Comments on: That sense of… Enterprise

By: Bigfoot

Bigfoot — Fri, 14 Nov 2008 07:19:44 +0000

Just once, can they put one nacelle in full Warp 9 forward and the other in full Warp 9 reverse, and spin all the Klingons off? Of course, they would need to install seat belts first …

By: McNally

McNally — Fri, 14 Nov 2008 05:54:00 +0000

No, no, a thousand times no. We already know what the Enterprise looked like a few years before the original series. In fact, we know what it looked like a DECADE before the original series took place. And what did it look like?

Almost exactly the same as it did in the original series.

“If you’re going to do Star Trek, there are many things you cannot change. The Enterprise is a visual touchstone for so many people. So if you’re going to do the Enterprise, it better look like the Enterprise, because otherwise, what are you doing?” — J.J. Abrams

I don’t know, Mr. Abrams. What ARE you doing?

By: God and a Half

God and a Half — Thu, 13 Nov 2008 19:05:10 +0000

The saucer looks fine. Perfect even. The neck may be a bit too streamlined for my taste, but nothing too wrong with that. I’m even okay with the shape of the secondary hull – in general – but there are some things which bother me about it. The engines are okay. Sure, they’re much different than anything else we see in TOS or the movies, but that’s fine. Engines get swapped out all the time (look at tuner cars). The big thing that’s bothering me is the warp pylons. They look too much like the ones form the Enterprise-E from the (largely horrible) TNG movies, as opposed to straight or tapering the opposite way, which we see in the earlier forms (even the godawful Enterprise from the godawful Enterprise show). And of course the neck seems to be connected in the middle for some damned reason, which just looks weird, with a taper into the secondary hull which also looks out of place, but isn’t completely unfathomable. Overall: B-.

By: Joseph

Joseph — Thu, 13 Nov 2008 18:30:48 +0000

I am kind of sad to see the inexplicable red glowy bits gone from the nacelles (or maybe they are just not turned on!). Still, this is quite obviously the Enterprise, “no bloody A, B, C or D.”

By: earthandbeyond

earthandbeyond — Thu, 13 Nov 2008 14:52:26 +0000

Seeing this design, I can accept it. While it is a bit different, this movie takes place a few years before TOS, and it could have been refitted to the TOS form.

By: Karnbeln

Karnbeln — Thu, 13 Nov 2008 14:29:36 +0000

I keep seeing Gabe Koerner’s design creeping up in these discussions. And while, yes, it’s closer to the original in basic shape….it’s also incredibly ugly, in my opinion. Greebled to death. With the possible exception of the Buick nacelles, at least the surfaces of the new Enterprise look good, even if one doesn’t agree with some of the shapes.

I also see people saying this is a ripoff of Koerner’s design, but the only similarity (excluding the overall Constitution-like shape) I see is that the nacelles have that shell on top of the Bussard collectors, yielding some similarity in an outline, but not much when the details are compared side by side.

By: tai

tai — Thu, 13 Nov 2008 13:34:52 +0000

I think the Enterprise Refit/Enterprise-A design looks much better than this, more modern, and more like the original Enterprise design. This just seems awkwardly off balance to me. Maybe it’s just a bad angle for this ship.