The two bottom ships don’t look like inverted Galileos to me. I can clearly see TMP nacelles, and not located in the same place as the Galileo nacelles.
The two bottom ships don’t look like inverted Galileos to me. I can clearly see TMP nacelles, and not located in the same place as the Galileo nacelles.
Im sure you saw me post the one Disco clip where someone put the TOS in place of the SNW and they just updated the lighting and it looked great. I think with maybe some surface wear and better lighting it would look really good with anything today. I always liked the smoothness of the surface. That's the problem I think when it's a CGI model. It's so smooth the CGI comes through more. With a little wear and better lighting I think it would look much better and blend in fine with anything today. To me anyways.. it's a timeless design.
Well I was actually referring to all the characters changes and constant nods to TOS. I'm cool with the aesthetics but do not like the upscaling of the interior sets. Heck I may be even fine with them saying it's now 442 because for some they thought the original measurement is too small. But then why double everything in size interior wise?? It ends up having the same problem.
TOS didn't even manage to stay consistent with itself.
Well it was 60's tv. They were still hammering out stuff as they went along.
I see what you're saying and I understand that it looks like that, but it's the exact same artwork with the fill-colors removed and the all the shapes changed to different-colored outlines. I perspective-matched the full version from Drexler's old website to the IAMD screencap so you can flip between them. If we're looking in the same part, the "TMP nacelle" is the cross-section of the shuttlebay turntable/elevator, with the shuttle in the lower position.
Not really with a lower crew compliment.
Ah, ok, I can see what you're saying now. Yep, it seems to be an optical illusion that made it look like I was seeing TMP nacelles when I wasn't.
This. A ship that held 203 officers and crew before Kirk took command will now hold 430. That's more than doubling the crew complement, and that means a lot of crew cabins will need to be reduced in size and extra cargo and storage space within the saucer has to be eliminated.
How do you reach this conclusion the Constitution Class was not long range?
Given how far Kirk's two Enterprises traveled during their respective lifespans I'd say the Connies were definitely long range exploratory and defense vessels.
No I mean the exterior is now too small. They upscaled the exterior but also upscaled the interior.
Even if everything was doubled in size for SNW, I don't think it's much of an issue. The interior volume of the Enterprise would be significantly increased at 442 m.
Never missing an opportunity to show off my models, I'll drag out this old picture that shows both the TOS Enterprise and the DSC Enterprise at the same scale.
She's a lot bigger, but still comparatively small when compared to the Galaxy class....
To me, this looks like an appropriate size difference after roughly 100 Years of development.
Which is a non issue to me because compartments and modules would be changed for a larger compliment.
Admittedly, I have only read a few pages of this thread, but the idea that the sets filmed for TOS do not match the exact "in-universe" dimensions of the ship, and therefore those rooms would fit into the ship if they were sized, and more importantly, shaped, a bit differently, seems to resolve, for me, almost any issues with the size of the ship in TOS.
When TOS was made, even a movie taking place on a real naval vessel would have had sets that were shaped or sized a bit differently for ease of filming, but today with film crews able to use smaller equipment, those sets would be able to be adjusted in size and shape to fit at 289 meter ship. Every official source prior to 2009 that I have seen, if it gives a size, gives that size, or something close to that in feet.
The "problem" is that the new shows did not try to create sets that were these "altered" versions of the original sets that would have looked like, and had proportions like the rooms would "in-universe." Instead they made new sets. They could have gone farther to make it look like the original and yet added detail for without changing the details that were already visible in TOS. That would have satisfied two groups: those who wanted to see a show in the era just before TOS look like TOS, and those who felt that the look needed updating for newer-style TV's. But they went with their own different look, which in my opinion opens them up to the argument that this is not the same universe.
I don't consider anything made after 2009 to be canon to what came before, so what I called a "problem" in the above paragraph is not actually a "problem" for me, because I don't feel the need to make the first two eras of production fit with the later eras.
We actually don't know that they don't contain crew spaces. Admittedly, Jefferies intended the engines to be "dangerous." However, after there has been a Nacelle Control Room in TNG, and given that the locaiton of the engine room is not clear anyway, there could be rooms in the forward part between the Bussard scoop and the vents, just above the struts. In TAS, they drop a living anti-matter item into the engine, and that could have been in the nacelle, or it could have been just below the plasma transfer conduits. The nacelles could be sometimes able to have living humans inside, and sometimes not, or always have habitable portions, or never be able to accommodate living humans.
Yeah, I don't think that's a very apt comparison. I'd think something like this might be more appropriate.
Why?
This is just wandering, but "spaceship evolution" has always puzzled me. Like when Probert came up with the C as being between the Excelsior and the Galaxy.
What would you say is between the B-17 or the B-29 and the B-2?
Well, there's the B-36 and B-52 but, there was also the B-47 in there, along with the B-58 and...and...
Size matters not. Judge me by my size? As well you do not. For my ally is the force...wait... Wrong franchise.
Size matters not. Judge me by my size? As well you do not. For my ally is the force...wait... Wrong franchise.
Well, you compared the very first self-propelled airplane to a commercial jumbo jet. Besides the fact that they're both airplanes, they don't have much in common. Whereas I compared an Aircraft Carrier built in the 30s to a couple of other Carriers built in the late 50s early 60s and another being built in the late 2020s. They have more in common than simply being boats.
I dunno. It's just the typical design philosophy of most science fiction?
