• passinglurker@startrek.website
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    I see what you’re talking about, and don’t want to see them play so fast and loose with the notion as to take old noteworthy’s and heroships out of mothballs, triple the volume and call it a “refit” for nostalgia bait. But Trek does offer an interesting notion here that we don’t really have in real life in that there are core valuable parts of a ship more important and possibly more enduring than its hull. We don’t take reactors out of old aircraft carriers and submarines and drop them in new ships as some sort of legacy so the idea that it could arguably be done in star trek is novel.

    • USSBurritoTruck@startrek.websiteM
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      I don’t think either of us are arguing against the Federation reusing old components.

      The only point of contention is that you were sceptical that the Voyager A could be a refit of an Intrepid-class starship due to the size disparity, and my argument is that, even though I am personally not a fan, the was the current crop of Trek showrunners have decided to use the term size doesn’t really matter with regards to what is or is not a refit.