.Maybe a more detailed look in the future will reveal the more un-smoothed look that was being talked about.I saw it revealed at trek today but know its gone from the site. Maybe its all the fans trying to get in there for a look 
[ July 08, 2001: Message edited by: Kosa ]
[ July 08, 2001: Message edited by: Kosa ]
Read and join the protest:
http://www.ex-astris-scientia.de/misc/enterprise_design_comment.htm
Non-canon series heading our way!
I mean, I don't care if this series is non-canon - there is MORE than enough Trek already to pour over... I found myself watching "Friday's Child" with awe and "The Defector" with baited breath, and "The High Ground" with thought and "Second Sight" with child-like wonder Last night...
TOATALLY AWESOME! Who needs new crap Trek - we already have some totally beautiful episodes to watch.
Andrew
P.S. Watching "The High Ground" - one of MANY reasons to have a Crusher-centric storyline in the next Trek movie.
Oh, and our second?? "Jean-Luc there is something that I have to tell you" line! CLASSIC!
Andrew
Also, the ship appears to be ~250m...much smaller than all but the smallest estimates of the Akira's size.
[ July 08, 2001: Message edited by: Aethelwer ]
No offense, because some of the people with that opinion are my favorite people in the world, but get a life.
[ July 08, 2001: Message edited by: Sol System ]
And Sol, it isn't that I don't like the design. It's that it was taken DIRECTLY from the Akira. The lines are almost exactly the same. What that shows me is a complete lack of creativity, and I have always found the creative aspect of the show, how they come up with unique starship designs, worlds, sets, etc. one of its best aspects. One of the reasons I watched really bad Voyager episodes.The Ambassador has completely different lines from the Constitution. It more resembles the Galaxy than a Constitution. The secondary hull of the Ambassador is WAY out of proportion, too short and thick, when compared to the relatively thin and large primary hull. The primary hull itself is completely different. The connecting dorsal is wide and thick. The impulse drives are configured differently and in different positions. On the dorsal for the Ambassador, on the aft edge of the saucer for the Constitution. The nacelle and pylon configuration is very different as well. They don't sweep up at an angle, but rather are configured like that of an Excelsior, with the pylons forming a 90 degree angle.
A better example would be the comparison between the Constitution and the Constitution-refit. Superficial changes. The pylons are swept up and back, not just up. The bridge module changed. The main sensor/deflector was updated. The upper and lower navigational domes were changed. More running lights added. Aft hangar bay doors were modified. The overall lines are identical.
[ July 08, 2001: Message edited by: Daniel ]
Down with Enterprise!
http://webj.subspacerelay.com
Join up, let's get this thing rolling. It's time to kick Berman and Braga out of Star Trek.
Of course, that kind of shoots continuity to hell...but...
I mean really who cares , you cant expect these people at paramount to please everyone , they are trying to make a TV show , not revolutionize the world , this isnt the 60s theres no space race to get people thinking about sci-fi they cant keep making these shows to suit an ever more shrinking group of people. If you all feel that this isnt "trek" which in my opinion it isnt , fine dont look at it as "trek" just look at it as another scifi show.
I understand that you feel that this is "THE END OF TREK , OH MY GOD!" but people said the same about Voyager and about countless other things.
I see people are already doing SIZE COMPARISONS , geez , stop picking the show apart before its even aired , you all know your going to watch it religiously anyway so just sit back and chill out.
I cant believe how much i enjoy things more now that I've stopped tearing them apart and sucking all the fun out of them.
As for my opinion of Enterprise
I'll wait and see , its not Trek , infact i dont think its meant to be , i think its just another show on tv , and whether i enjoy it or not depends on story and characters not what "warp scale" they use or the exact length of the ship or whether the ship looks to "Akiraish"
quote:
Originally posted by The Mighty Monkey of Mim:
Hey, maybe the Akira is just WAY THE FUCK OLDER THAN WE THOUGHT, and the version we see in FC is just a refitted type!
Absolutely! Did it ever occur to you that the Akira-Class was created from the original design of the Enterprise?
Perhaps this Enterprise is a joint Vulcan-Earth ship, where as Starfleet builds ships mainly from Earth, the designs would be more utilitarian looking.
