One Month To ‘Discovery’ Promo And Billboards Appear, Plus Cast Will Appear At PaleyFest

New Discovery promo shows saucer up close

In 1 month, explore the final frontier. Stream #StarTrekDiscovery on CBS All Access starting 9/24!

A post shared by Star Trek Discovery (@startrekcbs) on

The newest promo video features a small figure in an EVA suit (like we’ve seen in the May and July trailers) at the edge of a big starship saucer which slides into view.

You can get a better look at it on the official CBS All Access page.

Discovery now on billboards

A variation on the artwork used in the new promo animation is up on billboards around Los Angeles, first spotted by Discovery Klingon actors Mary Chieffo (L’Rell) and Ken Mitchel (Kol).

Discovery writer/producer hates replicators too

On Tuesday, TrekMovie reported that Star Trek: TNG and DS9 veteran writer/producer spoke about how he and other writers in the TNG era hated replicators because the removed the value and uniqueness of things in the Trek universe. It was also noted that some of the more advanced tech of the 24th century might have been one of the reasons why Star Trek: Discovery was set in the 23rd century.  TrekMovie posed a question to some of the writers on Discovery to see if they agreed with Ron Moore, and writer/co-executive producer Ted Sullivan replied that he indeed did agree, calling replicators “lazy” and “drama-removing.”

Discovery coming to PaleyFest NY – will they go to NYCC too?

PaleyFest has announced that there will be a Star Trek: Discovery panel with stars and producers from the show on October 7th as part of PaleyFest NY. Tickets go on sale on September 12th for some Paley members, the 14th for all members and the 15th for the general public. More info at

PaleyFest is held the same weekend as New York Comic Con. Panels have not been announced but if cast and creatives are in NYC for Paley, there is a good chance there will be a NYCC panel too.

Plans for streaming Discovery in Canada finalized

Bell Media (owner of CTV and Space linear TV channels, and the CraveTV streaming service) has released details for their CraveTV streaming offerings.

Discovery‘s two-episode premiere will be available Monday, September 25 beginning at 8 p.m. ET following its linear TV premiere a day earlier on Sunday, September 24 on CTV and Space.

Companion programming includes new documentaries plus the official companion after-show for Star Trek: Discovery.

With the addition of Star Trek: Discovery, CraveTV offers Canadians an unparalleled lineup of Star Trek programming. The Star Trek Collection features all episodes of all previous television series including: Star Trek: The Original Series,  Star Trek: The Animated Series, Star Trek: The Next Generation, Star Trek: Deep Space Nine, Star Trek: Voyager, and Star Trek: Enterprise.

To get your Trekkie juices flowing, on September 22 CraveTV will add the documentaries Building Star Trek, and Trek Nation.



Star Trek: Discovery premieres on September 24th on CBS with all subsequent episodes on CBS All Access in the US.  In Canada Star Trek: Discovery will premiere  on Bell Media’s CTV and the Space Channel on the same night. Netflix will launch Star Trek: Discovery on Monday, September 25 to countries outside of the U.S. and Canada.

Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

That image provides some scale which would seem to indicate that it’s smaller than a Constitution class starship and not much larger than the NX-01.

That saucer probably belongs to the Shenzhou (which has NX-class style/design elements), CBS hasn’t been showing the Discovery much. So it being a bit bigger than an NX-class would fit.

Go look at a some pics of the the front of the Shenzhou again. This isn’t it. Could just be an artist’s conception or the Discovery has just one deck in the outer saucer section.

I lean towards the “it’s just some promo art” option, and they didn’t actually make it look like either ship.

I think this image, like all Trek starships, just makes these ship look too small.

Isn’t it true that radiation from deep space is everywhere in space?
I always wondered that these starships would need to be much, much larger.

Why? For one. To protect the crews aboard from deep space radiation.
Or two, a I think Star Trek (and Star Wars) often make deep space seem unthreatening. Where a simple airlock with a sliding door is all you need for protection against intense pressures on the hull from the vacuums of space, to space battles, not to mention any underwater adventures.

