26 Phaser Arrays? The Cardenas Class Starship

[@TCPolecat]

As someone who served in the US Navy, I think you're overlooking one of this design's greatest strengths: Redundancy. This is a HUGE feature in the modern Navy, you have back-ups for EVERYTHING, even engines. This design not only gives you a pair of back-up nacelles you can use if one of them is damaged in a fight, but gives you back-up and independant power supplies on every turret. That is a HUGE advantage in combat, as even if the central power goes down, you can keep fighting! No wonder these lasted as long as they did in universe, they probably just tanked their way through any problem until the Klinks rolled in with their superior firepower. Seriously, you gotta give a warship design like that props for just being too stubborn to die, and having back-ups for its back-ups.

[@sw-gs]

If Defiant firing everything at once would rip ship apart, then I highly doubt that Cardenas energy systems could handle that ammount of weapons even in standby mode.

[@oniris3326]

Starfleet do care a lot about redundancy, having 2 or 3 backup for most systems.

[@vic5015]

Yup. It's a *big* part of why the Air Force prefers designs with 2 engines. In the USAF's ideal world, it would operate several hundred F15s and F22s and no F16s.

[@Zeithri]

@@sw-gsThe Defiant uses Twin-Phaser Cannons of 24th Design into a compact ship. If the Defiant was larger, it'd likely not rip itself apart. But knowing the Sisko, then he'd probably strap eight of them in for sixteen phaser cannon bursts :D But aside from that, each of these Phasers are tied to their own individual power source which means they never drag power from the main system. That's an enormous benefit to overall fighting prowess, but it also means it cannot take extra power from the warp core to boost the firepower. A game like Starfleet Command deals a lot with system and energy placements. Weapons that take up no energy like missiles can be incredibly powerful. So think that, but a ship that have so much fire power, and none is tied to the warp core, meaning it could just boost it's shield as much as it wants while spraying & praying phaser fire all over the place.

[@Zeithri]

@TCPoleCat Well the problem wasn't really that Klingons had superior firepower in Discovery. It's that they have a cloaked-ramming ship that can just ram ships apart. One Cardenas can blowup a lot of Klingons before succumbing so it becomes a matter of Zerg-tactics. Not to mention implanting a computer virus that ran haywire on Starfleet systems and that was probably the big part of Starfleet's continual losses against them in the Disco-setting.

[@chan742]

I love the predecessor to the warp coasting system. It's fun to create prototypes that are worse than the later developments and give them very specific faults. I can 100% see the engineers on a Cardenas class arguing with the command staff that they need to drop out of warp to degauss the nacelles before the warp field starts to lose cohesion and they go hurling out of a warp bubble. It's a limitation that makes all future ships with 4 nacelles seem so much more powerful.

[@bearnaff9387]

It also explains why designs using >2 were uncommon in civilizations that used nacelles. If using nacelle switching requires specialized technological development and all you're getting is better warp field sustainability, it makes more sense to take those two extra nacelles and build an extra ship with them. Since manufacturing most things seems to be a solved issue in the 23rd century, there are probably few cases where the resources to make starships are better spent making one ship when you can make two. If you were in a situation where making the current state of the art was less efficient than making older tech, working out a 4-nacelle ship design using that more mature tech to get increased range at speed _would_ make sense. But, I think the situation is more one where, once a design is ready for manufacture, it's just a matter of budgeting the right amount of energy and matter to the shipyards and you get your starship. At that point, two ships are better than one, even if the one ship can fly for longer without stopping, in almost every situation.

[@MRTransportVideos]

A really strong-looking ship class - the hard "X" of the warp nacelle struts shows a real sense of being a no-nonsense vessel, while the stepped back Bridge, although the 'softest' looking part of the design, is protected by the shoulders of the saucer section, looking like a raincoat that's been pulled up to cover the ears.

[@shingshongshamalama]

It makes sense that early Starfleet ships would get real big and then get smaller. Miniaturization of technology is one of the biggest challenges to making new technology practical for mobile applications.

[@jm823]

It makes sense that in the beginning years of the Federation it would need a "Hammer" as it would be needed to standup to other galactic powers and any threats out there and as the Federation established itself and other powers joined it, one would find a hammer less and less useful as the saying goes "If all you have is a hammer, everything and everyone will look like a nail" LLAP 🖖

[@gmradio2436]

Discovering these ships through STO has been a positive influence for me. I learn of cool ships mostly on their own merits rather than being attached to a specific show.