Since I am a big fan of the Akira-Class, I will enjoy this series even more. I pity those who are too obsessed with weather the design should be one way or the other, they will never enjoy the series as much as they could if they had an open mind about this.
There's obviously been some market testing here. If its a popular design, they will use it. They wont use a crap-tastic design that looks too 22nd century cause a lot of people wont like it. Yes, I know there are PLENTY of fans here that would love a true 22nd utilitarian design, but outside of flare that just doesnt work. People like sleek agressive looking ships. Theres a reason the Akira grases the cover of most novels/and all games its featured in, even if it isnt the strogest or central ship.
Anyway, this is a really exciting time for me.
I look forward to welcoming Enterprise into our new family.
DISAPPOINTED!!!
I mean , we could say the same about the ships in Battlestar Gallactica being derivative of those in Starwars , but the fact is the stories were entirly differant. So the guy likes the Akira , its not likes hes copying work from another Scifi Series.
I agree they could have been more imaginative , but I guess this is what they wanted. Like Wes says , sure we would all love a huge round Tin Can but if your like the majority of TV viewers wouldnt buy into that.
[ July 08, 2001: Message edited by: Dr. Obvious ]
But as our beloved Berman said: "The terrific thing about this for longtime fans is that they'll get to see the development of all the technological gadgetry and capabilities that have become part of the Trek mythos. They'll see them in their infant, trial-and-error stages, before they end up being what we know them to be."
In the case of the ship design he was already wrong (because the Akiraprise is *not* in a visible infant stage), and I anticipate that we get much similar trouble even with the regular technology (think of transporters, supscae comms, FTL sensors).
Take a good hard look at that picture that The_Tom posted. Am I the only one who can see that this may be a hoax? Look at the unevenness of the outline of the ship. Look at the aft ends of the nacelles and the aft quarters of the saucer. This looks like someone just took a sketch of the Akira and used MS Paint to edit it. But, let us assume that this diagram is what it claims to be. Some of y'all are passing judgement on just one view of the ship. What about a side view, a bottom view, or a 3D pose? Nope, like I said, some of y'all jump at any little chance to start ripping into a series that has yet to premiere.
I also think that using that tired "get a life" putdown is unbecoming for a Star Trek fan. We all choose our own levels of obsession: for one fan to tell another that he cares too much about their mutual subject of interest is to align yourself with the mainstream, which believes that caring at all about "a mere television show" is to be ridiculed.
I know you've done excellent work with the Starfleet Museum. I go there often and sit in awe of the stuff you guys have done. But the early history of the Federation and Starfleet as presented on-screen is sketchy at best. The producers, who are vested with producing the show, and the writers, who are vested with writing the show, have the right to go in try to clear things up. Most of the time, they do stay true to what has previously been presented. Every now and then, they goof up. But I guess if I say something about them "being only human" or that there is "thousands of hours of Trek," I'm going to be branded an "apologist," is that correct?
Yes, you have the right to ticked to kingdom come about any amount of trivial and serious details. But I also have the right to say that when one is flaming an entire show for something little, you are infringing on my right to enjoy the damn show.
The ship is an indicator of what sort of creative effort is being invested in the show. So while it's true that if they screwed up on the ship it doesn't necessarily make it an entirely bad show, it is a pretty damn blatant warning sign that we're going to have a lot more problems on our hands as time progresses.
I am really disappointed. This ship IN NO WAY looks like it belongs in the 22nd century, a hundred years before the original Constitution-class.
If it isn't obvious to everyone by now, (and it's been obvious to many for far longer than this) it should be: our buddies Rick and Brannon are on a crusade to wipe out the original Star Trek. I know people will say that's going too far, that I'm being a bit extreme. But it's true. They don't like the original show. They've never liked the original show. The don't want anything to do with the original show.
Hey, doesn't that mirror a quote from an interview with some Paramount guy? Probably not Okuda, he's too polite, but someone?
Anyway, I've had just about all I can take of their royal highnesses Berman and Bragga.
Okay, I feel A LOT better now...
I'm quite positive it's legit.
