Check out the engineering hull on the first two pages. The deflector dish is more of a rounded cone structure with a little dish indentation in the front. And the ventral side has a little funny notch running the length of it.
While not canon by any means (any more than the 390,000 ton mass in this publication), that struck me in two ways:
1. I've never seen that before.
2. For those of us who view the Constitution Class as being a class with some history (e.g. my estimate of 2210 for the class*), this is the closest to an official indication of what an earlier version might've looked like.
posted
Dig Spock's non-pointed ears on the last page! (The pic with the chess set.)
-------------------- “Those people who think they know everything are a great annoyance to those of us who do.” — Isaac Asimov Star Trek Minutiae | Memory Alpha
Registered: Nov 2000
| IP: Logged
-------------------- "The Starships of the Federation are the physical, tangible manifestations of Humanity´s stubborn insistence that life does indeed mean something." Spock to Leonard McCoy in "Final Frontier"
Registered: Jan 2000
| IP: Logged
Check out the engineering hull on the first two pages. The deflector dish is more of a rounded cone structure with a little dish indentation in the front. And the ventral side has a little funny notch running the length of it.
Er...that's not a model- it's just a crappy painting- same as a dozen other crapy, inaccurate depictions of the Enterprise that graced TV Guide and various magazines over the years.
Still, fun to speculate on it as a possible pre-pilot version....as though the ship was refit just prior to The Cage and again before Kirk took command.
Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
posted
There are no details whatsoever on the saucer. Given the timing of the material--pre-release advertisement-- I really doubt it's a model. Maybe preproduction artwork. But this was definitely made after the second pilot filmed, so the appearance of the ship was already pretty much finalized.
Registered: Nov 2000
| IP: Logged
quote:Originally posted by Jason Abbadon: it's just a crappy painting- same as a dozen other crapy, inaccurate depictions of the Enterprise that graced TV Guide and various magazines over the years.
To me, this one has a little more street cred given that it came from NBC rather than some random schmoe. Otherwise, I wouldn't care a lick either.
That's what makes it more intriguing . . . was it just some coke-bottle-glasses wearing drunkard doing scribbles for the ad department, or an actual preliminary Jefferies concept?
After all, that front funny cone thing was a prior part of one of the Jefferies designs:
Indeed, if you look closely, there's a little white line running along the bottom of the engineering hull in that view that corresponds to the feature in the blue painting, making it an interesting middle ground between the early Jefferies rendering and the final design.
-------------------- . . . ceterum censeo Carthaginem esse delendam.
posted
Or maybe the schmoe who was tasked to draw the artwork got it wrong. Or used pre-production references. That painting is so clearly incomplete (look at the saucer again, there's no details at all) that it can't be anything else.
If you want to imagine it's something more, that's cool. As Rick Sternbach said, "There is no canon." But this image wasn't intended to be anything important.
After all, if you told the artists (and the producers) that 45 years from then, rabid fans would be nitpicking at every tiny inconsistency on their network affiliate promotional material (not even meant for public consumption!), they would have laughed in your face.
-------------------- “Those people who think they know everything are a great annoyance to those of us who do.” — Isaac Asimov Star Trek Minutiae | Memory Alpha
Registered: Nov 2000
| IP: Logged
quote:Originally posted by Guardian 2000: Indeed, if you look closely, there's a little white line running along the bottom of the engineering hull in that view that corresponds to the feature in the blue painting, making it an interesting middle ground between the early Jefferies rendering and the final design.
That's supposed to be reflection- that notion of the ship would have been shiney steel colored instead of white- see the reflection on the saucer as well?
But,...if we're going to play this game, I'm all in! We could say that early Connie concepts had the lower half of the secondary hull as the detachable lifeboat in case of emergencies- it would make planetfall easier than a saucer and could even have the same (if larger) propulsion as a TOS shuttlecraft.
Reverend, work it up for us! You're the matt Jeffries of Flare!
Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
quote:Originally posted by MinutiaeMan: If you want to imagine it's something more, that's cool. As Rick Sternbach said, "There is no canon." But this image wasn't intended to be anything important.
After all, if you told the artists (and the producers) that 45 years from then, rabid fans would be nitpicking at every tiny inconsistency on their network affiliate promotional material (not even meant for public consumption!), they would have laughed in your face.
Are you, a Flare member active in the Starships & Technology forum, attempting to diss the "nitpicking" of "rabid fans"? I'm just askin'.
As for the imagining of something more, I said myself it's not canon by any means. I simply find it more intriguing than the run-of-the-mill erroneous third-party interpretations, because it has a better pedigree, and is more interesting, besides.
-------------------- . . . ceterum censeo Carthaginem esse delendam.
quote:Originally posted by Jason Abbadon: That's supposed to be reflection-
That was always my interpretation, as well. However, depending on the origin of that blue painting, that idea might not be accurate. After all, the line doesn't show up on the warp nacelle underside at all as one would expect it to, and the idea of it as a reflection showing up on the saucer is uncertain at best.
As for the painting itself (which, just for clarification regarding your earlier post, I never thought to be a model) . . . basically, without knowing the source of this artwork, it could very well be a mid-stage Jefferies design.
-------------------- . . . ceterum censeo Carthaginem esse delendam.
quote:Originally posted by Guardian 2000: Are you, a Flare member active in the Starships & Technology forum, attempting to diss the "nitpicking" of "rabid fans"? I'm just askin'.
I have no illusions that I'm not just as rabid as you. *wipes froth from mouth*
I'm just pointing out that you said, "this is the closest to an official indication of what an earlier version might've looked like." Implying that this image's differences were more meaningful than they were supposed to be.
If you think that's what the Constitution used to look like, that's cool. But there's nothing "official" about it.
-------------------- “Those people who think they know everything are a great annoyance to those of us who do.” — Isaac Asimov Star Trek Minutiae | Memory Alpha
Registered: Nov 2000
| IP: Logged
quote:Originally posted by MinutiaeMan: I have no illusions that I'm not just as rabid as you. *wipes froth from mouth*
You still have some of the blood of non-believers on your lapel. I'd let you use my hankie, but it's still stained with my tears over BoP scaling inconsistencies. ;-)
quote:I'm just pointing out that you said, "this is the closest to an official indication of what an earlier version might've looked like." Implying that this image's differences were more meaningful than they were supposed to be.
If you think that's what the Constitution used to look like, that's cool. But there's nothing "official" about it.
Absolutely it's not official . . . but it is the *closest* to something official that I know of. "Fauxfficial", if you will.
-------------------- . . . ceterum censeo Carthaginem esse delendam.
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic
