posted
Don't be surprised if tomorrow you read that this image is false.
-------------------- "A film made in 2008 isn't going to look like a TV series from 1966 if it wants to make any money. As long as the characters act the same way, and the spirit of the story remains the same then it's "real" Star Trek. Everything else is window dressing." -StCoop
Registered: Jun 2000
| IP: Logged
Anyway, about the picture: I'm sure that the possibility exists that this could be some sort of interm design, but it's certainly *not* an Akira. The nacelles are all wrong, and the main hull only has have of the "catamaran" style. My though is that the extension aft of the saucer is solid, shaped like a "hump" atop the saucer section. The nacelles probably angle downwards, thus confirming the "upside-down" look purported by AICN.
The "hump" section will likely not contain the main deflector (if the ship actually has one). Instead, it may be integrated into a blister on the underside of the ship as on the Akira, or alternatively in a seperate pod. It'll be interesting to see how our hypothses pan out when official pictures are released.
Everyone remember when the first pic of the E-E was accidentally seen in an interview with Berman about "First Contact"? It wasn't a week before people had pretty accurate ships rendered in 3-D, based on a fuzzy top view. I'm sure the same will be with the Pre-E.
posted
The way I see it, this ship is basically a TOS (not pre-TOS) Akira, which can't really be backdated so easily. Akira is a 24th C design because of its layout, not because of the curviness of its components. It's sort of like constructing a stealth fighter out of sticks and canvas and saying that it's a World War I fighter.
Like Akira, this ship seems to have to booms extending from the secondary hull connected to a rear pod, which is fairly small. There's clearly a space in that rear extension. My guess is that the nacelles are above the saucer, since the light from the left is on the inner surface of the starboard support. You can seem a hint of impulse emitters at the 135 and 225 degree positions (4:30 and 7:30). The front of the saucer also looks a bit squared off, so maybe something is buried up there.
We shall see if this is the real deal.
-------------------- When you're in the Sol system, come visit the Starfleet Museum
posted
I'm having a hard time buying this. I mean, that is the Akira. Just at a very low level of detail. Maybe with different nacelles, but maybe not even that. I still agree with Scully.
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
posted
Mark Nguyen: Doctor heh? Nice to know my Cynicism in parmounts ability to keep a secret was justified. Now all I need is 161m for length and I've got the double
As for the image does it appear to have a spine running down the center of the Saucer? It could be a lighting effect exept there appears to be a slight v cutout at the neck?
Does anybody else think it wierd to be anylzing a logo?
posted
Well if you look at the fall of the 'shadow' or the light... the light is coming from our left... and casting a shadow - there are two large 'spindles' that stick out over the saucer section (their shadows are cast on the saucer section and not right next to them - but a bit further away suggesting height)
Also the light shows that the nacelles angle upwards...
-------------------- "Bears. Beets. Battlestar Galactica." - Jim Halpert. (The Office)
posted
I'm starting to agree with the original look at it. It's an Akira Class saucer with Constitution Class nacelles attached to it. At the same time the plaque beside it [Voyager production thing] should make it obvious that the plaque is a fake. I mean think about it, it wasn't until after Voyager's production ended that Enterprise had been dediced upon by TPTB.
-------------------- Later, J _ _ _ _ _ ___ _ _ _ _ _ The Last Person to post in the late Voyager Forum. Bashing both Voyager, Enterprise, and "The Bun" in one glorious post.
posted
Remember when Voyager was being made, TV Guide ran a preview? They had a supposed image of the ship, but it was different from the finalized Voyager. It had downturned nacelle pylons and different nacelles.
So I believe that right now the final design of the ship still isn't set in stone.
-------------------- "Lotta people go through life doing things badly. Racing's important to men who do it well. When you're racing, it's life. Anything that happens before or after is just waiting."
posted
I duno about that. By this time, they've finished the pilot episode and are working on the subseqent ones. Assuming this follows established Treks, many of the sets will feature *some* kind of diagrams of the ship proper. I'm fairly certain that at this point, the ship design has been long since handed to both the set guys and the CGI guys. A wee bit of insight can be read here:
posted
Regarding that argument, I feel that everyone should go and look at the diagrams of the Enterprise-B displayed on said ships bridge in Generations. Notice anything wrong?
Of course, that was a movie. But still, filming before the model's finished is not without precedent.
-------------------- 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.
Topic Closed
Printer-friendly view of this topic