Post A Reply
my profile
|
directory
login
|
search
|
faq
|
forum home
»
Flare Sci-Fi Forums
»
Star Trek
»
Starships & Technology
»
The Corrected Akiraprise...
» Post A Reply
Post A Reply
Login Name:
Password:
Message:
HTML is enabled.
UBB Code™ is enabled.
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Ryan McReynolds: [QB] [QUOTE]Originally posted by Masao: [qb]J, you're not the only one who hoped for that. I think those of you who are willing to accept Akiraprise believe that any ship consistent with 2150 MUST be boring or primitive-looking. With enough time and effort, a great ship that looked liked it belonged in 2150 could have been designed, at least I had hoped. After all, do you think vehicles from 2001, Blade Runner, and the Aliens movies (just to name a few) are boring and primitive? Their levels of technology are far below that of Star Trek in 2150. Even supposedly Victorian technology, like "The Time Machine" and "Nautilus," can look cool when well designed. And I guess you think that all technology produced today looks like a bucket of bolts. The choice between a 2150-consistent ship and a boring ship is a false choice.[/qb][/QUOTE] Indeed... but the very idea of what constitutes a 2150-consistent ship is entirely subjective. I, for one, think that the [i]Enterprise[/i] is such a ship as is, for reasons I feel are probably abundantly clear by now. However, I [i]don't[/i] think that a more, shall we say, "predictably-styled" ship would be boring. Your own work at the Starfleet Museum proves that without a doubt. Any of your designs fit the period very well based on prior information, and John Eaves couldn't have gone wrong going in that direction. Indeed, I was expecting something [i]very[/i] similar to your own Moskva class, to tell you the truth. Nevertheless, I think that the real division among us tech fans is one of expectation and payoff... not a division over what we think the ship looks like. Myself, Siegfried, and others to a lesser extent don't mind that the [i]Enterprise[/i] shatters our preconceptions. Everyone else around here does. As I've said before, I would bet that [i]any[/i] design to come out of the studio at this point would get almost the same reaction unless it was what we expected. That's not to say we don't have our quibbles with the ship itself. If I were in charge, I wouldn't have had an [i]Enterprise[/i] remotely like this one. My own design would probably be similar to most of ours around here. Spheroid/ellipsoid primary hull, cylindrical secondary hull, perpendicular nacelle pylons, and so on. (I'm also fond of slapping some nacelles onto the [i]Sulaco[/i] and painting it white. :) ) But the [i]Enterprise[/i] that will be is no less valid in my book, and I see nothing about it that goes against established continuity. I can see the basis for the argument that the [i]Enterprise[/i] is a copied Akira class, but I have yet to see any support given for the anti-timeframe commentary save, "We all thought it would look like ___." Christ, I don't post here for two years and all of a sudden I'm writing a doctoral thesis every time I respond. :D [/QB][/QUOTE]
Instant Graemlins
Instant UBB Code™
What is UBB Code™?
Options
Disable Graemlins in this post.
*** Click here to review this topic. ***
© 1999-2024 Charles Capps
Powered by UBB.classic™ 6.7.3