This pic was posted on STARTREK.COM. SOmeone on another BB pointed out it could be a future Enterprise. Pretty interesting eh? - - - - - - - - - - - - -
[ February 26, 2004, 10:29 PM: Message edited by: TSN ]
Posted by Futurama Guy (Member # 968) on :
Okay
#1 - put a spoiler alert up!
#2 - why the hell can't the execs in chart of previews for Star Trek make things surprises anymore? I mean they totally gave half of Nemesis away (or at least a number of eye candy surprises) in its previews and now with this they took away a whole lot of mystery of this here future-ship. Those Bastards!
#3 - It kind of looks like a Cheyenne Class from what is visible.
Posted by Mark Nguyen (Member # 469) on :
It's not. At the same time though, the angle it's at doesn't make it look overly symetrical...
Mark
Posted by RAMA4 (Member # 1229) on :
quote:Originally posted by Mark Nguyen: It's not. At the same time though, the angle it's at doesn't make it look overly symetrical...
Mark
That's only because you can see one side. If you saw behind his head you might see a nacelle..
But its all speculation anyway.
RAMA
Posted by Futurama Guy (Member # 968) on :
quote:Originally posted by Mark Nguyen: It's not. At the same time though, the angle it's at doesn't make it look overly symetrical...
Mark
"It kind of looks like" not "hey look, it's a Cheyenne". Think more of it as a comment on how '24th Century' that ship looks for likely being morelike 29th Century, rather than a comment of starship design ignorance... Posted by RAMA4 (Member # 1229) on :
quote:Originally posted by Futurama Guy:
quote:Originally posted by Mark Nguyen: It's not. At the same time though, the angle it's at doesn't make it look overly symetrical...
Mark
"It kind of looks like" not "hey look, it's a Cheyenne". Think more of it as a comment on how '24th Century' that ship looks for likely being morelike 29th Century, rather than a comment of starship design ignorance...
Could be a timeship/starship. How does it look like a Cheyenne, they have 4 engines??
RAMA
Posted by Dat (Member # 302) on :
quote:Originally posted by RAMA4:
quote:Originally posted by Mark Nguyen: It's not. At the same time though, the angle it's at doesn't make it look overly symetrical...
Mark
That's only because you can see one side. If you saw behind his head you might see a nacelle..
But its all speculation anyway.
RAMA
I think he meant the bottom half (more like the starboard ventral nacelle) should also be partially visible if it's supposed to represent a Cheyenne or something similar.
Posted by Dukhat (Member # 341) on :
Major, major, MAJOR (get the idea?) Spoilers ahead... $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ Apparently, according to a very reliable source, "Azati Prime" will feature a 26th century Federation, and more specifically, a 26th century Enterprise, the Enterprise-J. If this is indeed the Ent-J, then I'm very unimpressed. I would have figured that by the 26th century, warp drive would have become obsolete (if that is indeed a warp nacelle).
So there's going to be 12 Enterprises in 400 years. A pretty awful track record, considering that just the Ent-D herself was supposed to last for 100 years.
*edit* (I originally thought that the May ep "E-Squared" would feature the 26th century Ent-J as well, but I might be in error.)
$ $ $ $ $ $
$ $ $ $ $
$ $ End Spoiler space...
[ February 26, 2004, 09:14 PM: Message edited by: Dukhat ]
Posted by leuckinc (Member # 729) on :
Spoilers? $$ $$ $$
Enterprise - J? You think they would come up with a better name. J? Thats sad. But it does leave room for the other ships.
Posted by Malnurtured Snay (Member # 411) on :
Y'know, what the hell happens when the USS Enterprise NCC-1701-Z is destroyed ... do we get a USS Enterprise NCC-1701-A1?
Posted by Dukhat (Member # 341) on :
AA.
BTW, Jeff, it's almost one in the morning. You should be in bed.
Posted by TSN (Member # 31) on :
1701-AA, perhaps. Of the new show "Star Trek: 12 Steps".
Posted by Futurama Guy (Member # 968) on :
quote:Originally posted by Dat:
quote:Originally posted by RAMA4:
quote:Originally posted by Mark Nguyen: It's not. At the same time though, the angle it's at doesn't make it look overly symetrical...
Mark
That's only because you can see one side. If you saw behind his head you might see a nacelle..
But its all speculation anyway.
RAMA
I think he meant the bottom half (more like the starboard ventral nacelle) should also be partially visible if it's supposed to represent a Cheyenne or something similar.
This is what I meant regarding the similarity**...
**Key word: "similiarity" - which seems to escape those not catching what I originally was getting at...and that is ignoring the nacelle count.
Posted by Aban Rune (Member # 226) on :
I'm just glad it isn't supposed to be a 29th century ship.
Personally, I think the idea of seeing a 26th Century Federation is kind of cool. Probably having to do with Future Guy's faction in the Temporal Cold War.
I'm also glad we might get to see some new Federation ships. I had feared those days were over.
Posted by Dukhat (Member # 341) on :
quote:I'm also glad we might get to see some new Federation ships.
So am I. I just wish that John Eaves wasn't designing them. Not only are his ship designs unoriginal, but in this particular case, this ship from the 26th century looks an awful lot like the ship with the same namesake from the 24th. (Granted, I realize that all I'm seeing here is an obscured computer image and not the actual thing, but from what I do see, that's what it looks like to me).
