***SPOILER***Can we get this new design from last night's episode?

artan42

azrael605 wrote: »

> @markhawkman said:
> azrael605 wrote: »
>
> > @evilmark444 said:
> > I actually like the combination window / viewscreen most ships have now, looks good and serves a practical purpose too in that if the viewscreen is disabled they can still see out. Consider TWoK, at the end in the Nebula the viewscreen was all staticy and they could barely see the Reliant, with these window viewscreens that would have been less of an issue.
>
> It shouldn't have been an issue period. There is no nebula in existence that could interfere with an AM transistor radio, much less 23rd century tech, but sadly Nick Meyer infected Trek with this massive factual mistake about the nature of nebulas.
>
>
>
> Hmm.. are we sure about that? I mean, sure it's possible to be sure we haven't seen one yet, but to say such things can't exist? I don't buy that.

Nebulas do not interfere with telescopes from Earth seeing through them, they do not block radio signals from pulsars, their particle density is so low that they only appear as clouds from light years away, from up close they just look like more space. Basically everything about the sequence in TWOK ignores the FACTS of nebulas, all of which information was know at the time, and the scientific advisor on TWOK told Meyer all of it.

1. Open Google.
2. Search 'science fiction'.
3. Watch the popular franchise 'Star Trek'.
4. Join the dots .
5. Optional: explain why that one scientific error is more important than, say for example, warp drive.

Unknown

This content has been removed.

evilmark444

artan42 wrote: »

azrael605 wrote: »

> @markhawkman said:
> azrael605 wrote: »
>
> > @evilmark444 said:
> > I actually like the combination window / viewscreen most ships have now, looks good and serves a practical purpose too in that if the viewscreen is disabled they can still see out. Consider TWoK, at the end in the Nebula the viewscreen was all staticy and they could barely see the Reliant, with these window viewscreens that would have been less of an issue.
>
> It shouldn't have been an issue period. There is no nebula in existence that could interfere with an AM transistor radio, much less 23rd century tech, but sadly Nick Meyer infected Trek with this massive factual mistake about the nature of nebulas.
>
>
>
> Hmm.. are we sure about that? I mean, sure it's possible to be sure we haven't seen one yet, but to say such things can't exist? I don't buy that.

Nebulas do not interfere with telescopes from Earth seeing through them, they do not block radio signals from pulsars, their particle density is so low that they only appear as clouds from light years away, from up close they just look like more space. Basically everything about the sequence in TWOK ignores the FACTS of nebulas, all of which information was know at the time, and the scientific advisor on TWOK told Meyer all of it.

[*] Optional: explain why that one scientific error is more important than, say for example, warp drive.

I thought warp drive (aka Alcubierre drive) was theoretically possible, we just don't know if we could ever build one or obtain exotic matter to power it?

markhawkman

azrael605 wrote: »

> @markhawkman said:
> azrael605 wrote: »
>
> > @evilmark444 said:
> > I actually like the combination window / viewscreen most ships have now, looks good and serves a practical purpose too in that if the viewscreen is disabled they can still see out. Consider TWoK, at the end in the Nebula the viewscreen was all staticy and they could barely see the Reliant, with these window viewscreens that would have been less of an issue.

> It shouldn't have been an issue period. There is no nebula in existence that could interfere with an AM transistor radio, much less 23rd century tech, but sadly Nick Meyer infected Trek with this massive factual mistake about the nature of nebulas.

> Hmm.. are we sure about that? I mean, sure it's possible to be sure we haven't seen one yet, but to say such things can't exist? I don't buy that.

Nebulas do not interfere with telescopes from Earth seeing through them, they do not block radio signals from pulsars, their particle density is so low that they only appear as clouds from light years away, from up close they just look like more space. Basically everything about the sequence in TWOK ignores the FACTS of nebulas, all of which information was know at the time, and the scientific advisor on TWOK told Meyer all of it.

Ever heard of the Coal Sack? Seriously... It's famous for being the most horribly boring nebula in the history of astronomy. All pictures of it look like a dark smudge on the photographic plate. It's very close and we still have trouble seeing through it. I know you're going to say "But we cans till see through it!".. would we if it was farther away? Truth is optical sensor blocking nebulas show up in photos as little more than dark spots. People noticed the Coal Sack because it blocks a large chunk of the sky.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2V2RzEY2vxg
In Star Trek nebulas that are sensor blocking are considered to be rare and potentially dangerous. Also it wasn't optical interference that was the main issue in TWoK. It seemed more like a form of electrostatic interference that caused the sensors to malfunction. The main symptom was seeing STATIC on the view screen.

angrytarg

Seriously, why does Star Trek has to be "scientifically sound"? Nothing in it's entirety is. Nothing. From astronomy over physics to biology and genetics it's all bollocks. And no just because with a lot of goodwill some things are partly theoretical possible doesn't change that, neither do props or concepts that inspired real world science or development as the effects and what was there in the beginning are light years apart. Trek did good in inspire people and those people did some amazing work, nobody takes that away. But don't try to apply real science to a TV show...

artan42

evilmark444 wrote: »

I thought warp drive (aka Alcubierre drive) was theoretically possible, we just don't know if we could ever build one or obtain exotic matter to power it?

