USS Enterprise (eventually) on Discovery?
- Thread starter EJD1984
- Start date
The saucer has been both lowered (given the shorter neck) and slightly widened (for whatever reason). (I don't think it's been scaled up overall, as all the window arrangements (and thus decks) remain almost identical to the original.) To dovetail with the lower saucer, the angle between the pylons has been slightly widened as well, presumably in order to keep the relative heights and positions of the nacelles and the saucer comparable to the original in both profile and head-on views.
Last edited:
Try as I might, I just don't care all that much for the JJprise and the refit. Of all the Trek ship designs they just look like a collection of pieces that don't fit well together. Like 'design by committee' with the members not agreeing with each other. The result looks very awkward. I don't hate them, but they don't spark much interest for me....maybe that's the way to describe it.
I like this design a lot better, though still with certain reservations:
I agree, best interpretation of that version yet.
Looking at the new images here I realize another reason to love it... It now appears as something which can become the TMP Refit Enterprise without all the mental gymnastics.
Nobody except this guy:
You're just wrong. They're not preeeeeety straight lined. It's immediately obvious from the side view that they're tapered.
The original Enterprise had the same rectangular part in the inner nacelle. Again, just wrong.
Dude. At some point this stops being a discussion, and solely becomes a sad picture of someone trying to scramble different quotes out of context to create some dissonances were there don't exist any.
If you had to put the Enterprise NX-01-nacelles in one of the two categories a) drop-shaped or b) straighlined cylinder, it's obvious in which category they belong. There isn't even an argument to be made.
Also, this is already SO far away already from my original statement, it stops being funny anymore and is solely driven by the power of being self-righteousness in lack of arguments. Start thinking about your own opinions, formulate arguments, or simply stop it. You're not doing anyone a favour by derailing this discussion into stupid word-mincing.
I'm trying to find angles of the TOS and TMP connies that are close to this angle
IMO it looks a bit as if the nacelles aren't as much swept back as they are on the TMP-version. Seems to be a middle-of-the-road variant between the sharply swept back versions (of TMP and the NX-01), a the straight TOS-version.
I'm not sure though. Really would need some direct comparison pictures to confirm or deny.
The saucer seems to be widened to match the nacelles (or the nacelles are further apart to match the saucer)
IMO I think the nacelles actually aren't widened compared to the original. It's only that the neck is shorter, reducing the entire ships' height, and thus needing steeper pylon angles to reach the same relative position toward the saucer. Thus it seems the ship is wider, but in reality it's just more flat.
It kinda' looks like it's overall dimensions might be upscaled, too. That is something we definitely won't know until season 2, though.
Is it sort of a perceived 'hunkering-down effect'?
Like a turtle that has withdrawn / pulled back somewhat and has become more defensive?
I still think that Vengeance, and its shorter neck, has an influence on the perception of menace:
No, it becomes a sad picture of someone completely unable to take responsibility for his own words and admitting to being wrong. You said it was completely straight, and when shown that this wasn't true you started playing with words. That you then blame others for that behaviour is pretty unfortunate.
And don't think that this is personal. It's entirely about your statements.
Last edited:
I'm trying to find angles of the TOS and TMP connies that are close to this angle
I think the fins on the bottom of the nacelles are a nod to the Refit Nacelles that has fins on the rear, not the same angle, but they're there.
Try TMP, after it leaves space dock, or when it resumes warp after Spock fixes the imbalance. It's facing the other way so it'll require flipping but IIRC the angle is very similar.
Well, what do you know. Something we agree on.
For the TOS Connie I just ended up using Star Trek Online which is a really accurate model of it. Couldn't match the angle exactly, but I think I got close.
The number of levels/window rows is almost identical. Good job!
Only the shorter neck is noticable in this regard. No upscaling in terms of additional decks.
I just hope they make her size on-screen roughly comparable to that of the Discovery, and not akin to the ludicrous "official" length differences.
G
Gonzo
Guest
It looks bigger but not to the extent of some estimates I have seen, say around 450m at the absolute most.
Anything smaller and its going to look ridiculous alongside the Discovery unless they try to use camera angles to hide it which would be too obvious.
Is it sort of a perceived 'hunkering-down effect'?
Like a turtle that has withdrawn / pulled back somewhat and has become more defensive?
I still think that Vengeance, and its shorter neck, has an influence on the perception of menace:
Somehow, personally, I think the Discoprise looks even more menacing than the Vengeance - and her whole schtick basically was "evil Enterprise". I can't put my finger on why exactly that is, though.
I'll guess they use some mix of the two - slight upscaling, but always having the ships in clear foreground/background configuration if together in one shot. So that you can't clearly make out the size difference.
I don't think they dare to change the official size of the connie too much, and they are already 'locked-in' with their official size of the Discovery.
Similar threads
