Shop The Official Star Trek Shop Now!

RUMOR: Discovery set pre-TOS

bryan-fuller3

Ain’t it Cool News seems to have gotten a few minutes of time with the very busy Bryan Fuller, he gave a few cryptic teases about the time frame of Star Trek Discovery.

When asked about the time frame:

There’s a big clue in the number of the ship [NCC-1031] that indicates when we’re set

AICN has taken his words to mean that, since NCC-1031 is quite a bit lower than NCC-1701, Discovery is set pre-TOS.

On possible connections to previous Trek universe, AICN specifically asked about a Section 31 connection given the slightly conspicuous 1031 registry number:

There are aspects of our first season that, depending on how well versed you are in that mythology, you could either read into it a connection, or not.

Fuller is a big fan of Halloween, so it’s more likely the 1031 is for the date of Halloween (10th month 31st day).

According to AICN, Fuller will “spoiler it up” on August 10, when CBS presents their new slate of upcoming shows to the Television Critics Association.

– Read the full article over at Ain’t It Cool News.

Sort by:   newest | oldest

Rumour based entirely on the registry number of the ship being less than 1701 I might add. Not exactly rock solid information, or credible deductive reasoning. NX-01 was hardly the first experimental ship that Starfleet launched now, was it?

Fuller said there is a hint in the registry number. There are only so many variables that can be drawn from (within reason in the Star Trek universe) that a pre TOS show is one logical theory not a rumor. But as dan just stated there are TOS ships with 1017 and 1024 registries. And then it’s “Titans” style, very 70’s. In any event, the unknown will be known Aug 10th

The USS Constellation (tos: the doomsday machine) and USS Whorfin (st6) are the nearest registry numbers to 1031 (1017 and 1024 respectively)

I just don’t think there’s enough evidence to say that the numbers are directly sequential.

Agreed

Maybe the USS constellation was not the first ship to carry that name. Besides there are several TOS dangling threads and contradictions that later incarnations had to clean up.

Then wouldn’t it have been 1017-A?

Soot was hoping 70 years post Nemesis.

Make it 1 million years post Nemesis. Same thing. Dont bother.

@TUP,

Then don’t watch, problem solved!

@Ahmed – ok. Will you agree not to watch if its not post-Nemesis? Or at least to not whine about irrelevant things? Thank you.

@TUP,

If DISC turned out to be a TOS prequel, then I’ll watch the premiere only & wait for the DVD to catch the rest of the series, unless it was really really perfect.

Good thing that there are plenty of upcoming Sci-Fi shows, from Altered Carbon, Lost in Space, The Expanse, to watch in case this one turned out to be another needless prequel.

Yep. Can’t wait for Lost in Space reboot. I hope they don’t screw it up.

Regards.

What crazy logic are using to come to that conclusion?

Been saying it since that teaser, and it would explain so much regarding this Axenar litigation.

I think it’s a fantastic era of Star Trek history to explore though. Lots of room for TOS-centric references, cameos, and backstory to original series plots.

Also room to follow up on Johnathan Archer’s era, and even some of the Starfleet history introduced in the new movies.

For example, maybe the U.S.S. Kelvin survived in the prime universe. Maybe Admiral Marcus wasn’t such a bad guy there. either (and would be an awesome Peter Weller appearance). Even room to discuss the U.S.S. Franklin. All historic events that took place prior to the divergence created by Nero’s incursion in time.

Of course, it also opens up the possibility of seeing young or adolescent versions of our TOS regulars appear.

A prequel set 20-25 years before Kirk assumes command of the Enteprise works for me. Its safe and familiar, and probably a better bet than going full on Next-Next Generation in the 26th century.

The Axanar litigation was because they were using fan money contributed for the movie to build a permanent studio and offices that they planned to rent out and personally PROFIT from. There’s no conspiracy here. Peters tried to create his own little profit center, and when Paramount/CBS told him no, he threw all the other fan productions under the bus.

The situation is entirely his fault, and has nothing at all to do with Discovery.

THIS.

I doubt this will start after Nero’s arrival. Quite likely it will be significantly before the TOS era, say 50 years in the 2216s? Making it a nice round 200 years in our future, corresposonding with our calander. That way they do not have to address the alternate universe concept at all.

They’re not going to be addressing the JJ timeline, this takes place in the original Prime timeline.

zillabeast wasn’t saying it would be in the movie universe, but that it would be neat to maybe see elements of those films in their Prime universe counterparts, such as the Kelvin or the Franklin.