Though it shares a name and some basic similarities with Trek Warp Drive it's not really the same thing. For starters, speeds with a Alcubierre drive would be mathematical. Speeds in Trek are plot dependent.

angrytarg wrote: »

Seriously, why does Star Trek has to be "scientifically sound"? Nothing in it's entirety is. Nothing. From astronomy over physics to biology and genetics it's all bollocks. And no just because with a lot of goodwill some things are partly theoretical possible doesn't change that, neither do props or concepts that inspired real world science or development as the effects and what was there in the beginning are light years apart. Trek did good in inspire people and those people did some amazing work, nobody takes that away. But don't try to apply real science to a TV show...

Exactly this. Also bonus points for using light years as unit of distance, Targ knows how to science.​​

meimeitoo

angrytarg wrote: »

Seriously, why does Star Trek has to be "scientifically sound"? Nothing in it's entirety is. Nothing. From astronomy over physics to biology and genetics it's all bollocks. And no just because with a lot of goodwill some things are partly theoretical possible doesn't change that, neither do props or concepts that inspired real world science or development as the effects and what was there in the beginning are light years apart. Trek did good in inspire people and those people did some amazing work, nobody takes that away. But don't try to apply real science to a TV show...

Very simple: suspension of disbelief. That's one of the prime tenets of Sci-Fi: it doesn't have to "scientifically sound" for the full 100%, but it needs to be believable -- plausible enough, at least, to not want to run away from it immediately, at the first scientific 'error'.

Unknown

This content has been removed.

smokebailey

darthmeow504 wrote: »

smokebailey wrote: »

evilmark444 wrote: »

I prefer the grey color, the white hull and straight pylons were the two main reasons I always hated, HATED the TOS era Connie. Let's be honest though, no matter how Cryptic adds this ship they definitely will allow you to use the TOS hull material.

I love the white and the straight pylons. TOS connie will always be my fav ~hugs a TOS connie lovingly~
It also gives me the idea that the hull itself is luminous, which is cool.

I've always been in love with the TMP refit, which improves on the original in virtually every way while retaining the core essence of the iconic Matt Jefferies design. I really like how the TRIBBLE version incorporates so many of those improvements while retaining the core distinctions that define the original like the dish and the nacelles. I'm not terribly fond of the lip on the shuttlebay, but it might grow on me.

They really need to brighten up the hull material and shoot it with decent lighting, though. Everything in the series looks like wearing sunglasses at night / inside, just unnecessarily dark where you can't see a bloody thing. It's like come on, did someone forget to pay the power bill or something?

Yep...I wanna see some colors! ~flails arms anime style~

Unknown

This content has been removed.

centurian821

darthmeow504 wrote: »

smokebailey wrote: »

darthmeow504 wrote: »

smokebailey wrote: »

evilmark444 wrote: »

I prefer the grey color, the white hull and straight pylons were the two main reasons I always hated, HATED the TOS era Connie. Let's be honest though, no matter how Cryptic adds this ship they definitely will allow you to use the TOS hull material.

I love the white and the straight pylons. TOS connie will always be my fav ~hugs a TOS connie lovingly~
It also gives me the idea that the hull itself is luminous, which is cool.

I've always been in love with the TMP refit, which improves on the original in virtually every way while retaining the core essence of the iconic Matt Jefferies design. I really like how the TRIBBLE version incorporates so many of those improvements while retaining the core distinctions that define the original like the dish and the nacelles. I'm not terribly fond of the lip on the shuttlebay, but it might grow on me.

They really need to brighten up the hull material and shoot it with decent lighting, though. Everything in the series looks like wearing sunglasses at night / inside, just unnecessarily dark where you can't see a bloody thing. It's like come on, did someone forget to pay the power bill or something?

Yep...I wanna see some colors! ~flails arms anime style~

Interestingly enough about the colors, it wasn't long ago that the 60s/70s color set and style came back pretty hard. For a while there in the 2000s, all sorts of places like casinos and high-end hotels were being remodeled in that style with colors that looked just like the old tupperware from the 70s or the Brady Bunch. Dusty orange / red, lime green or avocado, lemon yellow, pale blue, etc. Mid-century modernist furniture was everywhere. Half the places I went on my delivery jobs looked like Old Drozana plus flatscreens.

There was never a good reason that Starfleet of the 2250s-70s couldn't have that look even in a fully modern production. If the style could be revived in our real life 21rst century, there's no reason it couldn't also spend a time as the "in" fashion and design aesthetic of a decade or three of the 23rd.

Thank you for this. I've been having a problem with the "modernize" and "look shinier" comments partly for this reason. Added details and proper lighting and materials can do a lot to get a modern look.