Enterprise-A Questions

[Blip]

No, you're telling me to let the matter drop (your own words.) Which is pretty clear that you don't wish to talk about it anymore, and that you wish for me to stop talking about it too. So just like you told me, let's please avoid needless word games. You are welcome to your opinion, and welcome to disagree with mine. But please don't tell me what to do, or who I can and can't talk to. This is not your personal message board. You, however, are welcome to stop talking about it any time you like.

Dude I really, really don't care if you want to talk about anything to other people. Why would I?

I simply asked that you respect that it holds no further interest for me -since it was me, and not the general thread that you'd been quote-replying to on that subtopic; hence letting the matter drop. It's really not that hard dude; if you really feel you can't stop yourself from wasting any more of my life on this I'm happy to just punch Ignore.

 

[Dukhat]

Dude I really, really don't care if you want to talk about anything to other people. Why would I?

I simply asked that you respect that it holds no further interest for me -since it was me, and not the general thread that you'd been quote-replying to on that subtopic; hence letting the matter drop. It's really not that hard dude; if you really feel you can't stop yourself from wasting any more of my life on this I'm happy to just punch Ignore.

You do what you need to do. I will continue talking about this topic whether you continue or not. And lay off the personal insults; that's against the board rules.

 

[Blip]

You do what you need to do. I will continue talking about this topic whether you continue or not. And lay off the personal insults; that's against the board rules.

I don't care if you talk about the topic to anyone else, merely that you stop trying to draw me into endless debate about one single point, to the inevitable result that I'm utterly bored to tears with it.

If you find that somehow personally insulting, that's on you.

 

[Dukhat]

I don't care if you talk about the topic to anyone else, merely that you stop trying to draw me into endless debate about one single point, to the inevitable result that I'm utterly bored to tears with it.

If you find that somehow personally insulting, that's on you.

I was pretty clear how one could interpret that the ships in questions could either be Connies, or not be Connies. I never said it was one way or the other, but I offered evidence that refuted the statement you made that 'those hulls were recognisable, so the question is irrelevant.' They weren't recognizable, and it wasn't irrelevant, and I posted screencap evidence to back up my claims, which you completely ignored. So at this point, there's really nothing more for me to say about the matter, so fine, let's drop it.

 

[B.J.]

Believe it or not, there are noticeable differences between the two saucers. And knowing which model was used for the wreckage IRL, I'd trust that the folks behind the scenes knew what they were doing far better than any Random Internet Guy.

Yes, there are differences between the Galaxy and Nebula saucers on the physical model. But there are few or no differences between them on some of the digital models that have been used due to kitbashing from the Galaxy model.

 

[Blip]

Yes, there are differences between the Galaxy and Nebula saucers on the physical model. But there are few or no differences between them on some of the digital models that have been used due to kitbashing from the Galaxy model.

Yes, I'm aware. But that was somewhat irrelevant to the point, so.

 

[blssdwlf]

Nor, for that matter, is there another ship that uses the Constitution-II starboard nacelle and pylon, so that's probably the TVH ships positively identified, as well.

I dunno. If you let the movie play forward just a bit you can see more of the starboard pylon and it lacks the vent that is seen on the Enterprise. It could be argued that this is not a Connie.

 

[David cgc]

The vent is there. It’s behind Spock’s head at that moment, but you can see it for a split second after McCoy stands up (and briefly blocks it even more).

 

[blssdwlf]

The vent is there. It’s behind Spock’s head at that moment, but you can see it for a split second after McCoy stands up (and briefly blocks it even more).

I see what looks like a shadow from the curvature of the pylon and no sharp feature that looks like the vent.

 

[David cgc]

I don't know what to tell you. The leading edge of the dark spot is vertical, like the vent, there's a white border along the aft edge, like the vent, it's the same color as the larger vent in the same lighting a couple seconds earlier, you can tell from the shadow of the fin at the back of the nacelle that a shadow wouldn't look like that, and there's nothing on the model that could cast a shadow like that... it's the vent.

Also, kind of off-topic, but looking at everyone's backs... how many different back-buttons did they make for the Monster Maroons, and is there any BTS explanation for why there are so many variations?