[@jameslynch2399]

So this ship class was supposed to be 60 years old by the time we saw it, but the examples we saw had higher registry numbers than the fresh-off-the-line Discovery. I really wish the makers of Star Trek over the decades had kept some semblance of sense to how registry numbers work.

[@TheMrPeteChannel]

Registry #s are all over the place. The USS Solvang was launched & destroyed in 2380 and its # was A very low NCC-12101.

[@SportyMabamba]

Err my dude you realise the USAF reset their designation system after F-117? Currently they have F/A18, F22, F35..

[@sasukesarutobi3862]

​@@SportyMabambaRegistry numbers are more to identify an individual ship than to designate a class of ships (like the F-117 or F-35 are - they're a design of plane rather than the individual plane). This works like the naming convention in US Navy ships (e.g. the Yorktown-class USS Enterprise was CV-6, and the USS Yorktown was CV-5). That said, registry numbers in Starfleet are also allocated in blocks, with the lead ship of the class getting the first registry (and usually also the same name as the class, such as the Constitution-class NCC-1700 USS Constitution). It's perfectly feasible that early Starfleet reserved some blocks that ended up being far too large for the class of vessel, so they reallocated parts of them to later classes.

[@3Rayfire]

14 years before the Constitution class puts it at the mid 2220s. So thirty some odd years max. remember the Enterprise launched in 2245, the Constitution was probably around 2240 at the earliest.

[@peterhans3791]

They used to make some level of sense before new trek.

[@matthewsalazar3575]

So…just to be clear…Star Trek Online has this class listed as a Command Dreadnought Cruiser…which would explain its sheer size and mass for the era. I don’t know if you mentioned all that but I felt it was worth mentioning.

[@peterhans3791]

It should be noted that "frigate" means a very specific type of ship in STO (commander engineering, raider flanking, and limited cruiser commands). Plenty of things that should be frigates end up being escorts or destroyers because of this...or a dread in this case.

[@maxrander0101]

its refit we get is one that uses the old design with new tech to fill a role of command cruiser it even says that in the ships info

[@peterhans3791]

@@maxrander0101 technically all the old ships are supposed to be just new models designed to look classic for varying reasons. Like the T1 NX is literally a fleet yard passion project to make a modern version. The T6 Franklin is actualy a ship confiscated from a rogue time traveler who built it with off the shelf civilian future parts (which are on par with modern starfleet). Exceptions are things like the Kelvin Connie that is actually a 23c ship, but implied to be at roughly modern power levels due to all the advancements from the Kelvin incident.

[@maxrander0101]

@@peterhans3791 thats what i was saying all the ships in the game at least and the ones we have seen in other media are modern refits of the classics or from entire other timelines

[@TimeSpinner]

A luxuriously large engineering section even given how big it was for its day, that thing would have been a flying fab shop - and probably had to be, with two shuttlebays, all those phaser turrets to refit, and a loadout that meant one set of nacelles or the other was always being worked on, given Starfleet wanting to get the most out of its then-fantastic warp capabilities. The Cardenas probably needed one shuttlecraft just to fit all the workbees needed to keep the thing working. And kudos to its designer, it feels very much like a Road Not Taken for the Federation - you COULD see this design possibly being extended into the future, with an elongated engineering deck 'stalk' surrounded by hab and science decks, before the "quick-eject" vertical engineering section so emblematic of the Federation took over; it very much feels like detaching the engineering decks was ever so slightly in this ship's future.

[@markfergerson2145]

I’m unimpressed by most ships designed for ST:D but this class has it all. Plenty of legs, plenty of teeth, plenty of range, plenty of room for non-combat work. The bridge placement looks cool but suffers from the same exposure issue that most Starfleet ships do. The bridge should be buried deep in the hull with plenty of extra armor, but here we are. Good coverage in this video for a ship class that should have had more of its stories told.

[@TimberWolf99]

I'm glad it doesn't have the main problem most Abrams/Kurtzman-era designs have. Namely, a physical bridge window where the viewscreen (and a solid bulkhead) is supposed to be.

[@CertifiablyIngame]

Technically it does have a transparent viewscreen, it's just they keep it "shut/off" because it faced a lot of battle. Most of the ones we see now are supposedly able to be closed off but we seldom see that because its "cooler" to see the views through the transparent window

[@TimberWolf99]

@@CertifiablyIngame Oh. Well then it goes the bin with the rest of the Abrams/Kurtzman designs.

