• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

USS Enterprise (eventually) on Discovery?

One thing that I notice is that the 'additional detail' makes it look as if the surface is made up of individual tiles. From an engineering standpoint, that did not go well for the shuttles because they kept falling off.

I much prefer the smoother look, without all of the clutter.

The refit has hull panelling like that. The edges are just not as noticeable.

The TOS Connie has it in some appearences outside of TOS, but the filming model at the Smithsonian doesn't seem to.
 
And yet the point remains that they are two completely different technologies. Can you acknowledge this?

Yes, they are two different technologies. Which again is irrelevant if those technologies are being used to perform the same function.
 
I like the curve, too, but it makes sense to remove it if only because having it just cuts into an entire deck for no reason.

Hard to say it makes sense unless we know the reason for it the curve. Besides, it is a TV show, everyone tells me looks trump everything. It looked better with the curve.
 
I like the curve, too, but it makes sense to remove it if only because having it just cuts into an entire deck for no reason.

My take on that is that sometimes they put form above function to achieve a certain aesthetic. You see it in architecture and lots of things. In-universe, they might have felt that it didn't take away enough from the decks to be a critical issue and went with the benefit to the look.
 
The refit has hull panelling like that. The edges are just not as noticeable.

The TOS Connie has it in some appearences outside of TOS, but the filming model at the Smithsonian doesn't seem to.

This is what there was on the 11-footer. It was just not easily seen in ordinary light, which I think was a good thing:

Saucer1.jpg


Their 'restoration' brings that much more into prominence and in my opinion it looks horrible:

Saucer2.jpg


:angryrazz:
 
Yes, they are two different technologies. Which again is irrelevant if those technologies are being used to perform the same function.
Incorrect. If deterrent technologies have invalidated one, the new technology, especially if it is of a significantly different aspect, is more of a surprise.

For instance whenever the first use of cannon's and hand-gonnes in battle in Europe was, possibly Crecy in 1346, its probably doubtful that the opposition commanders's responce was "ah yes a device that makes things move very fast from it to hurt us and take down our fortified buildings. We've seen such things before. It's just a ranged weapon and they've upgraded."

Essentially we're discussing one or two words in a script. There have been far larger things invalidated since TOS than whether or not ANY kind of cloaking technology ever existed.
 
I visited a local model/hobby supply store and they had a fully built, fully painted Polar Light's TOS Enterprise model that looked exactly like the 11 footer at the Air and Space Museum. It was a beautiful site. Next time I go up there I'll get some pictures.
 
Incorrect. If deterrent technologies have invalidated one, the new technology, especially if it is of a significantly different aspect, is more of a surprise.

For instance whenever the first use of cannon's and hand-gonnes in battle in Europe was, possibly Crecy in 1346, its probably doubtful that the opposition commanders's responce was "ah yes a device that makes things move very fast from it to hurt us and take down our fortified buildings. We've seen such things before. It's just a ranged weapon and they've upgraded."

Essentially we're discussing one or two words in a script. There have been far larger things invalidated since TOS than whether or not ANY kind of cloaking technology ever existed.

I’m going by Kirk and Spock’s dialogue, which clearly stated that neither had heard of any technology which could render a ship invisible, and was the norm for over 40 years until both ENT and DSC (both prequels to TOS) came along and showed something different.
 
I’m going by Kirk and Spock’s dialogue, which clearly stated that neither had heard of any technology which could render a ship invisible, and was the norm for over 40 years until both ENT and DSC (both prequels to TOS) came along and showed something different.

This. The dialogue isn't ambiguous at all. It is poor form by both the Enterprise and Discovery writers that they couldn't/can't do a prequel without a crutch.
 
This is what there was on the 11-footer. It was just not easily seen in ordinary light, which I think was a good thing:

Saucer1.jpg


Their 'restoration' brings that much more into prominence and in my opinion it looks horrible:

Saucer2.jpg


:angryrazz:

You should look at the 2016 restoration. This one was far from the original intent.
 
AFAIK those Shield Grid/Hull lines were intended originally, but were drawn onto the model in pencil, to preserve the mostly plain and clean surface of the hull.

When it was previously restored (the one before 2018/2017) went overboard on adding those details. The more recent restoration was a lot more respectful and representative of the original.
 
I'm not seeing any greeble on the DSC Enterprice.

It has very smooth surfaces, only broken up by hull panel lines and the occasional phaser emitter or light.

but nothing that fits the model definition of greeble.

Hphpoia.png


Also, it is now live in Adversaries

cO8hesK.png

Ugh..it looks like the refit and NX had a lovechild that split the difference...

It they're gonna bevel the neck at the base, why not add a smaller refit style torpedo bay? It looks strange bare, like it's missing a part.
 
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top