Masao - I'm not being apologietic , I am just showing you this issue from both sides , the producers have their motives , now if those motives dont agree with yours , oh well tough cookies its their show.
I guess Paramount doesnt consider losing some fans a bad move if it will gain them new ones.
In my opinion , the trek we all know is a relic , existing only with the established fan base , not expanding. Paramount realizing this figures they will launch a modern Star Trek , its a gamble , but oh well , maybe it will work , who knows!? Maybe it will be a hit. If you notice, the word "Star Trek" is no where in the title graphic i saw.
Either way , all I'm asking is that you all wait and see , you all seem to be racing to see who can dismiss this show first and who can rip it to shreds faster.
Monkey Of Mim - As I said in my last post Berman and Braga are doing what they were hired to do , attempt to make Star Trek popular again , they were hired to take a dieing franchise and try to bring it back , I know I'm probley gonna get alot of guff for saying that but its true , The Original Star Trek is as much a relic as John Wayne movies , its a sinking ship and they cant keep shelling out millions to keep pandering to the same hardcore fans who they STILL cant seem to please no matter what they do. Star Trek is good for the silver screen but not a series.
Man I've gone from "Mr Canon Fact Nazi" to this , what a change...
Basiclly I'm still wait and see , on Enterprise , its an experiment , lets wait for teh results before we go on witch hunts.
Anyway , Six Feet Under is on , I must bid you all farewell for now
[ July 08, 2001: Message edited by: Dr. Obvious ]
I must admit, however, that a lot of what I've heard about the new show bugs the hell out of me. However, despite these strong reservations, I'm willing to give Enterprise a chance (surprise, surprise). While I've invested a lot of time designing my own ships, I didn't really expect the ships of the new series (I hope there will be more than one) to resemble them too closely. The reason I work in the pre-TOS era is that little has been established. I won't say that I'm not dissapointed by the route that the producers have taken, particularly as it differs from mine, but they have the perfect right to take that route as it is their show. On the other hand, what we've seen and heard so far makes me think they've made terrible mistakes in terms of ship technology, including power source, transporters, speeds, and hull layout. Can anyone honestly say that this ship looks anything like they expected a ship in 2150 to look like?
Part of the reason that this subject is so passionate (for me at least) is that there is a lot of negativity going on when we really have very little in terms of concrete official information. It's still entirely possible for that top view of the SS Enterprise to be a 2150 style ship. But it's so hard to judge based on one view. If the rest of the views turn out to show that it is simply an Akira with TOS nacelles, then, yes, I'll write a protest letter and mail it to Rick Berman and company.
I take offense to being called an "apologist" because I am not. I do believe in waiting until I see the first couple of episodes before completely flaming the hell out of something. If I get the feeling that the new series will be a joke based on those first few episodes, then I too will be upset with the producers and will join in a letter campaign against it. But I won't do that before I see the show.
quote:
Originally posted by Masao:
I also think that using that tired "get a life" putdown is unbecoming for a Star Trek fan. We all choose our own levels of obsession: for one fan to tell another that he cares too much about their mutual subject of interest is to align yourself with the mainstream, which believes that caring at all about "a mere television show" is to be ridiculed.
You sir, couldnt be more wrong. There is a point in which an obsession becomes a mental disorder, weather it be a TV show or anything else.
When it is a mental disorder, people turn to these obsessions to escape other aspects of thier life. In the case of a telivision show following, it might be to escape the passive 'loner' lifestyle a child suffers at school, or even an adult in his or her social life. A lot of you don't want to hear it, but its a pretty widely known issue. Anyway, not that many of you fit this, but sometimes I wonder.
The bottom line is most of you will either watch it or not. No, you won't complain about it till you die, because if you don't like it, you wont watch it. The people who watch it just to bitch about it probably rode the short bus as a kid.
Those are my 2 cents, i'll probably throw in a quarter later.
Mark
Not to mention the fact that most people who write it can be found in other areas of this forum obsessing over whatever their personal Trek interest is
Masao , as a Trek Fan I'd have to agree with you the ship looks to advanced.
But i dont see why they still cant have a good show , though I'm not ruling that out i just dont choose to start make a noose for Rick Berman and Braga , after all they are doing what they were hired to do . You all seem to forget that those 2 people arnt the only ones on that staff and they too have bosses they have to please.
yes yes i know that was a bad Prof. Frink Impression , i will go now...