Thank you. That said, all the confusion it’s started seems to be a little too much for casual fans go wrap their heads around.

I doubt anything from the Abramsverse will appear in Discovery. I get the impression CBS and Paramount don’t exactly play nice with one another regarding Star Trek. I have a strong feeling they will steer clear of anything involving Star Trek (2009), STID or Beyond.

Pretty much. I mean look at the promotions of these two thus far, neither ever brings up the other. They did a Trek 50th anniversary panel at comic con and at least one actor from each TV show but they couldn’t invite one member from the new films? Add to the fact the cast of Beyond was all there for the screening of the film and total silence about the show. If you only paid attention to the PR you would never know one exists in the same world as the other.

USS Essex NCC-173

AICN is an entirely irrelevant and poorly sourced website, staffed by incompetent writer wannabes who have no concept of basic writing skills or journalistic ethics. Their track record is POOR when it comes to rumors, and most of their reviews are paid for. Why would anyone take anything posted at that site seriously? Hell, why would anyone even READ that site?

Ha! It is a garbagefest, isn’t it? Reading the praise they heap in ginormously long reviews upon even the crummiest of short-lived genre films is indeed a slog worth doing only once.

The worst part? A certain red-headed member of that team is one incredibly smelly individual. I was once stuck in an elevator with him, and on another occasion I was sitting two seats in front of him at a press event. The stench was so bad that people were going out of their way to move as far from him as possible. Words do not begin to describe it. I can only assume very little showering takes place, because it was inhuman.

Take it up with Bryan Fuller, he’s the one dropping the hint.

I love Trek, I wouldn’t mind another prequel series, but I was hoping for a continuation …say after post Nemesis. Oh well, maybe the show runners know what they are doing. We will see.

It’s not a prequel series, it’s a sequel to Enterprise. ;-)

Could mean the Romulan War, so that’s something. Still, if it’s a prequel, it would be nice if it lived in its own time rather than constantly foreshadowing TOS, like Enterprise did.

That cloaking sound at the end of the teaser gave me an impression that the romulan war could be involved.

As long as they learn from the mistakes of ENT, I’m good. ENT didn’t embrace the prequel concept until the fourth season, but by then it was too late. Also, from a design and writing stand point, it was staler than shite.

Enterprise was the best concept since DS9 went to war but Berman and Co. just werent up to the challenge. It deserves another kick at the can.

Enterprise didn’t get good until it started foreshadowing TOS.

The best season of Enterprise was the last one. That show was literally becoming great. Such a shame it was cut short.

“Literally becoming great?”

As opposed to figuratively becoming great?

Why is it that so many people have no idea when to use the word “literally”?

It sounds intellectual even if you don’t know what it means… :-)

It literally does.

I must say though, Im liking how once the new show was announced, the nuggets of info were coming in at a decent pace, not all at once and not months upon months without any info. Wasn’t long after the announcement we received a teaser, then a few months later the USS Discovery teaser (cuz its not final people) and now Aug 10th “spoiler it up”. If we get nuggets of info even once a month I would love it. 5 months away…Star Trek discovery a late christmas gift and a great way to usher in the new year.

So, they’re doing the Romulan War? Krall’s rant to Kirk was not just a shout-out to Enterprise, but a tease of things to come? And we could see the Kelvin?

I’m so sad! Post Nemesis would have been awesome and would gave us wonderful opportunities for cameos! And now? That’s so disappointing!

It depends on which cameos you wanna see. Post Enterprise still offers plenty of opportupunities for cameos. Frankly, I’ve got no interest in seeing Picard or Worf, or Riker ever again. Data is dead, etc. but I’d rather not see any cameos at all. Take this into its own world that has little contact with established Starfleet. Give us something new and fresh..

Crazy enough Enterprise avoided cameos throughout most of its run. It really didnt have any until its most (in)famous when Riker and Deaana showed up in the finale. But yeah due to the nature of the premise obviously they really didn’t over indulge in it at all.

To an extent Spiner was a cameo, though he played a new character it was related to a character seen on TNG. And the Defiant (was that the ship?) was somewhat of a cameo too. Speculation had them wanting Shatner as Chef for ages and thank goodness that never happened.

Agreed.

Who says, even if this is true, that every season will be on the same Discovery? Or that the Discovery in the promo is the Discovery from the series?

Got to say when it was first announced Trek was returning to tv I was ecstatic. I have been looking forward to it more than “Beyond”. (I’ve tried so hard to like the JJ universe but just can’t. Love the characters and the actors playing them just the rest is awful). Anyway I digress, sadly with every snippet of news regarding this new show that drips out my heart sinks lower and lower. Never thought I would ever say this but I’m losing my faith. :,(

Why keep revisiting the ‘past’ if the rumour is indeed true.

We tried pre-TOS. It was called Enterprise.

The only way forward is with a series set post TNG by at least the same amount of time TNG was post-TOS.

USS Enterprise-G (?!)

Otherwise we keep revisiting the same old enemies, see stories limited by not contradicting the ‘future’, and if ratings fall, let’s do another ‘we found the Borg 1st’ story.

The only way to be free artistically and creatively is for the production team to unshackle themselves and pick a crew, a ship and a time ‘beyond’ that we’ve already seen.

Only then can we truly explore strange new worlds and visit new civilisations.

I agree completely, and I would’ve believed the people involved in the show to have come to the same conclusion. Therefore as others have mentioned, this big clue I believe could mean a number of things. I certainly wouldn’t jump to the conclusion that the show is set pre-TOS, and I would hope it is not, mainly because of the reasons you have mentioned.

It surprises me that so many people are so confused about prequels. Why is it okay to do 6 series set “going forward” but one prequel is enough? Its all the future.

Going beyond Voyager is such an abstract time with technology that would be so fantastical as to make Star Trek more fantasy than fiction.

A prequel is 100% the correct decision. Filling in the blanks is way more interesting than laying down abstract and random nonsense.

Nope. They didn’t try “pre-TOS” in anything other than time frame. They never embraced the prequel concept until the fourth season and it was too late by then. Rather they spent the first couple of seasons with stupid “temporal cold war” stuff with a ship that meandered around with no direction. Then did a big event that was so big, it’s hard to believe it was never mentioned (because it was a retcon) Also, no, the way “forward” is not in the future. Trek has a big problem and its’ called not embracing it’s concepts in a realistic manner. The transporter would fundamentally alter warfare. Holodecks, along with replicators, would create a massive society of addicts . Genetic engineering would be a thing, not something that creates arrogant and evil supermen, just to name three off the top of my head. Trek typically brushes that off as well as giving us any real tech advancement. Remember the timeship from Voyager? Remember how, aside from some superficial elements like costumes and LCARS layout, there was no real difference between their portrayal and that of the 24th century ships? It was annoying and showed lack of vision. TNG felt cheap to me when it premiered for the same reason. It never felt like the future of the future. It felt like the same future with different costumes and touchscreens instead of buttons. If there was one thing B&B did right, it was to set the post Voyager series in an earlier time… Read more »

Wow, LENSMAN, first-class, first-rate thinking (in other words, I agree.) The relatable human conclusion is a very important one for those doing TREK to reach, and we can just hope they extrapolate their tech in a more agreeable fashion. The only way I’d probably welcome Trek going further into the future is to see the collapse of Federation type story that paramount already turned down about 20 years back, the thing that wound up becoming ANDROMEDA.

An interesting, cogent mini-essay, but its premise only makes sense if you believed that TOS was anything like a realistic depiction of a possible human future, or that TNG was supposed to be a carefully thought-out extrapolation of what the TOS universe would look like after 78 years. Such a series might indeed be quite cool, but it wouldn’t have been produced by Gene Roddenberry as Star Trek, much less bankrolled by Paramount, which was understandably more interested in retaining the broad outlines of a fictional universe that millions had come to embrace than taking creative risks with a project that was still a considerable gamble. (I remember when TNG was announced in the Los Angeles Times that Roddenberry made a statement to the effect of “We’re blue-sky on everything at this point–it’s even possible at this point that people don’t travel by starship.” A possibility that, unsurprisingly, never reared its ugly head again.) Again, I appreciated reading your thoughts, and would really like to see some hard SF presented with the kind of extrapolative sophistication you describe. But worrying overmuch about the fact that the tech on TOS is mostly outdated and that the various series don’t really tie together all that well is, for my money, like obsessing that the Eugenics Wars never really happened. “Discovery,” like the movies and series which preceded it, will have that 50-year pedigree and all its baggage to contend with, but it will ultimately succeed or fail based on its own characters… Read more »

Bravo, Lensman, very well put. You got me thinking. I tolerated the “space radios”, but it’s true, new audiences will not buy that. Then again – if it’s a prequel of TOS and TOS still has “space radios” instead of smartphones… ;)

A lot of this used to bug me, then I decided it was the best Paramount could do. I think it should go back to bugging me.

Sorry no. Voyager managed to take place concurrently yet introduce us to numerous new alien species, cultures and histories that had nothing to do with TNG or DS9. Enterprise did as well, without contradicting anything.