 

[blssdwlf]

I don't know what to tell you. The leading edge of the dark spot is vertical, like the vent, there's a white border along the aft edge, like the vent, it's the same color as the larger vent in the same lighting a couple seconds earlier, you can tell from the shadow of the fin at the back of the nacelle that a shadow wouldn't look like that, and there's nothing on the model that could cast a shadow like that... it's the vent.

Here is the full sequence. That shadow you think that looks like the vent doesn't have the right shape.

You can see the shadow at this point and it curves around (next to Spock's head). It isn't vertical as we would expect from the vent.

That white border on the aft edge could be a matte line or an edge reflection because from a similar angle you can't see the white border on the aft edge on an actual Connie.

Also, kind of off-topic, but looking at everyone's backs... how many different back-buttons did they make for the Monster Maroons, and is there any BTS explanation for why there are so many variations?

LOL, if those Monster Maroons can have so many variations, surely there could be variations of the Connie in space dock

 

[Dukhat]

I'm not sure what else it could be though (IRL, I mean), other than a reuse of the Enterprise. They only had four models to work with; the Enterprise, the Reliant, the Grissom, and the Excelsior.

 

[blssdwlf]

I'm not sure what else it could be though (IRL, I mean), other than a reuse of the Enterprise. They only had four models to work with; the Enterprise, the Reliant, the Grissom, and the Excelsior.

True, IRL they had four complete models to work with, the Enterprise, the Reliant, the Grissom and the Excelsior. There are also those partial models made for close ups and pyrotechnics and the scene from ST4 only needed parts of a model. Some partial models may be unfinished or not accurately detailed as the original and just a guess, one was used with a warp pylon appearing to be not fully detailed. Without seeing the entire ship, we have room to imagine that those nacelles could be from a class different from the Enterprise, IMHO.

 

[Dukhat]

There are also those partial models made for close ups and pyrotechnics and the scene from ST4 only needed parts of a model.

Which partial model would it have been, though? It would have had to be something made for TMP, TWOK or TSFS, and not something battle-damaged, because the nacelle/pylon appears to be clean. The only partial model I’m aware of was the engineering hull that was shot at by the Reliant in TWOK (which did not have a nacelle) and the self-destructed model built for TSFS.

 

[DSG2k]

Here is the full sequence.

With apologies, I'm going to have to disagree on the vent thing. One important detail to remember is that the pylons aren't flat-sided. They're curved, like truncated ellipses. As a result, a detail on the rear half of a pylon might become invisible from shallow front angles. That is to say, the faint visible edge of the upper little funny corner vent does demonstrate that it is a Constitution-style pylon.

Here's an excellent model from Michael Wiley, superimposed, placed atop the image you supplied . . . such scene-matching is difficult to get just-so, but it should at least demonstrate that the model is fairly close.



Now, let's attempt to position and overlay the model over more movie frames:



The visibilty of the front pylon edge gives a good spatial cue for positioning. I tried to maintain the angle and 'fly by' the Wiley 1701, but in any case you can see that, at a roughly proper angle, there's simply not a lot of that vent visible.

 

[blssdwlf]

With apologies, I'm going to have to disagree on the vent thing. One important detail to remember is that the pylons aren't flat-sided. They're curved, like truncated ellipses. As a result, a detail on the rear half of a pylon might become invisible from shallow front angles. That is to say, the faint visible edge of the upper little funny corner vent does demonstrate that it is a Constitution-style pylon.

I've done more than my share of camera matching and 3D modeling so I understand what you're getting at. However, based on how much of the larger vent we can see as a reference, the smaller vent should be much more apparent at the filmed angle, IMHO.

Here's an excellent model from Michael Wiley, superimposed, placed atop the image you supplied . . . such scene-matching is difficult to get just-so, but it should at least demonstrate that the model is fairly close.

Unfortunately your sample model is not close enough in the most important parts. There is clearly some very different proportions and geometry on the warp pylon and nacelle apparent in your overlay so I don't really see how your demonstration is accurate enough to be valid.

Are you able find a more accurate model?

Now, let's attempt to position and overlay the model over more movie frames:



The visibilty of the front pylon edge gives a good spatial cue for positioning. I tried to maintain the angle and 'fly by' the Wiley 1701, but in any case you can see that, at a roughly proper angle, there's simply not a lot of that vent visible.