Realism. I think this point should be made as it would help present the mechanics and science in Trek more realistically. The new Battlestar Galactica seemed to handle this a bit better – and with a gritty realism.

In any event if this has always been considered in the ship designs, then these ships are even more amazing to wonder about. I just think they are too small to do all the things they should do – in the environments they go too.

Just what I have always thought. They should easily double the size of the ships.

Doubling the size of the ships would not fix any of what you talked about. It would merely create a much larger ship with the same problems.

Also, you wrote this: “Where a simple airlock with a sliding door is all you need for protection against intense pressures on the hull from the vacuums of space…” You don’t really understand how space works.

The vacuum of space (only one, not vacuums) does not put any kind of pressure on the hull. It also does not put suction on the hull. The pressure of the atmosphere *inside* the hull puts outward pressure on the hull, and it’s not “intense” at all. It’s 1 atmosphere–what we have here on Earth.

Our spacecraft currently have simple airlocks with thin, simple doors. Space isn’t like the deep ocean, where immense amounts of water are pushing inward against the hull. There is nothing outside to press on a spaceship hull, so it only has to resist 1 atmosphere of pressure from inside.

In the ocean, every 10 meters of depth adds 1 atmosphere of external pressure (the water pressing against the hull). The wreck of Titanic is about 1800 meters deep, so the pressure there is around 380 atmospheres. We have subs that withstand that much pressure easily, and much more. Subs have pressure inside and outside.

A spaceship would only have pressure inside, and only around 1 atmosphere. NASA’s Apollo craft used about 1/3 atmosphere during missions, and the walls were only 0.0012 inches thick (0.03 centimeters). That’s about the thickness of the side of a soda can. Since there is no pressure from the outside, that tiny thickness of hull was enough.

The ships in Trek are more than plausible at their current sizes and much, much smaller.

You also have to add to the very real science you present here the supposed advances in material sciences that will occur between present day and the era of Star Trek. Just look at how much stronger and lighter materials have become just in the time between those early Apollo spacecraft and today. It sounds like PaulB could expound with far more details, but I dare say we have materials now, at that same 0.03 cm thicknesses, that have far greater strength and rigidity than anything the Apollo designers ever dreamed of!

No greater example of this exists than Star Trek: The Voyage Home. Remember the scene with Scotty and McCoy at PlexiCorp? The specific details escape me… but I remember Scotty asking how thick a section of plexiglass would need to be to withstand a certain pressure, and the answer was something like 8 inches. Scotty then bargained with the formula for transparent aluminum, which could do the same job at only 1 inch thickness.

By the time Star Trek’s era arrives, I dare say that material sciences will give humanity all kinds of advances that will allow ships to be elegantly designed, like those in Star Trek, using materials with properties not yet even imagined.

A main point was the Radiation extremes in space. A space age material that is so think would not protect against intense space radiation.
I am not a fan of “magical force fields” protecting everything on the ship without ever showing any type of deflector device or mechanical emitters on the ship’s exterior. And before you bring up the main deflector dish, That deflector dish on the secondary hull was always supposed to be used for removing space debris, to create a path for safe space travel.

The type of hull binding force filed as presented in ST Generations on Enterprise B was just lacking. IMO.

A main point was the Radiation extremes in space. A space age material that is so THIN would not protect against intense space radiation.

Is not Earth protected from extreme radiation by its own “Force Field”? I’m more intrigued by a notion I read somewhere (can’t remember where), that Life’s DNA codes depend on interaction with Earth’s EM Field, sort of like VHS and Cassettes interacting with EM fields in order to “play”. Also, changes in EM Field values induce changes in DNA code-reading values, I.E. goodbye dinosaurs, hello mammals. If this is so, then some kind of force field is needed to maintain long-term DNA integrity. I don’t really know what I’m talking about, other than in the broadest sense of a very general,vague, hypothetical, idea.