There’s a lot of Trek history we know nothing about — it’s a big Galaxy, and plenty of unexplored civilizations out there on the frontier that has nothing to do with larger concepts already introduced. And at its heart that’s where Trek lies.

You say going forward is the only way to be free to truly explore, but that’s not true either, because they have to deal with the canon and bonds of everything that has come before. And not only that, but they often create new past events to support the future ones, which would have been just as interesting to see in their own right.

Exactly Enterprise failed and not many fans are in love with the reboot films so why do ANOTHER prequel show. Yeah I want stuff that isn’t shackled to canon like most prequel stories are. Hopefully its not true.

Canon is the best hope for a well written TV series (and movie for that matter). Rules and confines make writers try harder.

What if it were between TOS and Vger?
You have 15 years to play with as phase 2

The ship design and Fullers comments about fans being aware of things that didn’t make it to air point to that being a possibility.

Not disappointed at all! The Kelvin timeline is a HUGE disappointment. Going back to pre-TOS is exactly what this franchise needs. Can show the Prime timeline in all its glory, without worrying about all the canon they have to adhere to from TNG on. Show the lead up to Kirk’s Enterprise, with all the sparkling beauty of Prime timeline TOS era ships and uniforms. Can show the Romulan war, the background story to the Talosians on Talos IV, lots of opportunities. This is exciting if true!

“without worrying about all the canon they have to adhere to from TNG on”

They still “have to” (if they care, that is). Otherwise they might introduce a bunch of continuity issues and inconsistencies with the later years and events of the Prime Timeline (didn’t ENT fall into that trap?). That’s why I thought that Enterprise-C timeline would be a pretty comfortable zone, canon/continuity-wise – you could still go with technology that, while it couldn’t look modern by today’s standards, wouldn’t have to look more dated than TOS. Etc.

NCC 1968 USS STAINS

Pre-TOS? Count me out… :(

I Khan Believe It An\'t Butter

Wahhhh, their not making Trek the way I want it…wahhhhh

Seriously it’s not about YOU

If it’s not about the trek fans, who is it about?

Not a Trek fan if you’re vowing not to watch something that takes place pre-TOS with no knowledge of whether its good. Basically “yeah, its awesome but I wont watch” = not a Trek fan.

@TUP
You mean just like you’ve said you wouldn’t watch a trek show that actually moves the story forward? You know like every other fictional franchise out there?

@Da Trufe – nope, I never said that. Sort of a simpleton perspective to say “move the story forward” means taking place in a time period beyond Nemesis.

“Not a Trek fan if you’re vowing not to watch something that takes place pre-TOS with no knowledge of whether its good. ”

I’m simply not interested in pre-TOS era. I think I’m allowed to?

@Zuk – why aren’t you? Were you interested in the JJ films, pre TOS Trek? I can think of no good reason for a blanket statement that like. Would you be interested in a TV series that takes place on the Enterprise B? That would be a “prequel” to TNG but a sequel to TOS.

“Wahhhh, their not making Trek the way I want it…wahhhhh”

Troll harder. I’m just not interested in pre-TOS era. Simple as that. I think that’s allowed. I grew up with TNG and VOY and would prefer Star Trek to go forward.

I really don’t think it’s about the fans. No one created Star Trek “for the fans”. They created it for money, but also for people who like good entertainment. GOT isn’t made “for the fans”, it’s made to entertain people, who may then become fans. Fans are a byproduct. So no, they aren’t creating entertainment for the fans, nor should they be. They’re creating entertainment for anyone to enjoy, fan or not. Fans grow out of the product, but are not the reason for its existence.

well said albatrosity.

@albatrosity Yep.

I Khan Believe It An\'t Butter

Oddly enough a Troll by any other names complains only about what they want. Try harder yourself next time.

That’s your prerogative, but this backlash about “not moving forward” reminds me very, very much of the backlash against Star Trek: The Next Generation when it was announced back in early 1987. There was a lot of whining and grumbling (on BBS’s in those days) about “It’s not Kirk and Co., so this won’t be REAL Trek and I’m not gonna watch!”
This despite knowing almost nothing about the show.

They were wrong. Very, very wrong.

“Young minds, fresh ideas. Be tolerant!” -Kirk, Star Trek III.

I wish the series was set in a new universe separate from Prime or Kelvin. The writers cannot have maximum freedom if they are tied to either timeline. I want to see brand new interpretations of what Vulcans and Andorians, and Klingons look like. New ideas on starship design, uniform design and so forth.

