Poll Enterprise-D vs. Enterprise-E, which do you like better?

Discussion in 'Star Trek: The Next Generation' started by TroiFan4ever, May 27, 2023.

?

Which ship do you like better (or think is better)?

  1. Galaxy Class Starship (Enteprise-D)

  2. Sovereign Class Starship (Enteprise-E)

Results are only viewable after voting.
  1. Arpy

    Arpy Vice Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2001
    Exactly. It's designed to look stylish, not like a real life ship we'll one explore space with. It screams kewl sci-fi movie, and I can never take it seriously. Plus it looks like the Voyager-A, not an Enterprise.

    The D's biggest problem is that it was designed for SD screens. Its effect on HD is not as sharp and organic. I'd love for an artist to reinterpret it a bit. The top heaviness is not a problem: this is space. Does the NX-01 look like it's scraping the ground the entire time, not having a body below it? Actually to me it does, part of why I don't like it, but part of what's impressive about the D is that broad gravity-defying saucer. It's the coolest place to work ever. Plus it's brilliant for having a larger saucer and smaller engines; per Probert, that's by design to show how the technology has progressed since ye olde Constitution Class. I love that extra bit of verisimilitude. It makes the universe seem more real.
     
  2. KamenRiderBlade

    KamenRiderBlade Rear Admiral Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2012
    Haven't they not released the new pics for Voyager-A yet?

    The PathFinder class that is used for Voyager-B is pretty nice, I would want some modifications to it obviously, but overall, the shape is fine.
     
  3. Arpy

    Arpy Vice Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2001
    Not the V-A from PRO. The instant you see the Sovereign you wonder where its neck is.

    This is the problem with the NX as well. It was the brainchild of executives who looked at the Akira and said make the Enterprise this. Gross. In the same show, when it came time to show a future Enterprise they continued the erasure of the Enterprise configuration and made the J a future NX.

    They’re all fine for other ships, but the Enterprise should look like the Enterprise. Witness the F and the G and probably the H.
     
  4. Dukhat

    Dukhat Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2007
    Location:
    Maryland, USA
    Yes. That's his design modus: coolness over logical functionality. I'm not saying that's a bad thing, but it's definitely what he does. It looks fine for the Sovereign, though.

    No, just the B in PIC. Probably the first time a successor hero ship has been shown before the original.
     
  5. KamenRiderBlade

    KamenRiderBlade Rear Admiral Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2012
    The lack of a neck is a logical progression from the Intrepid Class's design lineage along with making the ship "Tougher".

    WWE's Otis is human proof that you can be ridiculously tough & lack a neck.


    Yeah, the neck's existence has been a constant state of flux over time for the base StarFleet StarShip design configuration.
    - Thin neck (TOS Connie)
    - Thick neck (Excelsior class)
    - Short neck (Neo Constitution / Constitution 3 class)
    - Fat neck (Olympic class)
    - Collapsed Neck (Intrepid class)
    - No Neck (31st Century StarFleet Ships)
    - Dual Necks (Odyssey class)
    - etc.


    Unfortunately, the precedence has been set for lack of a neck with the NX-class.
    You can't undo the past, so let's just learn to live with it.
    The vast majority of ships named Enterprise will have some form of neck.
    So it should be fine.
     
  6. C.E. Evans

    C.E. Evans Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2001
    Location:
    Ferguson, Missouri, USA
    I like to think that the Enterprise-D was atypical of Galaxy-class starships, and that a lot of her missions in TNG were due to her status as the Federation flagship (you don't send your top ship away for years and years, IMO). Even so, that Enterprise did investigate a lot of the unknown during her brief time in service, even if those unknowns were mysterious things that popped up well within Federation space. I also like to think that the interior upgrades we saw in Generations were in preparation for an actual long-term exploration mission into uncharted space, but fate had other plans...