…The pressure of the atmosphere *inside* the hull puts outward pressure on the hull, and it’s not “intense” at all. It’s 1 atmosphere…


That is what I was pointing out. Its NOT just a simple vacuum with little pressure. Sure the vacuum still exists and that is one thing you have to protect against, but I was wondering about the effects space travel as presented in Star Trek.

I wonder how Star Trek’s simple sliding doors would be a benefit when protecting against the extremes of space – AND SPACE TRAVEL PAul,B.

Metals and equipment in space can get very cold, and very hot, just by being exposed to direct sunlight metal can soar to hundreds of degrees, or the reverse in the extreme low temperatures of darkness.

Take the primary hull of the Enterprise for instance. The large round saucer disk takes up an enormous volume of space. I think you would need a considerable amount of space to hold the large amount of equipment that would be needed to simply heat or cool that much space, while also providing for breathable air, protection from the cumulative radiation effects especially on extended deep space voyages, ship’s propulsion, weapons systems, landing craft, and all the other star ship components.

And things get even more extreme when the ship is speeding around a giant star with 10-100 times the luminosity of our own Sun, or when the ship might be harshly re-entering a planets atmosphere, or going into Warp (what stresses and radiation extremes does entering Warp would create?) or when the ship must survive a Klingon torpedo. I don’t thing 2 inches of tansparent-tri-luminum, or whatever it might be, is going to easily solve that engineering problem. As I stated above, the stresses presented on an average voyage are far greater than posed by a simple vacuum.

Look. Trek’s Starships have Warp capabilities. I saw Geordie (with Q’s technical help) lesson the gravity of an entire moon to help move it! I say future starships would make use of this warping ability. This would affect the design of the ships, and this would favor a design that would be much, much larger, and perhaps the “hull” would even be made muck thicker using a bulkier material, like some kind of space cement?

With Warp power changing the dynamics of mass in space, the ships hull could be much, much thicker. This would allow for the protection and safety to the crew from the radiation, pressure and temperature extremes of long space voyages.

@TrekMadeMeWonder You just wrote: “That is what I was pointing out. Its NOT just a simple vacuum with little pressure.” Um, NO, that is NOT what you pointed out. Your previous comment described “intense pressures on the hull from the vacuums of space.” That’s nonsense, and it’s the opposite of what you just claimed you meant.

Also, it IS a simple vacuum with little pressure–only 1 atmosphere–involved. THERE IS NO PRESSURE FROM OUTSIDE THE SPACECRAFT BECAUSE THERE IS NO ATMOSPHERE.

Your comments make it seem almost as if you’ve never actually watched Star Trek because this is what “technobabble” explains all the time. The hull thickness. The materials being used. How they have force fields to reinforce the structures.

Your comments also show a lack of basic science to the point where you simply do not even know how to formulate questions or express your confusion clearly.

Try going back to your first comment and rewriting it to say whatever you THINK you are saying. I replied to what it actually says.

TWO of us gave you detailed explanations that you ignored. Try learning more, typing less.

This is your 2nd reply cherry picking my post above….

What about this?….

And things get even more extreme when the ship is speeding around a giant star with 10-100 times the luminosity of our own Sun, or when the ship might be harshly re-entering a planets atmosphere, or going into Warp (what stresses and radiation extremes does entering Warp would create?) or when the ship must survive a Klingon torpedo. I don’t thing 2 inches of tansparent-tri-luminum, or whatever it might be, is going to easily solve that engineering problem. As I stated above, the stresses presented on an average voyage are far greater than posed by a simple vacuum.

Let me shut this down with one word: Deflector. End of discussion. These ships are not intended to operate without the aid of the deflector. Period. If those systems go offline, nothing else matters. It’s been depicted time and time again. It is not only canon, but logical.

Love to see that canonized, Curious.

Perhaps this is covered when they refer to “loosing life support.”

