It looks VERY close to the Akira design... I love it!
(please note that this may be a hoax)
I'd like to add that the designer(s) have made an excelent choice to make the ship look like (arguably?) the best looking official Federation ship ever to be seen on screen. IF this is indeed the top view of the pre-Enterprise I'm more convinced now the see this series than before.
[ June 29, 2001: Message edited by: NightWing ]
-------------------- "And they had other stuff (...) like pictures of the Vulcan woman on Enterprise." "OOOOhhh! Uhm, I mean: Nerds!"
Cartman
just made by the Presbyterian Church
Member # 256
posted
That is an Akira (or an adaptation of the design, anyway), and I very much doubt the new ship will look anything like it. Starfleet hasn't been founded yet, the primary/secondary hull configuration hasn't been adopted yet, and this has hoax written all over it.
[Edited for your convenience] Right Here [/Edited for your convenience]
[ June 30, 2001: Message edited by: The_Evil_Lord ]
posted
Evil Lord's right, that pretty much is an Akira. I share doubts that the final pre-UFP ship will resemble that in any way. If it carries any familiar design configurations we've witnessed evolve SINCE TOS, then I don't think they've done their job very well.
-------------------- "To the Enterprise and the Stargazer. Old girlfriends we'll never meet again." - Scotty
quote: ...the primary/secondary hull configuration hasn't been adopted yet
Really? When was that ever said?
-------------------- "Existence is random. Has no pattern save what we imagine after staring at it too long. No meaning save what we choose to impose. This rudderless world is not shaped by vague metaphysical forces. It is not God who kills the children. Not fate that butchers them or destiny that feeds them to the dogs. It?s us. Only us." Rorschach
Cartman
just made by the Presbyterian Church
Member # 256
posted
It's one of those semi-canon facts, based upon the design of the Daedalus class (which was supposedly the first Starfleet ship to demonstrate such a configuration, according to the encyclopedia).
Registered: Nov 1999
| IP: Logged
posted
Of course, the best part of the nagging fan-boy criticism of Enterprise is watching the same people who'll quite happily ignore Okua's chronology at will deceide that EVERYTHING WRITTEN IN THE ENCYLOPDEDIA IS A HOLY TABLET FROM GOD.
And you're wrong, anyway.
Daedalus-class starship (Italics mine):
"These ships were amoung the first to demonstrate the primary/secondary hull and warp nacelle designs that would become characteristic of Starfleet vessels".
Not "The first". "Amoung the first". Which is a world of difference. Especially since we're talking about ships which are only around ten years older than whatever the Enterprise will be.
-------------------- Yes, you're despicable, and... and picable... and... and you're definitely, definitely despicable. How a person can get so despicable in one lifetime is beyond me. It isn't as though I haven't met a lot of people. Goodness knows it isn't that. It isn't just that... it isn't... it's... it's despicable.
Cartman
just made by the Presbyterian Church
Member # 256
posted
Well, erpz. A loophole. My bad. You got me there(didn't really expect anyone to look it up though ).
Btw (1), anything that's in the encyclopedia is about as canon as canon can get (you dig?). Pretty damn close to a holy tablet from God if you ask me. Btw (2), it's among the first.
posted
If we were paying attention, I'm currently on a kick of putting in "ou" where it doesn't belong. It's partly to annoy the Candians who can't spell "color", and partly to annoy the Yanks who can't spell "colour", and partly to annoy Omega, who can't spell.
-------------------- Yes, you're despicable, and... and picable... and... and you're definitely, definitely despicable. How a person can get so despicable in one lifetime is beyond me. It isn't as though I haven't met a lot of people. Goodness knows it isn't that. It isn't just that... it isn't... it's... it's despicable.
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
quote:Btw (1), anything that's in the encyclopedia is about as canon as canon can get (you dig?). Pretty damn close to a holy tablet from God if you ask me.
I think that the Okudas make it pretty damn clear that anything in the Ency that is not "material from finished aired episodes" are their conjectures and are not official/canon. They usually identify most conjectures.
Okuda conjectures aren't bad. They generally aren't like (some) novels (comic books, RPGs, video games, etc.) where people are pulling stuff out of their asses just to explain something that hasn't been explained onscreen. They generally base them off of: (1) the episode writer's intention (2) scenes that were cut (3) material that was in the script but not stated onscreen, such as character names (4) information that was heavily implied but not directly stated onscreen, or (5) a logical extrapolation of the facts stated onscreen.
One would hope that an episode writer tries to stick with the facts that have been stated onscreen, but should they be expected to interpret them the same way that the Okuda's do? Hell while the Daedalus class is canon and the design is canon, they have never been canonically tied together (as stated previously in this thread). All we really know about the Daedalus class is that it was in service in 2167 and retired in 2196. We don't even know if it did have the primary/secondary hull configuration, let alone that it was one of the first ship designs to have it. They either pulled that little nugget from their anal cavities or perhaps based it upon a kind of general agreement between the people on the Star Trek staff that this was the case (behind the scenes lore). It probably was a tip of the hat to the fact that it was the real life prototype for the whole primary/secondary hull configuration that has pretty much dominated Trek ship designs for 35 years.
Bottom line: The writers seems to have a hard time considering facts that have been restated 1000 times over onscreen as "a holy tablet from god." They obviously don't consider the Okuda's conjectures to be and neither do I.
But they are interesting to read.
[ July 01, 2001: Message edited by: Obi Juan ]
-------------------- "Existence is random. Has no pattern save what we imagine after staring at it too long. No meaning save what we choose to impose. This rudderless world is not shaped by vague metaphysical forces. It is not God who kills the children. Not fate that butchers them or destiny that feeds them to the dogs. It?s us. Only us." Rorschach
posted
And I'm sure that the Okuda's themselves have said that their conjectures could quite easily be ignored, if it improves an episode.
-------------------- Yes, you're despicable, and... and picable... and... and you're definitely, definitely despicable. How a person can get so despicable in one lifetime is beyond me. It isn't as though I haven't met a lot of people. Goodness knows it isn't that. It isn't just that... it isn't... it's... it's despicable.
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
).
Printer-friendly view of this topic