    To me, the Enterprise-D and the Enterprise-E were both long-range multipurpose starships that could do a wide variety of missions. IMO, both were comparable designs, although the Enterprise-E seemed to be a leaner & meaner vessel with no provisions for regular civilian passengers. Otherwise, I don't think one is better than the other, but one may be better suited to a particular task than the other. For exploration, I'd go with the Enterprise-D in a heartbeat. For interdictions, it's the Enterprise-E. Both ships can do either task when called upon, but that's who I think is more optimized for each.
     
    jackoverfull likes this.
  7. Arpy

    Arpy Vice Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2001
    To me it just says smaller. There's less there there. Voyager is a light explorer, no neck, compared to the Enterprise's heavy explorer, full neck. ...obviously the neck is not the only distinguishing difference – size, width of saucer, etc.

    The iconic ones anyway. :D
     
  8. KamenRiderBlade

    KamenRiderBlade Rear Admiral Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2012
    NX-class is iconic in it's own way.
     
  9. ED-209

    ED-209 Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2019
    Location:
    ED-209
    Different answer for each question, which do I like more - the D - which is better - the E - it's a more advanced class.
     
  10. Ragitsu

    Ragitsu Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    Nov 1, 2021
    Enterprise-D: "This is the last time I stick my neck out for you."
     
  11. Qonundrum

    Qonundrum Vice Admiral Admiral

    "D" for me.

    It is a more original design, albeit cheaper in some ways - the lack of nacelle adornments, and even the snap-lock look of where the nacelles snap into the engineering hull for easier assembly or whatever the reason was being one of them. (which is far easier to spot on the blu-ray, but even then...)

    The phaser arrays are so much fun to think about. Each turret node can be angled in roughly 300 degrees (not unlike what the TOS/film 1701 could do, save for lack of nodes), with the potential of multiple beams from each array - though instead the f/x shots always show two beams from either side converging from an ultimate single node. Possibly due to the power level needed. Each nacelle pylon has an array, both top and bottom of saucer has an array, etc...

    The ship isn't as photogenic from some angles, but it's a spacecraft and the laws of terrestrial physics and pesky gravity don't apply and I never cared for it when they showed the ship inside Earth's orbit, or any planet's orbit.

    That said, it looks perfect from other angles, and can indeed carry the visual cue of zippy speed despite the oblong saucer betraying it in other angles - which initially (in 1987) gave me the impression the designer saw the old ship model, imagined what it would look like if sat on by a bored elephant, and penciled in the rough draft as a result.

    The separation issue - the idea was dropped because the time needed to separate allegedly hampered the drama. In the few times the capability was used, the drama still seemed fairly ratcheted up. But how many plotlines could make appropriate use of the concept before it got diluted down? Plus, I suspect some dislike the shape of just the Engineering hull. But, again, aesthetics in outer space. After all, look at the Borg cube as the ultimate example and/or po-faced* parody of the idea of ships in outer space having to look aerodynamic and aesthetically pleasing... though to an extent, the latter is going to have to be the case for entertainment purposes. Showing an "ugly" ship, however "ugly" can objectively vs subjectively defined as - of course - would probably nullify some of the drama as well.

    * as in "parody not meant to be a joke in a comedic sense"​

    Best of all, any initial nitpicks of the ship in 1987 melted away in 1994 when seeing GEN on the big screen. The design of the model really lent itself to the big screen with ease.

    I do adore the "D" for everything that it does.

    The "E" I'll go back and forth on.

    Despite the TNG movies ditching the Galaxy class, regardless of how cool it looked, nobody's going to blame them for doing a new model design and - yeah - all in all, it's pretty solid.

    It looks sleeker, due to its length of course, but is clearly an update of the "A" with bits of "D" added. Nacelle adornments do look terrific and are artsy, but that lower hangar/storage bay in the aft doesn't impress, though if you look at the "D" blueprints they have storage bay doors shown as well. Shame they never got used... if the actual TNG movies had been stronger, I could have a field day headcanoning or wishing to see more of the ship. But a movie is not just pretty visuals, which can only serve to complement strong plotting and can't really supplant it. (That said, seeing the ramming scene in NEM was fantastic and managed to be deservedly gripping, even if surrounding plot elements were too many chucked in...)