TrekMadeMeWonder – “I don’t thing 2 inches of tansparent-tri-luminum, or whatever it might be, is going to easily solve that engineering problem.”

Okay. You reject some of Trek’s made-up technology, while accepting other aspects of its technology. That is, you can believe in warp drive but you can’t believe in super-strong materials. Um…okay…whatever… I guess that makes sense in *your* reality. Good for you.

You reject Star Trek’s fictional materials, yet you’re also ignorant of real-life science & engineering, so…there’s really no conversation to be had with you on any of this.

I would rather be ignorant than be filled with angst, PaulB.


If you are PaulB than you KNOW, “Super-strong materials” are enough keep to out the effects of harmful radiation.

How big is the ISS? It doesn’t need all that tech does it? I’m genuinely asking….

Cap. See message above. Trek engineering and space scenarios require much more than the simplistic and fragile ISS designs.

Does the ISS need a better design? Not to accomadate it current low Earth orbit position. But if the ISS were to be moved to the Moon or Mars’ orbit, then I say the design would be very inadequate. Not impossible, but not very safe for the crew’s health due to radiation. The current ISS design is good for now because it is protected by being well within Earth’s magnetic field.

The health of those on long voyages to the moon or even Mars, will be harshly affected by both the Sun’s and deep space radiation.

Sorry your physics is off and your understanding of how’s and why’s relating to fictional technology based in the future.

I’m glad the scale is a little more reasonable versus the jumbo sized Enterprise in the Kelvin Universe.

Well, we are a long way from Galaxy class at this point

I’m referring to the Enterprise in the new movies, which is bigger than a Galaxy Class.

IT appeared to me that the new JJ bridge sits a few decks below where the original bridge resided. And it looks like it takes up that whole deck, which is larger then the space above it where the original sat.

This – to me- makes the JJ-prise look smaller than the Constitution class ships of Kirk’s time.

It should be smaller than the Constitution class, since those were supposed to be the biggest ships built by humans in the TOS era.

I don’t recall it ever being said that Constitution-class was the biggest ships. And it makes more sense that older ships would be bigger, with Daystrom’s duotronics revolution enabling much more automation and thus much smaller crews, resulting in smaller ships to do the same mission.

Nope. Read the TOS Writer’s Guide.

The TOS Writer’s Guide is not canon.

Oh, really?! So you or unnamed others know more about TOS than the guy who actually created it? Well, for me that’s not even a debate worth having. By all means, it’s your “head-canon,” so believe what you like. But for my money, it’s courtesy of such arrogance we got such revisionist garbage as the enterprise being built in an Iowa cornfield.

The TNG Writers’ Guide says no Klingon or Romulan stories, so that’s not canon either. “Trek” canon rules: If it’s not commercially released onto a screen, TAS excepted, it ain’t canon.

That’s a guideline as to what sort of episodes writers should write, as opposed to establishing “facts” about the characters, technology, and the TNG universe. Not the same thing at all.

@Michael Hall: “Oh, really?! So you or unnamed others know more about TOS than the guy who actually created it? Well, for me that’s not even a debate worth having.”

Good, since nobody is trying to have *that* debate. You’re literally replying to something nobody said.

The TOS writer’s guide was just that, a GUIDE, not “holy writ from Saint Gene.” It changed as they made TOS, so TOS itself repeatedly contradicts the writer’s guide.

What a jackass comment, Mr. Hall. Snarling and drooling over something nobody said while demonstrating your own ignorance of the topic…how embarrassing for you!

Explain to me how the Writer’s Guide changed during TOS’ production that directly over-wrote or contradicted what went before. (Yes, the Guide was updated to accommodate new information which reflected the episodes written, such as Spock’s family background, but that’s not the same thing.) While you’re at it, please give me one example of anything in a TOS episode that directly contradicts what was in the Guide. I’ll wait.

