Patrickivan said:
^ you are correct in that they may not be attached. But it makes little sense that they would be worked on dangerously close over the saucer section.
On another note, I find it funny that 200 years in the future they're using such little hull plates all over the place. And why they are not uniform in colour is perplexing too. Very messy- not so advanced looking.
Son_of_Soong said:
In the teaser it shows a view from the back of the Enterprises neck looking down its hull... and theres no warp nacelles attached. You see the pylons that hold the nacelles being built but the nacelles themselves are not attached.
ancient said:
Starfleet engineer: "What do you mean '950' feet?! I thought this diagram said '1950' feet!
Vektor said:
The FJ blueprints are not accurate to the filming model that was used in TOS. Nevertheless, the nacelles shown in the teaser are still bigger. I used my own 3D model of the Enterprise for comparison, which is as accurate to the filming model as I could make it based on available references. Either the saucer has shrunk and the nacelles have been pulled much closer together or the nacelles themselves have gotten at least 25% bigger in diameter.
Supposedly another image of the ship is "forthcoming." If it's any more revealing of the ship's overall shape and proportions then we will know just how accurate this teaser version actually is.
Son_of_Soong said:
My original point still stands tho, theres nothing to suggest the nacelles are attached yet.
ancient said:
The hull lettering ENTERPRISE is quite a bit smaller, and closer to being rounded rather than straight. (EDIT: Smaller in relation to the numbers I mean)
I'm hoping those nacelles aren't as big as they seem in the trailer. I matched the sizes of the glowy fan-caps, but the new nacelles are still bigger. Anyway, it's perfectly possible that they're place-holders.
But the bridge size is so small. Either the bridge is moved down for some reason, or the scale of the ship is way way up.
Yes, I know the trailer was made a while ago, and is probably a temp-job, but I can't help wonder...
Because it doesn't look very good?Irishman said:
Why isn't it okay if the ship as depicted in the trailer end up being the same bird we see in the film?
Irishman said:
I'm just curious, not trying to pick a fight. I really want to understand where you're coming from.
Why isn't it okay if the ship as depicted in the trailer end up being the same bird we see in the film?
ancient said:
Irishman said:
I'm just curious, not trying to pick a fight. I really want to understand where you're coming from.
Why isn't it okay if the ship as depicted in the trailer end up being the same bird we see in the film?
Because it's not really up to snuff. Many details are missing or out of place. Like the name being off-center) If the nacelles are as big as they look in the trailer, and as close together as that, it'll look Horrible, like the thing I made out of Charles Casimiro's blueprints earlier.
No one has said that the ship won't be the same one that's in the trailer, and this is clearly not a HATE!R thread or anything. It's just that the ship model has a weird, out of proper perspective look.
What's not to understand?
scotthm said:
^ By that time, it may be a different 'girl' altogether.
---------------
We use essential cookies to make this site work, and optional cookies to enhance your experience.