[@peterhans3791]

@@CertifiablyIngame I would take the Glass views greens so much more seriously if they showed at least the ability to close bulkhead over them for battle, or had a helms an argue they aren't worth using because they fly better with them open or something. As it stands now, all I can think of is the Kelvin Connie's bridge window cracking under impact with dust the deflector should have taken care of. It's like why would you introduce bridge windows out of nowhere and then immedietly point out how stupid they are.

[@3Rayfire]

Loved what the STO team did with the Buran, the Battleaxe.

[@ericmadsen7470]

Not a bad looking class for the early years of StarFleet. Iconic.

[@nyxorelius]

Of all the Discovery designs pre-time travel, this is by far my favorite.This ship is the flagship for my Disco Captain and my headcannon qoute for his thoughts on it is "SHe is old and falling apart constantly, but as long as we have show our hands at damage-control, we can tank anything that is thrown at us."

[@kaidenshepard8446]

Sorry to be picky here, but aren't they technically phaser banks, not arrays? The Ambassador class as far as we know was the first class to utilize phaser arrays, before then Starfleet vessels had phaser beam banks

[@DrewLSsix]

He differentiated between strips and turrets, this ship has arrays of turrets. Later ships had arrays of strips. An array isn't a specific type of technology.

[@buccizero]

Rick your videos are among my absolute FAVORITE of all KZbin content 💯

[@Superskull85]

Getting a 24th century neo design of this class with escorts being more popular would be interesting.

[@johndangelo3051]

My favorite earlier vessel.. great looking and very powerful

[@beyondu77]

What a beautiful ship. Say what you will about Star Trek Discovery, but the show has given us some amazing looking ships.

[@cianmannion1752]

Love getting lore about all different ships and designs and stories about them

[@timathyyy]

Ah yes the boom box

[@Nexusin]

I would love to see a slightly larger version of this ship with later tech added at the base. A warship with enough engineers on it to be able to repair multiple damaged vessels, or build bases on planets near hot zones.

[@DoctorX17]

Ohh, I missed this one... I love how much lore we get about some background ships these days! It really helps make the Trek universe feel more real overall. I really like the design of this. It's different, but not just for the sake of being different. The differences make a lot of sense, and the forward bridge and cut saucer give it a really mean look compared to the much more friendly, soft looking all-round saucer.

[@StarMandoForge]

One of the best ships seen on Discovery

[@casbot71]

With the bridge not being on top it opens up a unexploited opportunity - a _big ass phaser_ on top (and bottom) of the saucer. Having two really heavy phasers in those locations (along with all the current phaser turrets) would give maximum coverage, with both able to hit the same target if its on the same horizontal level as the ship, in front, behind or on either side (except for some pylon blind spots). And still having a single _heavy phaser_ able to hit targets above or below when the enemy has superior angle. So it's always able to hit back. As well, a quick roll can bring the target into view of both heavy phasers. Add a torpedo launcher further back on the hull facing up and a corresponding one facing down, and the ship can still hammer enemy ships that are swooping in on it and in a better position. It would mean that manoeuvrable enemies would have a harder time taking advantage of superior positioning. The extra photon torpedo launchers conver a blind spot, being a "fire everything, get them off us" weapon. Using up your photon inventory is preferable to being destroyed then and there.

[@dantheplasticman9742]

Enjoy these vids to no end sir. Nimitz next please?

[@CrazyNights1015]

I've always liked the design and it's STO successor, the Buran, is even better!

[@sasukesarutobi3862]

I like the lore design choice of the pairs of nacelles taking over from each other to prevent overheating and only when dropped from warp. It very elegantly demonstrates the amount of engineering progress still needed before the Constitution-class design was possible, as well as why the two-pair design didn't become more common after this class. I can also picture how obsolete it would have seemed after ships were able to cruise at warp for longer periods, with these "rapid response" vessels having to stop every 12 hours en route (and I wonder how long it took to switch over between nacelle pairs) while other vessels could just cruise continuously. A really nice choice that shows the stepping stones of technological progress, and how what was once cutting-edge can become irreciverably obsolete.

[@andylongman355]

Nice to hear a Canon mention of a aouth coast uk city. I always thought Portsmouth would totally be involved in starship building to some degree.

[@megafakecannel]

It that tiny port below the bridge meant to be a deflector dish?

[@christopherbrandt3703]

i do love this class of ship but there are a few things that i would change the position of the engines and nacelles a little closer together, bring the deflector dish back a little and close up the bridge area making it less likely to be attacked just like they did with the defiant class

[@JonathanGFoulds]

I really really enjoy your videos, this one in particular I thought I would comment on because I really like the inclusion of John eaves original design for what was meant to become the discovery instead of the enterprise for Star Trek phase 2?? - I hope I’ve got that right? The much more flush and angular designs of this era, I really like. The “very very early on teaser trailer” for Star Trek discovery, showed a ship almost identical to John Eves (I hope I have the spelling right) phase 2 enterprise, coming out of what looks like an asteroid type of space dock to music that was either Klingon or Romulan in its composition if I remember rightly? Watching a little further another element of this era that I love which you mention is the overall mass or scale of these ships and the almost signature “triple red” Bussard Collectors. Not to mention finally the unusual and sometimes surprising position of the bridge, as you mentioned it, not being standardized yet to its sort of centralized Dome position in the saucer. There is some fantastic concept art in the Star Trek phase 2 book that I have coveted for some time since it’s release several decades ago after the Star Trek phase 2 was then turned into the first movie - Star Trek the motion picture.

[@CaptainSeato]

"...followed the design aesthetic for... ...a combination of Enterprise era and TOS film ships..." ...by looking like neither of them, and not even remotely like McQuarrie's. Nailed it.

[@peterhans3791]

In STO you can plop a TOS style coating on the disco ships (type 0) and it makes seeing the resemblence much easier. You see the resemblence to the movie connie most easily on saucer edges but they still made a crazy mess of everything.

[@amazedsatsuma]

1:07 It also worth noting there was also the ISS Buran aka the ship mirror Lorca commanded before he transported to Prime universe edit: Since your research have determine this was Starfleet's first Four Nacelle design ...how much newer was the Nimitz class?

[@AeronHale]

Currently saving up for the fleet version of this in STO and definitely looking forward to it. It's easily one of the best looking ships of it's era and seems like it should be an excellent tank. Should be a great vessel for a broadsider build I got in mind using TOS twin phaser arrays. Just need 2 more fleet modules as of posting this!

[@Gauldame]

When "do you want a little starship with your order of gun" is a design plan.

[@lucasgiles7613]

The four warp coils would be useful if on of them takes damage they can till create a warp bubble

[@user-fl2wn5zr5z]

very nice design

[@feralprocessor9853]

So many turrets!!!

[@peterhans3791]

I like how this "frigate" is a dreadnought in STO

[@briankent2396]

Shame we can't get the Jupiter Class canonized

[@Peregrine57]

And to think all this time I thought the Buran was Nimitz class. I would have lost pub trivia night.

[@carllawson5043]

Love the look!

[@alinorafoster]

this is the very best looking ship in Discovery, and it makes me desperately wish its first seasons took place in the 25th century instead of the 23rd. The aesthetic established in the Battle of the Binary Stars would have been a phenomenal basis for the next next generation

[@hogfry]

Any chance of a Chimera or Manticore review in the future? Nog's laser jalopy is the bomb!

[@Code_Exodus]

Would love this as a hanger pet frigate in STO.

[@RobertP-zk8vh]

This ship turns super slow in sto

[@NS-xo6qe]

Would a proton torpedo fired by the USS Jaeger technically be considered a Jaegerbomb?

[@hallc91]

The video seems to imply that Phaser Strips are preferable to turrets but then doesn't actually seem to back it up as it goes on. Given that with this turret setup it was harder to neutralize all the weapons systems.

[@dhotnessmcawesome9747]

I love that boat.

[@warwolf88]

it was an awesome looking ship😊

[@gislasson]

amaizing video of this kind of a gunship starfleet ship sr amaizing!

[@JubeiKibagamiFez]

Not that I could ever afford it, but does STO have ships fitted with 26 phaser banks?I'm just blown away by the 26 phaser banks. That's insane, like that one ship from ST: Into Darkness.