You want a reboot. I seriously doubt CBS would threaten their cash cow by alienating the fans in such a way.

@Brian – I understand why people think that but its wholly incorrect. You dont take 50 years of goodwill and history and flush it away and say “all you people who feel a strong desire and attachment to this thing, dont bother”

Star Trek is a large and interesting sandbox with many areas still left to explore and deepen. A prequel is the best thing. There is an easy on-ramp for fans and casual viewers.

Absolutely agree re: a total reboot. It’s the next logical step.
The Kelvinites reset the timeline in order to free themselves from canon, but bizarrely, wound up being hogtied to it anyway (Khan, Section 31 etc) to the detriment of logic and reasoning. And the potential offering from Fuller and the Primers at CBS is leaving much to be desired judging by first impressions. The franchise is stuck in a rut, and the only way to get out of it is for a clean re-start.
Imagine a new universe of Star Trek without a Third World War or Eugenics conflict: the future of our history. And free from all of the references it could get back to being purer sci-fi. The possibilities are endless.
Don’t get me wrong, I adore Trek. But even as a life-long fan I can see that it is, in it’s current form, totally unworkable. You can’t have a 1960’s design ethic and sensibility supposedly existing in a period two centuries hence. JJ getting away with it back in ’09, was a fluke. Fuller won’t get away with it at all. It looks bizarre and regressive.

“Imagine a new universe of Star Trek without a Third World War or Eugenics conflict: the future of our history.” Been made. Twice. One was called Babylon 5, the other, Andromeda. :P

You know what they should do is set it on some human colony or vessel away from all the action we’ve seen so far, where Trek history as we know it doesn’t apply so much, like maybe on a space station on the edge of the frontier, or a far-flung corner of a distant quadrant, or…oh.

But seriously. These series can be kinda Earth-centric. How about a series where the main characters are tied to somewhere other than Earth? A backwater part of the Federation maybe, bordering a distant and relatively uncharted region with a completely different economy and lifestyle and even philosophy. Maybe a world occupied by the Federation or received as part of a treaty or something, a world that doesn’t want to be part of this conglomerate.

Dang, all my ideas sound like DS9 actually. This is kinda hard. Is there even anything left to see in Star Trek?

On B5, if not World War III, what was the war in which San Diego got nuked?

Pretty sure it was a terrorist attack.

Not convinced it’s pre-TOS. Probably mid-to-late TOS like the rebooted movies. From the design of the new ship and the four digit registry, and the TOS font in the logo, it looks to be set sometime between 2255 to 2299.

It would certainly help avoid confusion for new fans who’ve only seen the reboots, and with a similar time period it represents an opportunity to sync the two universes somehow.

It has to be true based on ship design alone.

USS Discovery looks a lot like USS Franklin.

I thought CBS/Paramount learned from their follies of a prequel with Star Trek Enterprise.

I guess not.

D.O.A.

You need glasses. Discovery looks nothing like the Franklin. Franklin is clearly derived from the NX-class. with no secondary hull and nacelles on pylons off a saucer that has a pie-shaped wedge missing from the back. Discovery has a huge triangular secondary hull with a complete saucer and nacelles on pylons off the secondary hull.

Not sure why anyone here can be negative about anything yet. They’ve said outright this will be a novelistic series. That probably means delving into a specific alien culture, and probably one we have never seen before. Rather than being ST history nerds, and debating what era this should be in, I think that what could be cool about this is that whatever else you think, they have probably outlined a huge story. They should probably call this ST: DEEP DIVE.

Before and after TOS era gives us a lot of room!

The AICN “Exclusive” doesn’t actually give any exclusive information … Bryan Fuller simply says the registration number is a clue. We all knew that. The design of the ship is also a clue, as is the score for the test footage.

I really seriously doubt this will be set in the Enterprise period. It will be likely be set in the 23rd Century. The klingons will likely be involved and so will the romulans, probably some episodes dealing with the aftermath of the romulan wars (which I believe is set in canon as the late 22nd century; 2170s to 2190s). This series will probably be set 2210s to 2230s, but I may be wildly wrong, so who knows?

ummm….When asked about the timeframe: “There’s a big clue in the number of the ship [NCC-1031] that indicates when we’re set”

Isn’t it sort of obvious what they are hinting at? This will take place between Enterprise NX-01 and TOS…