Just think about some of this stuff, guys:
#1. The bit about Starfleet being founded before the Federation. That's quite a stretch in itself. But what's sooooo outrageous is that this Enterprise is now going to be a STARFLEET ship. And, nobody sees a PROBLEM with this? It's been etablished for like...um...two friggin' decades that Kirk's was the first Starfleet vessel named Enterprise! Plus, the reg is said to be NX-01! You don't think we would have heard something by now abount an Enterprise that was also the first ship in Starfleet???
Okay, let's move on to...
#2. It has also long been established that Humans' first contact with Klingons was a disasterous affair, regardless of WHEN it happened (the dates aren't what concerns me most) and that there was unremitting hostility between the two up until Kirk's day. But, according to that marvelous script review, that's not exactly what's to become of this affair, is it now?
#3. The whole ship thing which I'm still pissed as hell about but won't talk to death anymore. Oh wait, maybe just a little bit more. I'm not saying the design isn't a neat looking design, it is. So is the Akira. but what's really sad is that that's all anyone cares about is whether the ship looks 'cool' or not. I would have no problem accepting this ship as a contemporary to the TOS style ships. It would probably fit in very nicely in the early to mid 23rd century. BUT NOT A CENTURY EARLIER!!!! It just doesn't look like a really old ship, which is what we're supposed to be talking about! A really old ship. It really should look more like the flippin' Phoenix, damn it all!
Okay, I'm done with that little rant. Tune in tomorrow, kids...
quote:
The bit about Starfleet being founded before the Federation. That's quite a stretch in itself.
Not really. As I've said before, the only on-screen evidence for Starfleet being founded at the same time as the Federation is a date of 2161 on the Starfleet Academy banner. And as I've also said before, there could have been another entity that served as a training institution prior to the Starfleet Academy.
quote:
But what's sooooo outrageous is that this Enterprise is now going to be a STARFLEET ship. And, nobody sees a PROBLEM with this? It's been etablished for like...um...two friggin' decades that Kirk's was the first Starfleet vessel named Enterprise!
Well, has it been expressly said that the NCC-1701 was the first vessel named Enterprise in Starfleet? Assuming so, could it not be possible that this, the SS Enterprise, is operating under the Earth Starfleet? And that after the founding of the Federation, the Earth Starfleet became the model for the Federation Starfleet?
quote:
Plus, the reg is said to be NX-01! You don't think we would have heard something by now abount an Enterprise that was also the first ship in Starfleet???
You got me on the registry. I can't think of a way to get this to gel with the rest of Star Trek. The only possible way for me is to say that this is the Earth Starfleet and that the Earth Starfleet used a registration system that was also adopted wholesale by the Federation Starfleet. But that in and of itself is a bit of a stretch.
quote:
It has also long been established that Humans' first contact with Klingons was a disasterous affair, regardless of WHEN it happened (the dates aren't what concerns me most) and that there was unremitting hostility between the two up until Kirk's day. But, according to that marvelous script review, that's not exactly what's to become of this affair, is it now?
You don't think that a Klingon being shot in a corn field by a human and then being returned to the Empire by the humans only to have that Klingon kidnapped en route isn't a disastrous first contact?
quote:
I would have no problem accepting this ship as a contemporary to the TOS style ships. It would probably fit in very nicely in the early to mid 23rd century. BUT NOT A CENTURY EARLIER!!!! It just doesn't look like a really old ship, which is what we're supposed to be talking about! A really old ship. It really should look more like the flippin' Phoenix, damn it all!
Okay, first of all, the Phoenix was launched about a century prior to when Enterprise takes place. Not to mention, it seems that the Vulcans have some sort of alliance-type friendship with Earth. The Vulcans could have helped shape the design of Earth's interstellar ships. And, as I've said before, we're basing criticism of this new Enterprise on ONE view of a small picture from TV Guide. This ship could look to your definition of old based on the other views.
quote:
Okay, I'm done with that little rant. Tune in tomorrow, kids...