Posted by AndrewR (Member # 44) on :
I wonder if the crew of the 26th century ship encounter the NX-Enterprise and go "this isn't the original Enterprise!"
Cause Archer might get a big head thinking that all the suffixes are in honour of HIS ship - and not Kirk's ship.
Although due to the temporal cold war - maybe everything like the E-J is crapola?
Posted by Krenim (Member # 22) on :
quote:Originally posted by TSN: 1701-AA, perhaps. Of the new show "Star Trek: 12 Steps".
Heh.
Seriously, though... That might be what the 29th Century NCV prefix is for. As NCC registry numbers get so huge and suffix letters get close to Z, Starfleet does a "reboot."
Posted by Harry (Member # 265) on :
It looks like a Nebula crashing into some weird TAS design.
Posted by J (Member # 608) on :
quote:Originally posted by leuckinc: Spoilers? $$ $$ $$
Enterprise - J? You think they would come up with a better name. J? Thats sad. But it does leave room for the other ships.
HEY, what's wrong with J... J's a great letter. You take back your insensitive remarks
Now, back to the story... the picture looks like a historical image of the saucer for a Galaxy Class starship--- why make a big deal of it?
Posted by Harry (Member # 265) on :
Because it has a freakishly skinny secondary hull.
Anyway, the future Enterprise is actually supposed to turn up in "E2", unless the E-J is involved in the upcoming "Azati Prime" arc, in which case it could appear in multiple episodes.
Posted by Identity Crisis (Member # 67) on :
Tangential - Did they use I or not?
Some alphanumeric systems don't use I (or O) because they look too much like the numeral. e.g. UK car number plates use a letter to indicate the year of issue, but skip I and O; (and use Q for other purposes).
So maybe Starfleet jumped straight from 1701-H to 1701-J to avoid confusion with the (Ambassador class?) NCC-17011.
Posted by B.J. (Member # 858) on :
quote:Originally posted by Identity Crisis: Tangential - Did they use I or not?
Some alphanumeric systems don't use I (or O) because they look too much like the numeral. e.g. UK car number plates use a letter to indicate the year of issue, but skip I and O; (and use Q for other purposes).
So maybe Starfleet jumped straight from 1701-H to 1701-J to avoid confusion with the (Ambassador class?) NCC-17011.
I design parts as a solid model, but occasionally I have to add a 2D section cut or view to help define something. According to our design procedures, we're not to use the letters I, O, Q, S, X, or Z. This group of letters seems to be pretty standard across all engineering disciplines.
B.J.
Posted by Dukhat (Member # 341) on :
quote:Anyway, the future Enterprise is actually supposed to turn up in "E2", unless the E-J is involved in the upcoming "Azati Prime" arc, in which case it could appear in multiple episodes.
No, it's not.
Spoilers: $ $ $ $ $
$ $ $ $ $ $ $ The Enterprise-J is only in "Azati Prime." "E-Squared" also has an Enterprise in it, but it's not the Ent-J.
Posted by Spike (Member # 322) on :
Where'd you get that from?
Posted by PsyLiam (Member # 73) on :
quote:Originally posted by Identity Crisis: Some alphanumeric systems don't use I (or O) because they look too much like the numeral. e.g. UK car number plates use a letter to indicate the year of issue, but skip I and O; (and use Q for other purposes).
It's not interesting at all, but...not anymore. We now use the last two digits of the year to indicate, er, year. It's Y2K just waiting to happen again. People will think that 100 year old cars are brand new come 2001, and madness will ensue.
And we didn't use Z either, presumably because it looks a bit like S.
Posted by Dukhat (Member # 341) on :
quote:Where'd you get that from?
From the same source I got the Azati Prime spoilers from. I don't want to say more, lest I get accused of uber-spoiling.
Posted by Dat (Member # 302) on :
I don't see why "I" would be skipped. The hull would be lettered NCC-1701-I, not NCC-1701I. Granted 1701I may appear in some graphics, but that would be very rare. Same with NCC-1701-O and any other letters that may be confused with numbers or other letters.
Posted by J (Member # 608) on :
quote:Originally posted by Harry: Because it has a freakishly skinny secondary hull.
I think you're all nuts... it looks like the GCS saucer, with the back side in the foreground, near Archer's back.
That design on the front looks more like part of the panel, not the ship.
My money would be on a GCS saucer, we'll all see when the episode airs.
Posted by Futurama Guy (Member # 968) on :
quote:Originally posted by Spike: Where'd you get that from?
I saw rumor about the Enterprise encountering another Enterprise is 'E2' on Trekweb. But I was thinking it to be like the instance that Voyager encountered itself in 'Parallax' or the Enterprise-D did itself in 'Time Squared'. Then
I saw these pics...and I don't know what to believe! Posted by Cartman (Member # 256) on :
"...or the Enterprise-D did itself in 'Time Squared'."
Or in Parallels, or in Yesterday's Enterprise (sort of), or in All Good Things...
Posted by U.S.S. Captain, NCC-M1K3 (Member # 709) on :
they should put tasha yar on board just for shits and giggles.. or maybe skip the bullcrap and make Sela the tactical officer
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Cool]](cool.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Eek!]](eek.gif)