[@peterhans3791]

STO has 8 weapon slots max, so a cruiser(even a free event or fleet one) could in theory push out 24 beams with the "beam:fire at will" attack. Some consoles allow for more phaser attacks all over (doesn't one variant of the Akira have a console that shoots phasers on point defense? And the vengeance from into darkness also has a console that shoots all over if memory serves). And this doesn't even get into the ships with phaser lances that are techncially another built in array with a long charge up. If you drop down to escorts, the Kelvin Einstein destroyer (the actual Kelvin) has an experimental weapon that loads something like 5 unique turret ports as part of the firing animation on the Kelvin itself...but you are sacrificing a regular phaser array for that since escorts/destroyers have 7 weapon slots.. So yeah, you could technically sort of have 26 phasers going off, but I don't think you would see this in practice because you would have multiple beams hitting the same enemy and the beams probably wouldn't fire all at the same time.

[@JubeiKibagamiFez]

@@peterhans3791 Yeah, I sorta knew 8 slots was the max, but I haven't played or kept up with new ship releases for a long while.

[@edoherty9097]

You gotta pump those numbers up! Those are Rookie numbers.

[@canisblack]

One of the great tragedies of Discovery was that there were so many out of place ship designs. I still say they don't fit the time they were inserted into in the timeline but would have - with a few tweaks - been excellent designs for Post Dominion War starfleet.

[@jimbeam4736]

Well said!

[@DrewLSsix]

Except they did perfectly fit their time. What do you think starfleet ships should look like that were designed just a few decades after the charter was signed? Certainly not like the TOS enterprise. That was a then modern ship, as we all know most ships in starfleet tend to be decades or even a century or more old. The Galaxy class may define modern mid/late 24th century ships, but the fleet as a whole is defined by classes that have their roots in the previous century.

[@markclay1813]

Always enjoy your stuff. Still wish you had finished the Romulan Story Missions. The Romulan Path through Hakeev always felt very different, and personal.

[@navblue20]

I agree. Maybe 1 day he'll go back to them. I kinda like to see how that Romulan officer turned out

[@davidmartin5483]

I was wondering what doas the NCC in the numbering of the space crafts stand for?

[@loki8284]

Overkill is underrated

[@amateurcrastinator9523]

I like the concept of the bridge. But I hate the execution here.

[@sillypuppy5940]

Its story reminds me of real-world battleships. Good ships, but eventually times move on and the refits aren't worth the trouble.

[@shogunender8752]

This is one of the coolest ship design I’m a big quad nacelle fan and this is so much better than any other ship design in Star Trek discovery

[@lasandrenstormewalker5432]

It looks like an X-Wing with a saucer put on the front

[@IAmTheAce5]

The bridge is at the front? “Bold, but foolish…”

[@X304Odyssey]

In sto I have the zen store 25th century update to the Cardenas class. Though one if my characters has the cardenas as it was in 2270 not the 2411 update lol

[@senjo39]

I’ve always enjoyed this design even on sto. It feels normal for me even though it doesn’t use the normal designs from star trek.

[@JasonAguirre]

I despise all these ships being added in as precursers to the Constitution. There is a reason they referred to it as Starship Class. It was meant to be the first real long range heavy cruiser. There were some great books that covered the era when it was first launched with April in command, and the ship had a real power and presence. Now they would have us believe it was just another incremental upgrade among dozens of classes.

[@jaredcolon4535]

Wait so it has two foreword dual launchers and one single after launcher or an aft dual launcher making 4 foreword and 1 after or 2 aft?

[@90lancaster]

Cardenas sounds like it might also be a stealth reference to Bill & Ted to me.

[@AugmentedDictatorGames]

I wish these stats actually translated in game.

[@swakage13x]

Honestly this is one of the Ships in trek that I would want, But I would definitely prefer A Late 2300 technology Version With a more voyager style saucer And using voyager era nacelles. But keep the gun turret systems with each having there Own independent power systems. And also keep the size as it is Because it's not super big but it's not small either It is manageable with a decent sized crew Of minimum 80 people probably. Plus having warp 9 Level engines And being able to swap between the sets of warp engines So I just have to exit warp for like a minute at most And then I can get right back on my journey That sounds great Honestly

[@jamesmarciel5237]

6:16 I agree with you assessment of the advantages of phaser strips over turrets. However, I have to question why the new Titan class USS Enterprise, NCC-1701-G has phaser turrets and not phaser strips. Seems like a step backwards, doesn’t it?