Anyway, you do bring up good points, but it is difficult to make objective criticisms of Enterprise until we see the final product of the efforts of hundreds of individuals.
[ July 08, 2001: Message edited by: Siegfried ]
I'm not even gonna say anything...
Of course the Enterprise is supposed to be a United Earth vessel so the NX 01 rego dosent matter. Of course it blows my idea that the N** stood for Federation to hell.
As to the design of the new Enterprise whilest the design does appear to be an Akira we really need to see some other angles to be certain
The new show Enterprise is intended not for the deep core fan, like me and others who are on this board, who grew up knowing TOS and the subsequent movies and series. The show is intended for those who grew up knowing TNG and its subsequent series and movies, along with their children who will grow up knowing Enterprise. This is the stated intent of Rick Berman who said the new series will be dependent on the last three series. This producer sees the future of Star Trek in the parents, and especially their children, who are familiar with Star Trek of the past fifteen years.
quote:
The new show Enterprise is intended not for the deep core fan, like me and others who are on this board, who grew up knowing TOS and the subsequent movies and series. The show is intended for those who grew up knowing TNG and its subsequent series and movies, along with their children who will grow up knowing Enterprise.
That would be me. And I'm still pissed off about these new developments.
I'm trying my best not to be judgemental about this show before it even starts, but it's not very easy at all.
I'm preparing to write a commentary today: "'Enterprise' - A Slap in the Face of Fandom."
Do you know who Rick Berman is?
"It has also long been established that Humans' first contact with Klingons was a disasterous affair, regardless of WHEN it happened (the dates aren't what concerns me most) and that there was unremitting hostility between the two up until Kirk's day."
Just to be sure, what is the exact quote regarding this, and what episode is it from (my brain thinks Day of the Dove, but it's not sure)?
quote:
Just to be sure, what is the exact quote regarding this, and what episode is it from (my brain thinks Day of the Dove, but it's not sure)?
Actually, it's "The Undiscovered Country." Spock makes a comment about "the end of seventy years of unremitting hostility..."
Just seventy years? 
$
$
I'm coming into this argument kind of late, so bear with me.
I've read everyone's posts both at this forum and the Starships forum concerning the Akiraprise. Without mentioning the "Enterprise" show itself, I'm just going to give my $.02 about the ship design.
I, like many people on this board, am a starship freak. One of the most interesting aspects of Star Trek are the many ship designs we get to see. I think that's why I, Bernd, Timo, et. al were so tenacious in trying to find the information about the Wolf 359 models.
Anyway, let's think about this. When was the last time we saw a truly new starship design? IIRC, it was about three years ago, during "Equinox" where we saw the Nova class ship. If you're a ship freak like me, three years is a hell of along time to go without seeing a new ship design.
Then came the Voyager finale, which promised us a slew of new ship designs per interviews with people like Sternbach et. al. What did we end up getting? Just a minor modification of the same Nova we saw three years ago, plus a fleet of the same old ships we've seen before.
So naturally, barring the show itself, I was excited just to know there would be a new ship design, albeit from the 22nd century. And again, absolutely no thought was put into the Enterprise's design at all. It's not a new ship. It's an old ship that was modified very minimally. And it doesn't even work for the time period.
Maybe "Enterprise" will turn out to be the best Star Trek show ever. Maybe it will be crap. Maybe the ship's interiors will be very well put together. But maybe they'll be as anachronistic as the exterior. I like to reserve my judgement until I've actually seen the show. But I do have to say that I'm very disappointed right now.
Mark
Now you can see the ship in better detail. The actual article mentions that the interiors will be similar to a submarine, very cramped and dark. The ship will have a crew of 70.
Some other things brought over from the Akira:
The little openings on the side of the saucer, which appeared to be torpedo launchers on the Akira, look like shuttlebays on the Enterprise
The tip of the hat to the old P-38 Lightening's turbochargers on her double hull that was on the Akira, are also on the Enterprise.
Also, the nacelles do go up, as does the weapons pod, so looking at the back of the ship we almost have a sort of W shape to it.
Also, does anyone else think the cutout at the front of the saucer could be a deflector dish?
He is the "Money Guy" Paramount gives him cash and he works with the creative staff to bring what they see to life.