    The yellow deflector dish is a break from the mold, and it grew on me. But I did miss the blue...

    Of course, the "E"'s nacelles also break the other mold, that of how the technology improved for several decades and yielding smaller nacelles. I suppose it made enough difference to have longer ones generate the field via less power or whatever treknobabble... then again, how "All Good Things" added a third nacelle and how VOY did the flappy-wings nacelle design to counter the fabric of space in the dumb "55mph but in outer space" episode that was promptly glossed over like a cheap arcade token, not quite unlike the one you found last week when cleaning up the basement and realized how much fun it was in the 80s going to arcades and then wondering why you'd misplaced one...

    At the end of the day, I still prefer the "D".
     
    Ragitsu likes this.
  12. Qonundrum

    Qonundrum Vice Admiral Admiral

    ^^this
    Geordi's explanation and thoughtfulness of WHY it was removed from the Veridian system, et al, is superlative and sublime. Anyone who collects old cars, computers, etc, would do exactly what Geordi (and drones and assistants) would do - so very relatable!
     
  13. Vger23

    Vger23 Vice Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2014
    Location:
    Enterprise bowling alley
    I like them both very much, but in recent years, I find the D to be the more creative and iconic design. The inside of the E is also very generic compared to the D.
     
    Ragitsu, Space Socialist and Galileo7 like this.
  14. Bry_Sinclair

    Bry_Sinclair Vice Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Sep 28, 2009
    Location:
    Scotland
    The C :lol:
     
    Morpheus 02 likes this.
  15. Mojochi

    Mojochi Rear Admiral Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2007
    The E is a ship. The D is a home. You can infer the point of each from just that, & I much prefer the point of the latter. Star Trek imho isn't just about traveling among the stars. It's about us living out among the stars. There must be a home for that.
     
  16. Herbert

    Herbert Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2017
    Location:
    Herbert
    That's what colonies are for.

    When TNG premiered I thought the Ent D looked ungainly and top-heavy with the huge honkin' saucer section. Didn't like it very much. The years softened my stance on it and I do like the D now.

    The E is badass though. It's a ship you WANT to go into combat aboard. The D looks like you can get a nice meal and some tea to relax but if you want to go Romulan ass-kicking, it's the E all the way.

    The D is a cruise ship, complete with shuffleboard, Parisi Squares, and Guinan bringing you your girly drink. The E is the one you want backing you up when the Borg or the Dominion come a'knockin.
     
    JRandomRedshirt and TroiFan4ever like this.
  17. jackoverfull

    jackoverfull Rear Admiral Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2020
    Location:
    Italy
    one of my favourite designs ever.
     
    Morpheus 02 and Bry_Sinclair like this.
  18. TheMurph

    TheMurph Rear Admiral Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2005
    Location:
    TN
    The D is gorgeous and got my vote. I hate the fact that it was destroyed. The E looked more toyish to me and not a natural evolution of what we had seen up to that point.
     
    Ragitsu and Space Socialist like this.
  19. Arpy

    Arpy Vice Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2001
    The D looks more advanced. If you didn’t know what time period they each came out of you’d think the E was the D’s predecessor. The D is more frightening because it doesn’t give a toss about appearing more powerful. It simply is. In its time period, nothing the Klingons or Cardassians or other adversaries had could compete, and the Romulans had to build something twice as large to try to. Think of the J. It doesn’t look scary in the least, it’s got a parks and a harbor you can see through its transparent hull, but it could probably obliterate 1000 Sovereigns without having to wake the tactical officer.
     
    Ragitsu and Space Socialist like this.
  20. Space Socialist

    Space Socialist Lieutenant Red Shirt

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2023
    The D looks majestic and wonderful. It’s believable as something from hundreds of years in the future built by humans and allies from countless other worlds; familiar as the descendant of the original series Enterprise, but with a more otherworldly feel. The E on the other hand has always seemed like a Trek attempt at a ‘badass’, ‘90s grimdark space battleship rather than an Enterprise.
     
    Ragitsu likes this.