Michael Hall,

As I recall, the first version of the Writers’ guidelines used as the first season episodes production started up still had Spock described as a red-faced Martian even though Roddenberry had changed the character to Vulcan. And it stayed as a draft until most of the first season scripts had been written. And it wasn’t sent out to the writers in a final form until the show was accepting treatments for the second season episodes.


I believe that was the series outline, not the Writer’s Guide. Do you have a source for that information I can check out? Thanks.

Michael Hall,

Re: Do you have a source for that information I can check out?

UCLA Library Special Collections:

Box 31, Folder 16

Rough drafts & 1 final draft of writer-director information, briefly explaining the Star Trek universe and laying out guidelines for writers. Total Items: 100+

Michael Hall,

In this excerpt, provided by David Gerrold from his THE WORLD OF STAR TREK:

“The STAR TREK GUIDE (in its earliest form) was a twenty-page mimeographed book distributed to all writers and prospective writers for the series. It contained descriptions of all the characters and sets as well as notes on the capabilities of the Enterprise and what kind of stories the series could use.

It was revised twice as the show progressed. New material was added and old material was updated. In the third edition, for instance, the Enterprise was upgraded from Cruiser Class to
Starship Class—the feeling being that a “starship” was a special kind of vessel with greater range, speed, power and other capabilities than other vessels in space. Much of this material was reprinted in Stephen Whitfield and Gene Roddenberry’s THE MAKING OF STAR TREK.” — David Gerrold

Jessica Leah Getman had access to the UCLA collections in writing this dissertation:

And observed:

“The original STAR TREK GUIDE, written by Roddenberry for use by the series’ creative team, describes Number One as:

almost mysteriously female…slim and dark in a Nile Valley way, age uncertain, one of those women who will always look the same between years twenty and fifty.

There are several versions of this guide available, with important differences between the original guide (c. 1965) and the guide created to serve from the second pilot forward (1966, a third, revised guide appeared in 1967). Stephen E Whitfield and Gene Roddenberry, THE MAKING OF STAR TREK (New York: Ballantine Books, 1968), 29; Gene Roddenberry Star Trek Television Series Collection, 1966–1969, Collection 62” — Jessica Leah Getman


Thanks for the links and the research. Fascinating stuff. Man, what I wouldn’t give to be able to spend a week or so rooting through that old material. Fifty years on I wish they’d just put it all online, while there are still a fair number of people who care about it at all.

The Guide, excerpted in The Making of Star Trek (I still have my copy), definitively states that the Enterprise was “the largest man-made vessel in space.” Since there is nothing in the series to contradict that and a fair number of references to the ship’s special status to support it (e.g, “There are only twelve like it in the fleet.”), I contend it’s as much canon as anything else on the show.

@Disinvited — thank you once again for pointing out that canon is only that which appears on screen, and has nothing whatsoever to do with anything, no matter how well intentioned, or “official” in nature, referenced offscreen.

If canon is what the license-holder says it is, in tandem with what’s been seen on screen (does that cover “James R. Kirk,” btw?)–well, it’s pretty obvious reading these forums that there are a number of fans who will never accept Discovery as a TOS prequel due to the visual anachronisms, no matter what CBS and John Van Citters say. I think ‘head canon’ is actually a more useful concept, inasmuch as it acknowledges that people tend to cherry-pick what’s most meaningful to them even when it comes to things they really like. (My Trek canon, for example, doesn’t include “And the Children Shall Lead” or the Abrams movies, but does include the fan production “World Enough and Time,” simply because I consider it to be the best story about Hikaru Sulu ever put on film.). But regardless, in evaluating what’s canon I do consider it only respectful to give special weight to what the show’s creator had to say about what his intentions were, even if he’s no longer with us.

Michael Hall,

Re: …canon is what the license-holder says it is…

At the time of its first network outing, I believed canon to be the purview of the copyright-holder which would be fleeting and eventually fall to any general consensus the fans would be able to muster after it entered the public domain.

I mean, who determines what’s canon for Sherlock Holmes, now, in its contemporary public domain times?