Also , because the credits read "Story By Rick Berman & Brennan Braga" doesnt mean he WROTE it , it means he brought it to the network for approval , but you never know maybe the man did have something to do with it.
Whether he is qualified for this job was up to the Studio Execs to decide and they seem to believe he is. They Have their motives.
The people that dont like this design seem to the think that this reflects the ammount of "creative effort" being put in.
Lemme Ask you a question , why not such a big uproar when we say all those Kit Bashed ships in Ds9 and TNG ?
Those ships were actually CUT AND PASTE jobs , now i understand that those were "background" ships but the fact still remains those were extreme hack jobs.
By the way , the warp pylons are facing up , not down like the Akira , this may help distingush the two ships. I may be wrong , make up your mind for yourself...
This series is an experiment , to try to add a new spin to an old story , they are trying to seperate this show (ENT) from the normal Star Trek "geek" stereotype in order to make it more mainstream
Notice "Star Trek" is not in the title graphic as it was in the other shows
There wont be any "Crossovers" with past cast members since they are all centuries from being born. (I am praying , please , No crossovers , but after all Sisko did seem to sneak himself into TOS so i have no idea what to expect
Either way , I will wait until the premire to dish out my complaints.
[ July 09, 2001: Message edited by: Dr. Obvious ]
At any rate, though I say again that I don't mean to be insulting, I stand by my comment. Mountains from molehills. The design of the ship isn't what the show is about.
And what's with all that surface detailing? The point of early Starfleet ships is that they didn't have surface detailing. (a la E-nil) They were smooth, white, and non-detailed on the exterior. This is friggin' ridiculous!
That NX-01 isn't going to do anything but screw stuff up. How can it even be NX-01? Now you'll all want an Enterprise-class. Up until the 23rd century, ships classes weren't even named, they were numbered! (DY-245, RT-2203, BBI-993, etc.) Plus they showed us in Voyager that NX-01 was the Dauntless. (Yes i know it was a fake) We know they're not going to be consistent with the old show from the sixties, but they could at least be consistent with their own pride and joy, (VOY) which only went off the air a couple months ago!!!
If Starfleet has been in existence for that long, that means we'll have to go back and count every bloody (formerly) Pre-Federation ship in our ship lists! What a rotten break!
Nonononono. I don't mean where does the unremitting hostility line come from. I mean where does the line about the hostility coming from a botched First Contact come from?
quote:
And what's with all that surface detailing? The point of early Starfleet ships is that they didn't have surface detailing. (a la E-nil) They were smooth, white, and non-detailed on the exterior. This is friggin' ridiculous!
Someone hasn't watched enough Car Trek.
Besides, the ship only remotely looks like an Akira from the top. I've already told you the arrangement of the nacelles and everything is different.
Another thing I noticed. The lip of the saucer is similar to the Excelsior, in that it is wider at the bottom then at the top and goes down at an angle.
Let's look at this SS Enterprise, shall we? It has a rough surface to its hull. Well, the TOS Enterprise wasn't perfectly smooth. Look at some of the close-up hull pictures: there are grooves in the hull. The pictures we've seen of the Daedalus class shows that there was some texture to the hull. The saucer of the SS Enterprise is circular. So were the TOS and TOS Movie Era Enterprises. The nacelles resemble the TOS Enterprise nacelles. Take a lot at the excellent work Masao has done at the Starfleet Museum. A lot of his ships use variations on the TOS nacelle. The SS Enterprise has an honest-to-goodness sensor dish at the tip of the saucer. Just like the TOS Enterprise! The nacelles, contrary to the Akira class, bend upwards. Just like the nacelles on all the following Enterprises. In my opinion, I think that this SS Enterprise will fit in with the era the new series is set.
Some of us seem to be forgetting something important. The ship is simply the vehicle by which the drama is allowed to take place. Star Trek has NEVER been about technology and cool special effects. Star Trek is about the interaction between the characters and humanity's role in the future of the galaxy. The ship makes little difference in the overall scheme of things. I think the ship fits in; a lot of people think the ship is an abomination. The Anti-Ships may be right, but it will be the characters that drive the series NOT whether the shape has X device or not.