I have to say I’m disappointed if the rumor turns out to be true. Every franchise should work to continue to push the story forward instead of going backwards and spinning you’re tires in the mud. Sequels are the name of the game. Prequels, while they can be interesting, are rarely ever successful. The only Trek show to get canceled early (other than TOS) was a prequel. The Star Wars prequels weren’t as successful. Look how well episode 7 did in that franchise even though I thought that movie was garbage? Look how successful TNG, DS9, and VOY were. The X-Files did a sequel series. I don’t believe we’d even have trek if in 1987 they decided to do a prequel to TOS rather than jump into the future even farther with TNG. That captured people’s imaginations all over again. Jumping into the future is almost like a soft reboot. It left’s you create so many new opportunities while also paying respect to canon. Prequels hamstring writers between walls and set up limits to what you can do. Also by going the sequel route you have a nice natural progression to the look of the show. You don’t have a show made in 2016 attempting to look like it takes place decades before a show made in the 60, 80, or 90’s. It’s so logical in so many ways to move forward that if they don’t do it Spock himself will be turning over in his grave.

Clearly its going to take place in the year 1031. Time travel.

Great, another series set before TOS – didn’t they learn their lesson with that god awful Enterprise show? This is really starting to look bad.

I wouldn’t say it was awful, I enjoyed it for the most part. That being sad, It had a decent amount of continuity struggles and the biggest problem was that the technology looked more modern than TOS.

Exactly thats the other problem with a prequel as Enterprise proved its hard to make a modern show set in the same universe before the show from the 60s and jive astehically. Again Abrams got away with it because we knew it was a different universe and timeline but here its in the same as TOS and if it looks close to that show its campy and cheesy, too far it looks out of whack with came before.

And for the record I was completely fine how Enterprise fit and looked in the timeline but I remember so many fans moaning about it to which again why even tempt it? All it does is get the fans to smell blood if it doesnt gel right with TOS. Obviously the ship itself is a huge red flag although its probably a big back story behind it.

It wasn’t the prequel premise of ENT that people complained about, as I recall. People complained about the theme song…they didn’t like Archer, at least not at first…the show took a few seasons to get good, which is typical of the post-TOS series. TNG and DS9 both took a few seasons to hit their stride. But, in terms of ratings, ENT started off with just half the audience that TNG started off with. Some say this was due to Trek fatigue, some say due to increased competition by the time of ENT. There was definitely Trek fatigue. Not sure whether increased competition was really that much to blame. If ENT had been fantastic, people would have tuned in to watch it instead of some other show. Ultimately, the most obvious cause of Trek’s declining ratings had to be Berman. He just kept promoting from within, promoting his buddies instead of going out and getting fresh, new writing talent. The audience for DS9 dropped off a lot because it wasn’t meant to be a mainstream show like TNG. DS9 was a serialized show, totally different in style and tone, much more slowly and deliberately paced than TNG, which was episodic and viewers could tune in at any point in the series and be able to follow and enjoy the episodes from that point going forward. With DS9, after a certain point in the series, if you hadn’t been following it up to then, the show was kind of impenetrable. It’s like… Read more »

I don’t see any case to be made for a Trek prequel being an intrinsically bad premise. ENT didn’t fail due to being a prequel, but for other reasons. The lame-ass Bad Robot movies haven’t even failed due to being prequels.

FWIW, Matt Decker’s ship, the Constellation (featured in “Doomsday Machine”) had a registry number of NCC-1017. Does this mean his ship pre-dated TOS? Of course not. It means they had an AMT kit and the decals for “1701” and rearranged the numbers. ;)

It would have more sense if they’d used 1710 and numbered the fleet ships 1700-1710.

31st Century?

I’m still guessing post Star Trek VI; that the Klingons and Federation have a joint ship. the Federation has contributed an old discarded vessel (saucer) retrofitted by the Klingons.

that’s almost as bad as giving the Federation, the Klingons and the Romulans a joint planet, and making it the shittiest desert stop in the galaxy. why would anyone want to work together on that wasteland?

I can see some exciting stories developing out of that, hostage situation. The Klingon crew want to blast the terrorists to pieces. Some real ethical conflicts – who is in charge? Whos culture trumps who? Can the Klingons and Federation work together? SHOULD they work together? I assume you’d need a pretty cool threat to bring them together in such a manner/force such cooperation.