[@kaitlyn__L]

It has both, and used both at once in the battle near the end

[@justinmurphy2227]

I'm glad you're posting more of this era. This is like the 1930's to 60's vehicles in my opinion. Those who gripe about Discovery ships being larger and so different looking, just look at our vehicles on the road now vs 40 years ago...hell 30! They are so different in EVERY way and it's the same for our fighter jets. Why can this be the same for the world of Star Trek as it's supposed to be....our world too?

[@Centurian128]

0:46 Wait a minute... so this means that an incalculable amount of ship design inconsistency could be rectified just by pushing DSC's timeline forward by 20 years!?! The box nacelles, the Constitution's swept back pylons, the console's looking too advanced could all have been avoided if the series was set AFTER TOS and not before!

[@user-lr4tu3it7k]

so.. ramming is off the table unless it's a kamikaze maneuver. "ramming speed". worf

[@LoneTiger]

Just fyi, Cardenas, the E has the same sound as in the E as Egg, and the first A has an accent in Spanish for emphasis, so the pronunciation is something akin to: Kár-de-nas. If you use translator and write the word with English setting, and listen to it, the sound is the same in English and Spanish.

[@ThisIsMeAndNotYou]

1 & 1 the force is strong with me

[@DeusEversor]

I will never understand why startrek ships do not do a vertical symmetry the way it does horizontal symmetry... like here, why not more ships have x-wing warp cells...

[@dustyjoe1980]

I really do enjoy all of your videos they are insightful informative and entertaining. Keep up the great work and thank you

[@Jeff55369]

Seems like the Andorians would have loved this ship.

[@feralprocessor9853]

Looks like an X-wing from Star wars from the front.

[@feralprocessor9853]

A defensive line of ships that eventually became outdated during the Klingon war?

[@KamepinUA]

The Prometheus Class of it's era

[@richardsuggs8108]

I like it.

[@Nerad137]

So it's easier to make new ships with better tech than to keep trying to hammer it into old classes with huge slow upgrade problems because you are worried about 'numerical superiority'? Eh? Imagine that.

[@fourmula4812]

would lik to see a ship that takes 4 nacells and sticks them together so they look like 2

[@kerviuskuroshiba5120]

I know I am not an expert in ship build or let alone Starships. But having the main bridge in front of the ship seem like a bad idea? 😅 I can live with the main bridge being on top due to the explanation of Gene Roddenberry, but the front? 😆

[@keit99]

They were still figuring out where they should put the bridge. Also what explanation from roddenberry

[@Kakkarot211]

they should sell off the retired designs to the marquis or something

[@brightlord-ov7cm]

Star Trek's X-Wing?

[@scottbraun2457]

--Damn cool ship.! I'd love a fleet of these..updated...with ENTERPRISE-E level tech..plus..BIONURAL JELL -and POSITRONIC "brains" ..melding SONGTECH, and BIONURAL JELL PACKs..of the INTREPID CLASS... as-well-as virtually the system covered with HOLODECK tech, pluss stockpiles of the MOBILE HOLOGRAPHIC EMMITERS..allowing for multiple EMERGENCY HOLOGRAPHIC CREW ..reproductions/all-out-replacements, to be in use..as needed..(long-and-short-term).

[@stavinaircaeruleum2275]

No kill like overkill

[@dantejones1480]

26 Arrays of Phasers? Against what in Star Trek needs that much firepower just to die?

[@keit99]

I just imagine the Designers rolling Dice on how many phasers they need 😂

[@teehasheestower]

The USS Abrams

[@stevegiles9080]

I say An overloaded war ship would be good just in case of another dominion war or something worse thsn the borg..

[@grahamturner1290]

🖖

[@PrinceAnakin]

I loved Crossfeild class starships and Section31 Fleet.❤

[@hanshawks5088]

Back that thing up

[@wolfbane7497]

What's next a Starship with 16 warp cells

[@TheMrPeteChannel]

Theses Disco ships belong in the 25th century with Picard era not the TOS era. Way to modern looking

[@gxxlee123]

This ship took a little imagination to design. But all we get out of current media is a re-re-re-re hashed version of a ship we have seen thousands of times. Don't get me wrong the ship isn't the show. But it does show that in universe they are progressing. Hell I could go without seeing the ship if the writing was good most of the time.

[@richardstone5552]

I like the design That being said I like all the Discovery Starfleet designs except for the Crossfield