Theres your comparison
[ July 09, 2001: Message edited by: Wes1701E ]
So, now for a more detailed analysis. Who thinks those gold caplike things on the forward "extensions" are warp core dumps? And I'm glad to see we have one turbo rotated about thirty degrees to port of the centerline, a la the original E. Those trapezoidal things p/s aft look like they ARE impulse exhaust vents, but not as I pictured them. They look better. The center section between the extended pylons on the primary hull is the shuttlebay. But I'm dissapointed about the pylons. So Constitution-refit. Ah well.
P.S. I just realized, should I have posted all that in the Starships & Technology forum?
[ July 09, 2001: Message edited by: Daniel ]
quote:
Some of us seem to be forgetting something important. The ship is simply the vehicle by which the drama is allowed to take place. Star Trek has NEVER been about technology and cool special effects. Star Trek is about the interaction between the characters and humanity's role in the future of the galaxy. The ship makes little difference in the overall scheme of things. I think the ship fits in; a lot of people think the ship is an abomination. The Anti-Ships may be right, but it will be the characters that drive the series NOT whether the shape has X device or not.
You couldnt be more right.
I think the Enterprise should be much smaller then the Akira. Just look at how few windows there are compared to the large amount of windows on the Akira. Besides, the ship only has a crew of 70!
Also, the gold things on the catamaran hull are the tips of the hat to the P-38 Lightening's turbochargers. The plane had a similar catamaran fuselage with it's prop engines located in the dual fuselage. On top of the each fuselage was part of the engine's turbocharger that looks exactly like those gold things. As for what they do on the Enterprise, no clue. They probably will never explain that.
[ July 09, 2001: Message edited by: The359 ]
LOL, its quite obvious that Jeager is the better designer.
"um, Wes, why did you add "PROTEUS" to the left nacelle pylon?"
I don't know what your talking about.....
quote:
I think the Enterprise should be much smaller then the Akira.
Okay, I've resized it assuming the "caps" are the same size.
#1 - the "turbochargers" on the top of each of the catamaran hulls
#2 - the bridge, which I am guessing is tall enough to be seen over the catamaran
#3 - the "bays" on either side of the saucer, most likely for cargo I am assuming. Although, as I look at it, it does seem as if the actual gray are may be DOORS for an elevator of some kind.
#4 - This is the dip in the catamaran that I am talking about. Looking at the top view, on the left catamaran, around this area you see that it is a bit shadded, showing that there may indeed be a dip here.
#5 - The impulse engines on the side of the saucer. I am guessing they extend down below the lip some just so that they have a little more room
#6 - The "pod" in the middle. This thing will have to be sitting fairly high in order to clear the bridge, although if the saucer is NOT curved on top, the pod should have no problem.
Other things to mention:
- The gold area at the front may not be a deflector dish as I look at it, because look at how incredibly thin it would have to be (vertically). They only way it would work is if there is an extension on the bottom of the saucer, but this might give the ship a sort of "ugly chin".
- When the catamaran hull dips down, it may not be as thin as you may think because the catamaran may also be on the BOTTOM side of the saucer.
- I believe the very end of the catamaran hull may be more impulse engines, since they seem to look like vents, and the Akira also had some impulse engines there too.
[Edit] Har Har, very funny Wes. You removed the PROTEUS from the left nacelle pylon but added it onto the tail end of the left catamaran. Now stop editing the picture and leave it the way it's supposed to be.
Some newbie is going to come around and think the ship is supposed to say Proteus on it...
[ July 09, 2001: Message edited by: The359 ]
Also, for all we know the Constitution class may have been alone in having the "streamlined, featureless hull". Maybe it was an experiment that they tried on the class, and then took off at the refit?
This ships does not look more advanced than a Daedalus. The Daedalus has an efficient design. It's compact, sleeker, and supposedly can hold about thirty more crew members than this SS Enterprise. It shows an evolution in starship design. We have the Phoenix, the first warp-capable Earth ship. It was flat with nacelles sticking out the sides. This SS Enterprise is still flat, but with the beginning of the circular primary hull that will become the basis of ships to come. In this step in the design, the nacelles move to an upward position which will be followed by later designs and, in particular, the following ships named Enterprise. Next, you have the TOS Enterprise. It has a circular primary hull and nacelles angling above that primary hull, but it now includes a secondary hull a la the Daedalus. There is a logical evolution in ship design here!
