The Enterprise is the oddest design is sci-fi

[Gotham Central]

I know that we've all gotten used to the design of the Enterprise (in all of its incarnations) over the years. But if you step back and look at it objectively, the Enterprise is probably the strangest spacecraft design in all of science fiction.

You have this large cumbersom saucer that is attached to a long cylindrical engine section by a skinny neck. For no apparent reason the engineering cylinder has a chunk taken out in the back. Finally the ship is propelled with two large engines sticking out from the engineering section like pontoons. From a security standpoint, it seems odd to have a small neck serve as the only connection between the command module and the ship's propulsion. The fastest way to neutralise a one of these ships would be to simply sever the connection between the saucer and the rest of the ship. Likewise, it seems less than secure to have the engines connected by a single relatively small connection. As anyone who has ever built a model of the original or movie enterprise will tell you, the pylons are the weakest point.

 

[Maurice]

There are plenty of spaceships odder than the Enterprise...all those ridiculous biomechanical shapes, for instance. You also can't compare a plastic model to a real structure, as the entire model is built of one material and has no real superstructure.

 

[kes7]

The Borg won't win any points for aesthetics, but as far as practicality, a windowless cube with decentralized systems is pretty hard to beat. Starfleet's ships are prettier, but tactically horrifying -- bridge full of senior officers in a see-through dome on top of the ship, anyone? Shields fail sometimes, people!

 

[Chrisisall]

You have this large cumbersom saucer that is attached to a long cylindrical engine section by a skinny neck.

For saucer disconnection, in case of catistrophic hull breach & warp nacelle rupture.

the ship is propelled with two large engines sticking out from the engineering section like pontoons.

Necessary in the event of a warp-core matter-antimatter event.

The fastest way to neutralise a one of these ships would be to simply sever the connection between the saucer and the rest of the ship.

Unlikely, since screens & shields reduce this possibility.

Likewise, it seems less than secure to have the engines connected by a single relatively small connection.

You proceed upon a false assumption; small need not equal structurally unsound, given 23rd Century advancement.

 

[Chrisisall]

-- bridge full of senior officers in a see-through dome on top of the ship, anyone?

Okay, LOL, that's kinda dumb- even I can't treknobabble my way out of that one.

 

[EmperorTiberius]

The Borg won't win any points for aesthetics, but as far as practicality, a windowless cube with decentralized systems is pretty hard to beat. Starfleet's ships are prettier, but tactically horrifying -- bridge full of senior officers in a see-through dome on top of the ship, anyone? Shields fail sometimes, people!

None of that bridge on top, thin neck, thin nacelle nonsense matters. Once the shields are down, it's over.

 

[Chrisisall]

"Target engines only, understood?"

 

[Finnegan]

Game over, man!!!!

 

[Cyke101]

Unlikely, since screens & shields reduce this possibility.

I feel I have to comment on this, at least in regards to TOS. One gets the distinct impression from the powers that be (writers, directors, actors, Gene, etc) intended for shields & screens to be the only real defense the Enterprise had. Any hit that could get through the shields meant the ship was a goner. Even from a pacing point, you'll notice how tension ramps up when the shields are about to give. Only after TWOK was the concept that the ship could take weapons fire invented, and then dramatic pacing for shieldless hits in later Trek became common place.

The Borg won't win any points for aesthetics, but as far as practicality, a windowless cube with decentralized systems is pretty hard to beat. Starfleet's ships are prettier, but tactically horrifying -- bridge full of senior officers in a see-through dome on top of the ship, anyone? Shields fail sometimes, people!

In TOS, we never really saw the Enterprise fire all her weapons, plus whenever she fought it was mostly from one angle. You tend to be forgiving of older SFX since it creates a kind of bias as to ship tactics and other things. Nobody ever attacked them from above, for example.

I mention that because while I give the TOS-E a pass, I can't do that for the E-D. Their most powerful forward weapon has a decent area of fire, but if the enemy is hovering above you (say, in a primo spot to blast the exposed bridge), your torpedo launcher is at the worst possible spot! It's blocked by one of the thickest areas of the ship, too! Ugh.

When the E-E had torpedo launchers behind the neck that could fire up, I was a bit relieved. But then schematics say there's only one quantum torpedo launcher, and it's located *surprise* below the saucer section once again. Bah!