Here’s an idea that popped into my mind: What if the ship itself is a “discovery”? Considering what we know about the real world origins of the ships preliminary design, coupled with the registry number, we can assume the ship itself is from a time before TOS. However, seeing that the Discovery is shown docked in an asteroid (or similar rocky body), combined with the radical hybrid design and the presence of the number 31, it’s possible the ship was hidden away and “discovered” in a post VOY time period with no historical record of it’s existence, purpose or mission. Imagine a television show that wants to bring in a new audience to a franchise with 50 years worth of back story. From a production standpoint, having the main characters be just as in the dark as the audience concerning a mystery at the crux of the show’s plot would be a great jumping off point. Furthermore, in an effort to break new ground in storytelling of the Star Trek universe, this new show COULD end up telling 2 parallel stories, showing events of the Discovery’s original crew in the past (pre-TOS) as well as the new crew who “discover” it in the future (post-VOY). This actually lines up with both the May 2016 CBS upfront presentation that mentioned “new CREWS”, as well as the new logo showing the starfleet delta symbol split into two parts. A show like this could cater to both fans who want the missing pieces… Read more »

I so hope you’re right! I don’t want another prequel!

I bet it has a cloak

Something I’d like to point out about the registry number NCC-1031 on the ship I think it’s a nod to the Space Shuttle Discovery which has a registry number of OV-103 which I think is cool.

I’d rather this be set in the original series time, in the JJ universe. It is now the prime universe. The original time-line is gone or impossible to get to. Why set a new series in a doomed universe?

I have no problems with it being set before the original series timeline. They’d have to repeat themselves? That’s like saying the original series could not have done a 4th year.

This is so sad. Another prequel. Have we not learned?

Ted A August 3, 2016 5:03 pm

Learned what?

Learned that a “prequel” represents the best and most dynamic story telling opportunities. Im sure thats not what Ted meant but its the truth.

I see that you are fans of Enterprise. I would prefer to advance the mythology and take us 100 years further into the future. Sure. There is enough to fill in on the existing canvass. That can be fascinating if done well. But evolving and expanding that canvass is much more interesting to me
And frankly more challenging for creators and writers.
T

It’s definitely not more challenging. It’s far too easy to play in a world of fantasy which is the case with a show set in the year 2550 or whatever.

Constrained by canon quality writers have to be more creative and interesting. Enterprise sucked precisely because it never embraced its premise. At least not until it was too late.

TUP August 4, 2016 11:40 pm

You’re right about it being more challenging to make a pre-quel fit into an already existing, rich world.

Though, I’m not sure that ENT never embraced its premise until it was too late. I’ve just started watching that series again, and from the very beginning they do pay a lot of attention to the whole endeavor being new. ENT is the first ship out exploring the galaxy, its transporter is iffy at best, their meals are all prepared manually (no replicators), no phasers on the ship and its torpedoes are just regular explosive torpedoes (no photon torpedoes). No shields, either. Just hull plating that gets polarized somehow—electrically, perhaps. I do find that whole part of the show—the premise of the early days of Star Fleet—exciting. And I am excited by a pre-TOS premise for DSC, too.

Of all the TV shows, Enterprise is the most like TOS. Guess people didn’t want that. Personally, I like Enterprise very much and am happy Disovery will be a prequel set between Enterprise and TOS (hopefully a little bit closer to Enterprise than TOS).

I don’t get it. Does no one want to see what the Federation looks like 100 years after next gen?

More challenging to do a prequel? Don’t think so.

And how do you characterize the Kelvin timeline? Easy to do, or hard? But more importantly, why? If they wanted to do something with TOS why not the Mirror Universe? The reboot is so downright silly and void of any meaning or depth that it has turned into a mindless action/ adventure franchise. This is not my Star Trek.

The movie franchise is in the wrong hands. The t.v. franchise? We’ll see.
T

Ted A Today 11:37 am

I don’t get it. Does no one want to see what the Federation looks like 100 years after next gen?

So, you just want even more fantastical technology and characters even further removed from what we can relate to? What would the Federation look like a 100 years after TNG? Just make up whatever magical devices you want, and that’s what it would look like. Press a button and transport instantly across the galaxy. If anyone dies, just make a copy of them from their transporter pattern. Poverty and the need for possessions have long been eliminated. And Star Fleet officers are trained (or brainwashed) to sacrifice their own lives on a whim rather than inconvenience an alien culture. Etc… The short answer is, no, I have no interest in seeing TNG + 100 years.

P.S. The only way I’d be interested in TNG + 100 years is if the Federation unraveled due to war or internal strife or both, and human society was set back hundreds of years to a post-war type shambles wherein the goal was to gather up what technology and knowledge remained from before the war and rebuild a civilization. That might be interesting. But, not simply a more advanced version of TNG.

