty: Into Darkness
'...The Federation. Starfleet. We're not a military agency.' Scotty: Beyond
'I'm not a soldier anymore. I'm an engineer.' Miles O'Brien: Empok Nor
'...Starfleet could use you... It's a peacekeeping and humanitarian armada...' Admiral Pike: Star Trek
Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!
The basic idea behind the design of the Enterprise was to create something that's "different" from what was rather common for sci-fi back in the day (so stuff that looks like jets, planes or rockets with wings). Without Matt Jeffries, Roddenberry wouldn't have had a clue though. When Roddenberry first saw the finished model it was upside down, and he even wanted to keep it that way...
These give some insight.
Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!
Probably similar, maybe a Daedalus...if lucky. Don't really care for the 'let's paste all sorts of bits and junk on 'em for the hell of it!" mentality.
I LIKE the tos look. Sleek, smooth hulls, NO greebles, NO kibbles, NO gnarly bits and pieces all over them like one sees in Star Wars, Aliens, and so on.
My character Tsin'xing
Wrong. I said "without Matt Jeffries or Andrew Probert".
The concept for the Daedalus was one of the original Enterprise-concepts made by Matt Jeffries. And it was also Matt Jeffries who didn't want external modules slapped on a starship. He was a mechanical artist and found that external modules would make ships too vulnerable for space.
Same principle goes for the Enterprise-D, which was mostly conceptualized by Andrew Probert.
Gene Roddenberry was basically just supervising, but he didn't do the actual work. The question I raised was what we would have gotten if Roddenberry would have had NO Jeffries or Probert, but the budget and technology behind Discovery.
Personally I believe it would be horrible. Like a child baking. Way too much of everything it likes slapped into an awful chimera of a cake.
My character Tsin'xing
The franchise or TOS? Because most of TNG and all of DS9 were post GR, as were ST II and VI.
Norway and Yeager dammit... I still want my Typhoon and Jupiter though.
JJ Trek The Kelvin Timeline is just Trek and it's fully canon... get over it. But I still prefer TAR.
#TASforSTO
'...I can tell you that we're not in the military and that we intend no harm to the whales.' Kirk: The Voyage Home
'Starfleet is not a military organisation. Its purpose is exploration.' Picard: Peak Performance
'This is clearly a military operation. Is that what we are now? Because I thought we were explorers!' Scotty: Into Darkness
'...The Federation. Starfleet. We're not a military agency.' Scotty: Beyond
'I'm not a soldier anymore. I'm an engineer.' Miles O'Brien: Empok Nor
'...Starfleet could use you... It's a peacekeeping and humanitarian armada...' Admiral Pike: Star Trek
Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!
Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!
Not really. More advanced would look simple and sleek. Everything is INSIDE the ship. The NX looks more primitive, and showed it...where guys had to serve systems on the outside the ship, very dangerous and inefficient. I feel sorry for anyone on a star wars or aliens ship. I like the simple, sleek look. 'complex' does not mean advanced.
~holds up her chica's smart phone~ sleek, smooth....one button. ~holds up a mobile phone from 1995~ clunkier, covered in buttons and more 'complex looking'. Look at a 1957 'vette. covered in details and complex. 1997 'vette, smooth, sleek, simple.
Something does not have to be peppered with 'details' like a Star Destroyer or Red Dwarf (the Dwarf is covered in greeble, and it's rust bucket) to be advanced. Hence I love TOS.
So you know what is even sleeker than your phone? A polished rock. Sleek and plain do not automatically mean more advanced. The sleek and barely instrumented canvas aeroplanes are nothing compared to modern aircraft. Turns out greebles are there for a reason.
The fact the Conni is made out of cardboard and plastic makes it far more primitive than any other ship outside of TOS.
Norway and Yeager dammit... I still want my Typhoon and Jupiter though.
JJ Trek The Kelvin Timeline is just Trek and it's fully canon... get over it. But I still prefer TAR.
#TASforSTO
'...I can tell you that we're not in the military and that we intend no harm to the whales.' Kirk: The Voyage Home
'Starfleet is not a military organisation. Its purpose is exploration.' Picard: Peak Performance
'This is clearly a military operation. Is that what we are now? Because I thought we were explorers!' Scotty: Into Darkness
'...The Federation. Starfleet. We're not a military agency.' Scotty: Beyond
'I'm not a soldier anymore. I'm an engineer.' Miles O'Brien: Empok Nor
'...Starfleet could use you... It's a peacekeeping and humanitarian armada...' Admiral Pike: Star Trek
Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!
Sheetwood and metal.
Star wars and aliens sure look primitive to me. And using modern air crafts as a comparison for space ships in the future...don't make sense to me. And,
Captain: "hey, our sensor array is down!"
Me: "No problem, I'll nip down to the access panels on deck 12, grab a spanner and fix 'em while finishing my salad!"
Captain: It's outside, Mel....
me: "WHAAA!!!!?!"
Captain: The sensor array is on the outside of the ship...that big, boxy thing , next to the missile launcher.
Mel: but I gotta suit up and go OUTSIDE....and there's a Zargon warships blasts about!!!!
Captain: but it's more advanced this way!!!!
Mel: ~slams knee into the captain's groin~ You're on your own, dude. ~swipes a fighter from the hanger deck and leaves~
I'll keep smooth and simple, Artichoke.
My character Tsin'xing
There's been at least one movie where the aliens used a ship that was a featureless metallic sphere.... showing how people were supposed to enter the thing was... interesting, to say the least, especially since it literally had no doors.
My character Tsin'xing
Something smooth, simple and sleek is more advanced. Jefferies had everything accessed from inside the ship, not need to suit up and head outside...they did THAT in Archer's time. And all those 'hull bumps' are perfect targets to get, you make the vicious lion a harmless furball without the claws and teeth. All those lumps and bumps are just Tim Allen level man grunting and beer guzzling. And, apart from TOS....some advanced ships in sci fi have been very simple. Look at Flight of the Navigator. Only SW ships I liked was the Naboo stuff.
Not a featureless metallic sphere, but this ship certainly makes it interesting how to enter the ship. Also if done right, then simple and sleek looks more futuristic than functional.