How Would You Modify Enterprise-B For A Series?

[SeerSGB]

I actually like the modifications they made to the Excelsior model for the Enterprise-B. Shame we don't see more of these type of "heavy" (to use a term) type Excelsior.

If I HAD to make a change: I'd use the Ingram Class as a base line, keeping the movie's saucer and nacelles.

 

[Knight Templar]

I actually like the modifications they made to the Excelsior model for the Enterprise-B. Shame we don't see more of these type of "heavy" (to use a term) type Excelsior.

If I HAD to make a change: I'd use the Ingram Class as a base line, keeping the movie's saucer and nacelles.

The Ingrams phaser cannon mounts always looked kind of clunky and I don't like the way the connecting dorsal actually angles backwards slightly.

 

[MacLeod]

I think first decide the parameteres of why the ship would have been modified. Why would the bulges have been removed, why would it be more angular. What purposes does this serve.

Once you know what you need the ship to do, then you can think about how this modifications would look..

Faster at both sublight and warp with more firepower and strong shields.

And a fully functioning cloaking device. My proposed captain not being a big fan of the Treaty of Algeron (see fan fiction short story in the near future).

Well Impulse is Impluse. Which I think according to TMP is around Warp .5

As for faster warp drive, maybe a slight modification to the Nacelles. For the clocking device, perhaps it has to have some sort of external section in order for the clock to work.

 

[Forbin]

Why does it have to be the Ent-B? Why not just do a different ship of the era?

Because that's what he asked. Why are you going to such extremes to NOT answer his question and attempting to neuter it?

I'm just giving a bunch of ideas. That's what you do during an initial brain storming. I noted the one ship to give some ideas and present an alternative.

Open forum. We are free to throw in whatever opinions and options we like.

Well yeah, but it sounded more like you were trying to slap him down than answer his thoughts.

In any case, we've moved on....

 

[SeerSGB]

I actually like the modifications they made to the Excelsior model for the Enterprise-B. Shame we don't see more of these type of "heavy" (to use a term) type Excelsior.

If I HAD to make a change: I'd use the Ingram Class as a base line, keeping the movie's saucer and nacelles.

The Ingrams phaser cannon mounts always looked kind of clunky and I don't like the way the connecting dorsal actually angles backwards slightly.

I can agree on the phaser "wings", but I've always preferred the Ingram's neck and secondary hull over the traditional Excelsior cut.

See the problem with modding the 1701-B is that the design is sum of it's parts. It works stylistically when it's a whole piece, but pull or change one piece and the whole design doesn't work as well. Just working with lines and parts on the 1701-B itself, I'd probably lengthen the secondary-hull just a little to taper the rear of the hull-canards more and maybe adjust the width to get the hull a better profile image from the front.

 

[sojourner]

Being a big fan of the original ST:3 Excelsior, I prefer to ignore that version with extra bits glued on that was used to portray the Ent-B. Damn that thing was ugly compared to the smooth lines of the original model.

 

[SeerSGB]

See I don't get the point behind keeping the 1701-B an Excelsior class--beyond cost cutting. I know, I know, it had (sort of) been established in TNG that the 1701-B was an Excelsior and the fans were expecting it. But why do what they did to the model and not call it some other class of ship.

 

[Dukhat]

See I don't get the point behind keeping the 1701-B an Excelsior class--beyond cost cutting. I know, I know, it had (sort of) be established in TNG that the 1701-B was an Excelsior and the fans were expecting it. But why do what they did to the model and call it some other class of ship.

The ironic thing is that during pre-production for Generations, Berman wanted a new design for the Ent-B because at that point he was tired of seeing the Excelsior class (a feeling I strongly agree with). There was also a concern about damaging the original studio model. It was John Eaves who came up with the idea to add on the parts to be damaged.

So what eventually happened? We ended up seeing millions of Excelsiors in DS9, exactly what Berman didn't want.

 

[MacLeod]

True we saw plenty of Miranda and Excelsior class ships in DSN, but I suspect the studio wanted them to avoid using the Intrepid Class ship as that was VOY, and one of the few times they used it was as a cost saving measure so that they could use VOY sets. It seems as if the Soverign Class CGI model was off limits as that was for the movies.