CX, The current technology is something developed in the 1960s. There’s nothing magical about using predictive science from half a century later. That’s called advacement, not magic. I agree that trek should not be about magic. That’s why we have Star Wars……..

Yep don’t care. Not spending money for All Access

If they are paying homage to the Expanded Universe, then the NCC-1031 was an Akyazi class ship. Those ships were first commissioned in 2286, the same year the Enterprise-A was launched.

I had a feeling this would likely be pre-original series. The design of the ship looks like it could be between Enterprise and TOS. I think others have it right, probably very early 23rd century. The registry number can also be a clue, though as others point out, there have been some lower NCC numbers on some ships during the original series. But Fuller giving that as a clue I think gives a reasonable indication that this is between Enterprise and the original series.

As for it being pre TOS, I will file that under “DUH”.

As for 1031, modern Trek has never done an out and out, modern horror story…..a little body horror with the Borg and BEM stuff with Species 8473, but nothing on the level of, say, an “alien” movie.

Trek has met plenty of near omnipotent beings, but nothing on the scale of Lovecraft’s Elder Gods.

THAT would be where no one has gone before!

They got pretty gross with “Conspiracy” on TNG, but there was backlash about that and the Powers That Be reportedly said “don’t do that again!” so Berman & Co. never did.

The grossest, scariest thing in Trekdom, if you ask me, are the Ceti Eels in “Wrath of Khan”.

Discovery, Disco Very, Very Disco? It’s set in the 1970’s Disco era! Bell bottoms, BeeGees, lighted dance floor, Saturday Night Fever baby! Oooh Oooh!

I posted this a few days ago in the previous DSC thread:

Cygnus-X1 July 29, 2016 12:40 am

This explanation of the significance of the Enterprise registry number (NCC-1701) implies that DSC (with its registry number NCC-1031) is set prior to TOS:

“Jefferies’ own sketches provide the explanation that it was his 17th cruiser design with the first serial number of that series: 1701”

From this we can infer that the Discovery NCC-1031 is the 10th cruiser design with the 31st serial number of that series.
Unless Fuller hasn’t done his homework, or has decided to ret-con the registry number formula such that it was different prior to TOS. But, that would be pretty lame.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Enterprise_(NCC-1701)

I get the impression Fuller’s remarks are meant to be a lot simpler. Lower registry number = earlier ship. Which would indicate a series being made for simple fans. Or by people with out a deep grasp of the mythology.

That got tossed out the window when they made USS Constellation be NCC-1017. (Why oh why didn’t they make that NCC-1710 or NCC-1717?)

Thorny Today 10:19 am

Yeah, good point. I guess whoever wrote that bit in “The Doomsday Machine” didn’t consult with Matt Jefferies.

But, that doesn’t necessarily invalidate Jefferies’ registry numbering system. The registry number of the USS Constellation could simply be regarded as a mistake or a change akin to other mistakes in TOS, such as “James R. Kirk” changed to “James T. Kirk,” the latter of which stuck. Additionally, the Constitution’s registry number could be ret-conned, if they really wanted to strive for 100% consistency. Fuller could easily enough invent a reason for the Constellation’s deviation from the registry numbering system. However, if there are other Star Fleet ships in TOS that also deviate from Jefferies’ system, ret-conning those as well could prove tricky.

If the Star Wars live action ABC show rumor is true, I hope it pushes CBS to change their views and put Trek on primetime.

Where it will be cancelled after 13 episodes… Online, Star Trek: Discovery has a better chance.

Network television is dying. The market is just too fragmented with free cable, pay cable, streaming, and other sources of entertainment all competing for your viewership. The highest rated weekly TV series when Star Trek: The Next Generation debuted in 1987 was “The Cosby Show” with 30.5 million viewers each week. The highest rated weekly TV series today is NCIS with 16.6 million viewers. That kind of number is not going to justify an undoubtedly expensive weekly series like a new Star Trek. I strongly suspect ABC will come to the same conclusion about live-action Star Wars. The numbers just don’t add up.

I’m really curious as to how this is going to make money–it’s not as if they can launch off the unbridled success of Beyond. TNG had the whale movie to give it a bump, Intergalactic Bus Stop and We’re Lost! had TNG and the former, respectively, to give them a boost. ENT had Star Trek: DOA and, uh . . . . yeah.

It’s already profitable. CBS has licensed DSC to Netflix, which will be showing the series around the world. And then there are the subscriptions to All Access in the US.

Didn’t Fuller say he’d start releasing spoilers on Aug 10th? Tomorrow…. lets hope!!

NCC 1031 I like it already 1031 is my birthday

wpDiscuz