The reason it doesn't bother me on the Chimera and the Belle is that it looks good thereWorks for me.
and it doesn't on the Raynor.Wait what.
It's not cool, it doesn't contribute to its overall impact on the viewer (unlike on the corvettes, which are supposed to give the glass-cannon impression).140k HP and a frontal HBlue/BBlue pair still enter the glass cannon category to me. A Raynor is still Shivan beam fodder, much more than even the Chimera and Bellerophon if you look at volume/HP ratio.
In any case, who cares about all of that. We're all trying to make sense about stuff, which is completely irrelevant here. This gap is a distinctive feature, and there is just no viable reason to remove it out of the blue.
Erm, no. It's still not a glass cannon. Maybe by heavy destroyer standards, but not by normal standards--which still place the Raynor in the "looks like a battlestar except for that random part in the middle that makes it seem like a twig".
Rather, the Raynor looks beefy, solid, and great--except for those struts. Random, and REALLY, REEEEAAAAALLY jarring. Imagine having the back-half of a superbattleship connected to the front half solely by a trio of struts? It takes you RIGHT out of your suspension of disbelief, and you're instead focusing on questions like "what the hell? That makes no sense. Why is that there? It goes completely against the notion of a destroyer-of-the-line..."
It looks completely out of place, makes no sense whatsoever from any design standpoint (the Raynor is NOT a glass cannon destroyer, nor is it a shock-ship with 90% of its firepower directed solely at the front, with minimal armor), breaks suspension of disbelief/is extremely jarring, and is a kind of design feature you'd ONLY (and I do mean ONLY) see in ships that either aren't supposed to see action (like medical ships) or are supposed to be cheap and expendable, which the Raynor is most certainly not. It's a massive structural, logistical, psychological, and engineering weakness, not just in the face of enemy fire, but even under basic operation (all traffic between the front and back halves of the ship is seriously bottlenecked, including traffic of material and energy; the ship has DRASTICALLY weaker structural integrity and tolerances for maneuvers).
If you want to replace it with a solid, yet still comparatively slim section of the ship, then I guess that's much better, but it's still stupid--it's a major flaw in design that can be exploited, and runs counter to the role the Raynor is designed to fill.