That Sketch The359 Posted is exactly what i figured it would look like from the side , and it gives the ship a whole new look, still Akira like but i mean , the Enterprise B C D E and almost every other ship design had the Saucer , Secondary hull and Naccele design combo , whos to say thats not plagerism?
And as for the ship looking much more "Rough" , are you guys telling the space shuttle is squeeky clean and perfectly smooth , whos to say those tiles/features dont serve a purpose?
Maybe the Pattern on the hull is capable of reflecting or other wise dulling the effects of radiation , or perhaps they serve as armor or something. Theories abound the ship looks nice it more then fits the role , I understand its futuristic looking but its not a run of the mill Starship.
quote:
Insede the chose a approch that would appeal to a "more general adduence". Now don't get me wrong I love a good SFX show but not if it violates the rest of the Star Trek timeline.
Nothing About That Ship violates the timeline. Let me ask you a question , Compare the Russian Soyuz Space Capsule to lets say the Gemini or Apollo Vehicles , they are both space vessels from the same era , yet they look TOTALY differant , why cant this be the same in Star Trek ?
quote:
Oh Lord. Well, a detailed pic at last. So, again, what's with this detailing on the hull? And WINDOWS?! WIndows on the upper side of the primary hull?! And facing DIRECTLY UP? In the cieling?!
Daniel , Ever heard of a Sun Roof or a Sky Light ?
Why Not Portholes on the roof? If I'm on a ship in the middle of no where , maybe i want to see something thats not a bulkhead when i look up in bed.
I dont think those Gold Caps are super charges , my brother and I suspect they are sensor palletes or part of the comm system.
As for the Submarine Like interior , I like it , I like it alot! I was hoping for something not TOS like.
[ July 09, 2001: Message edited by: Dr. Obvious ]
[ July 09, 2001: Message edited by: Dr. Obvious ]
And here you can see the SUPERCHARGERS (I accidentally had been saying Turbo Chargers before) on the P-38 Lightening, which are almost identical to the things on the Akira/Enterprise:
quote:
Originally posted by Siegfried:
This ship IS NOT going to violate the Star Trek timeline! I've mentioned the reasoning for this many times by now: it is possible for the 24th century Akira class to be based on a 22nd century ship.
I have also been saying this for quite some time.
I love you Siegfried. I really do.
In regards to the underside of the saucer, who here will agree that it will likely have a terraced, utilitarian appearance like the Soverign Class? Possibly with a cylindrical midsection which extends towards the front of the saucer to meet up with the deflector dish.
Vorlon: Actually, from the picture being bounced around, the dish in the notched out section of the forward part of the saucer. As for the underside of the saucer, I'd bet that it's either flat or slightly curvey.
It's low poly so it doesnt look like my typical renders, but I plan on completely removing the name and importing it into Dominion Wars and Armada. I will try to guess on what the sauser underside looks like and post a diffrent view eventually.
[ July 09, 2001: Message edited by: Wes1701E ]
[ July 09, 2001: Message edited by: Siegfried ]
Its Not the 60's , its 2001.
Did they ever say the Nacceles of the E-Nil were large because the technology required them to be?
No.
They were probley long because it looks nice , kind of like the cars of the era , long , huge , American.
The Design is advanced , because we are no longer in the 60s , we cant model this series to look older then TOS , because it wouldnt make sence.
Get Over It.
[ July 10, 2001: Message edited by: Dr. Obvious ]
[ July 10, 2001: Message edited by: Dr. Obvious ]
The Ent-A and Ent-D engines were the same size. But the Excelsior's are a bit bigger, and the Sovereign's are MUCH bigger. Voyager's are tiny.
There's no correlation.
Anyway... I have another view of the mesh.. this time the back.
And the original:
The question is... what should the bottom look like? I know there are already more models being made with diffrent bottoms.. but what do you think is the most realistic?
[ July 11, 2001: Message edited by: Wes1701E ]