True the design was around 90 years old by that time but can I introduce something from the modern era to prove a design can last:

The B52 Bomber, first flight 1952 so that makes it 60 years old (ture it's out of production)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/B52

But for one still in production howabout the C130 Hercules first flight in 1954

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/C-130_Hercules

 

[T'Girl]

6: I'm all in favor of bringing some of the Galaxy-class transporter room's design cues backward. They made a great deal of sense.

I've wondered if we could eliminate the "transporter room" altogether? The set, the place. We've seem beaming directly to sickbay, and beaming directly to the bridge, presumably you can reverse the process and beam down straight from the briefing room, or wherever in the ship. Why have a transporter pad at all? Maybe just a guy at a console somewhere, on the bridge, or in engineering perhaps.

 

[Avon]

wouldn't coming up with a completely new ship be better than taking an existing ship and modifying parts of it to make it different?

 

[Knight Templar]

6: I'm all in favor of bringing some of the Galaxy-class transporter room's design cues backward. They made a great deal of sense.

I've wondered if we could eliminate the "transporter room" altogether? The set, the place. We've seem beaming directly to sickbay, and beaming directly to the bridge, presumably you can reverse the process and beam down straight from the briefing room, or wherever in the ship. Why have a transporter pad at all? Maybe just a guy at a console somewhere, on the bridge, or in engineering perhaps.

This was mentioned in some behind the scenes publication for ST:TNG.

It said that the transporter room would always be some distance from the bridge so for story purposes, the "walk to the transporter" would be a handy sequence for expository dialogue.

 

[Mage]

Another who cares? I bet most fans would just as soon forget Harriman entirely.

I care, as do most Treklit fans who read Serpents Among The Ruines. Harriman was portrayed as not only a great captain, in that book (who redeemed his initial failure very well over the years) but also as a very human character. One of Treklit's favorites.

 

[LCARSGFX]

I've been thinking of an idea of a series based around the Excelsior class Enterprise (not with Captain Harriman). My idea is it would begin in 2319 or so more than 20 years after the launch of the Enterprise Excelsior class.

My thinking is the Excelsior class ship would undergo some kind of "midlife refit" like the original Constitution class Enterprise had (though perhaps not quite as extensive).

For me, I would modify the secondary (engineering) hull considerably. Trimming it down. Removing those extra sections added on in Generations and perhaps flattening out some of the curves of it somewhat. Trimmer, more angular. And an upgrade of the engine nacelles as well.

Keep the saucer like it is.

I wouldn't change a single thing.

 

[SeerSGB]

Another who cares? I bet most fans would just as soon forget Harriman entirely.

I care, as do most Treklit fans who read Serpents Among The Ruines. Harriman was portrayed as not only a great captain, in that book (who redeemed his initial failure very well over the years) but also as a very human character. One of Treklit's favorites.

Harriman gets to much flak from fans. They seem to forget that he was heading down to the deflector array to do the job that Kirk volunteered to do.

 

[anh165]

Why dont we just cut to the chase on what modifications end up on ships in internet discussions like this.

An additional nacelle, a big gun stuck on the saucer and with borg implants and armour.

So the Enterprise B is mysteriously more powerful and advanced than her successor because lets face it,fans wouldnt want continuity to get in the way of having a ship that can shoot itself out of any situation.

 

[Herkimer Jitty]

I dunno. Three pages in, and you're the first one to bring it up.

 

[C.E. Evans]

To me, the Enterprise-B is already modified enough. I would just make it a case that all other Excelsior-class ships would be of the original configuration.

 

[SeerSGB]

I'd love to hear a in-universe reason for the modifications to the Enterprise-B. Was the new design because of some sort of new warp-dynamic theory? Was it a competing design with the "traditional" Excelsior class that only saw limited production? Was meant to be something intended for a specific role that only needed a limited number of these types of Excelsiors?

 

[Forbin]

The thing that kills me is that they put that flared skirt on the hull "to make it appear to be a more evolutionary step toward the Enterprise-D design."

Yet the Enterprise C had a perfectly round 2ndary hull with no flare.

Not to mention that designs aren't always evolutionary. It's perfectly acceptable for a design to be REVolutionary, or just... different.