That might work. . . If there was a general consensus among fans these days about anything. I’d guess you could call Sherlock Holmes a franchise or even a multiverse at this point, with the original novels, various films, and TV’s “Sherlock” serving very different groups of people.

Michael Hall and Curious Cadet,


You are both welcome.

Interesting to have found something that counters Solow’s nonsense that Number One was tailor-created for Majel.

There’s a fair amount of stuff in IST that I’ve always found questionable, but who’s to say? I sure wasn’t there.

Michael Hall,

Re: I sure wasn’t there.

Me neither, but I know his tales of saving Roddennberry’s job from Lucille Ball’s ire over his pulling the blonde wig wool over the NBC brass’ eyes, and the one where the NBC executives were never fooled by the wig can’t BOTH be true.

Michael Hall,

Interesting, what made it into the script:

Also the Kelvin, with 800 crew, must have been significantly larger than the Constitution class

Just one reason–far from the only one–the Kelvin ‘verse is B.S.

Trekyards on Youtube did a pretty extensive review of this topic a few days ago.

The show will fail…

Considering they are working on season two that would suggest it hasn’t.


Considering that they are still shooting the remainder of season one, it is highly unlikely at this point.

Kurtzman addressing possible story lines for a potential second season doesn’t means that they are working on season two, most TV producers will have a five-season plan ready.

Given the amount of investments that was put into ‘Discovery’ it will most likely get a renewal; and only then they will start working on a second season & not a moment before.

“The show will fail…”

Doubtful, as it’s all but guaranteed a full run by being broadcast by the folks who are paying for it. A creative failure? That’s another matter entirely.

You’d like that?


I realized the other day that if this show truly takes place in the prime and upholds canon, then at some point starfleet realized that the uniform and broken delta is shite, and decide to go back to a standard gold, blue, red uniforms with the normal delta logo

I think I’m starting to like Mary Chieffo. Just like Anthony Rapp, she seems to be really into it.

That promo image looks suicidal.

That is a thin primary hull.

The primary hull on the Antares is thicker.

That is a VERY poorly designed billboard….Burnham is out of scale, words are too small, overuse of blends, blurs, and flares….And the last time I checked, space wasn’t white. As a professional designer and design professor, I’d give that a C.

And these writers need to stop complaining about the replicators. They serve a purpose on the show and they make writers work for their paychecks.

“And these writers need to stop complaining about the replicators. They serve a purpose on the show”
Absolutely right. Star Trek is supposed to be an entertaining depiction of a realistic future. Not a feature that allows writers to more easily produce stories.

If this is a size comparison. The front of the ship has only one deck! Kinda thin. I would imagine that you would want your starship to be at least a bit thicker. I don’t like this.

I don’t like the big change to the Klingons. STD’s Klingons look more like monsters vampire,from bad horror movie. I wonder if there some legal stuff behind the scenes.

If Discovery does get a second season,The naysayers will say it was ALWAYS going to get a second season.
Whether or not it gets a this season will be the real test, they will say.
The people against this show will do anything to minimize its success or even minimizing the POSSIBILITY of its success.

Whether it gets a third season will be the real test, according to the naysayers.
And if it gets a third season “Well, all the Trek spinoffs except Enterprise went seven seasons, so Discovery has to go seven seasons, too.”

It would have to bomb not to get to Season 3 I say… I would bet on 3 seasons minimum!

A month seems so, so long…. when we all know it aint…

Feels long enough, though.

If this has been covered already, sorry to ask. But I would like to know if all the episodes of Discovery will be available through CBS All Access. I do not own a television set and at present, there’s no way for me to watch the premiere on CBS.

After the pilot airs on CBS, all remaining episodes will be seen exclusively on CBS All Access,

If you don’t own a television set that’s no problem because CBS All Access will have the pilot and all subsequent episodes. The broadcast of the pilot on CBS TV is in addition to CBS All Access.