 

[SilentP]

Likewise, it seems less than secure to have the engines connected by a single relatively small connection.

You proceed upon a false assumption; small need not equal structurally unsound, given 23rd Century advancement.

Actually, no, unless the nacelle pylon is made of a much stronger material than the rest of the ship, being small (or rather thin/slim) will most likely be comparatively structurally unsound, regardless of advancement.

 

[Nardpuncher]

You have this large cumbersom saucer that is attached to a long cylindrical engine section by a skinny neck.

For saucer disconnection, in case of catistrophic hull breach & warp nacelle rupture.

the ship is propelled with two large engines sticking out from the engineering section like pontoons.

Necessary in the event of a warp-core matter-antimatter event.

The fastest way to neutralise a one of these ships would be to simply sever the connection between the saucer and the rest of the ship.

Unlikely, since screens & shields reduce this possibility.

Likewise, it seems less than secure to have the engines connected by a single relatively small connection.

You proceed upon a false assumption; small need not equal structurally unsound, given 23rd Century advancement.

I don't think the OP is trying to insult the Enterprise or anything, so you don't really need to counter everything.
I think the Op was just taking a step back and saying what many of us have thought...that the E is a unique design.

 

[Deckerd]

I think Chrisisall was carrying on the fine tradition of this board is all.

 

[Chrisisall]

unless the nacelle pylon is made of a much stronger material than the rest of the ship, being small (or rather thin/slim) will most likely be comparatively structurally unsound, regardless of advancement.

Yes, notice the rather slender connections of 747 wings to main hull, considering all the extra weight of the attached engines, it's no wonder why they snap off at the first hint of turbulance.
(Sorry, couldn't avoid snark there)

I think Chrisisall was carrying on the fine tradition of this board is all.

I try never to miss an oppotunity to babble the techno!

 

[Myasishchev]

-- bridge full of senior officers in a see-through dome on top of the ship, anyone?

Okay, LOL, that's kinda dumb- even I can't treknobabble my way out of that one.

When the shields go down, and the 50 megaton matter-antimatter explosive goes off next to the ship, would one be much safer behind a 10m wall of metal than they would behind a 10cm piece of glass?

Anyway, the Big E is kind of strange, but not the strangest. For example, the spaceship from The Fountain has any Fed ship beat hands down--it's just a transparent sphere with a tree in it and no visible means of propulsion.

 

[Chrisisall]

I feel I have to comment on this, at least in regards to TOS. One gets the distinct impression from the powers that be (writers, directors, actors, Gene, etc) intended for shields & screens to be the only real defense the Enterprise had. Any hit that could get through the shields meant the ship was a goner.

When the shields go down, and the 50 megaton matter-antimatter explosive goes off next to the ship, would one be much safer behind a 10m wall of metal than they would behind a 10cm piece of glass?

I think these makes the point.

 

[Bill Morris]

Irrelevant. Matt Jefferies was abucted by aliens, and that's what they showed him.

 

[Chrisisall]

Irrelevant. Matt Jefferies was abucted by aliens, and that's what they showed him.

In a glass case, at the Smitsonian, in the future, no less!

 

[C.E. Evans]

To me, the Enterprise always looked like something that took full advantage of being built in space rather than on Earth.

Oh, wait...

 

[FlapJoy]

When I was a kid in the 70's me and my brothers thought the Enterprise was the coolest space ship ever seen in sci-fi. Before that it was rocket ships and flying saucers. The Enterprise combines those two designs into one and it did look weird... but it also looked very realistically futuristic, especially in the NASA age, the real life lunar lander looked a bit weird too, cuz space is different... I could totally see a lineage.

The fact that the warp engines were up on pylons seperated from the ship always gave me the impression the engines were pwerful, dangerous, and maybe radioactive (as it was the post a-bomb age) and therefore a very iconic demonstration about the power needed to fly in space. It still freaks me out when I see trek designs with the warp engines incorporated into the saucer section, with windows right near the Bussard collectors. I keep thinking anyone who lives or works behind that port hole is getting a killer dose. I know now that it's safe (I guess) but to me anything that glows and flutters must be bad for you if exposed to it.

As far as defense, you can't really hide in space, you can be attacked from any angle. I'm sure no matter what, if you lose shields and some big serious advanced foe really wants to destroy you, they will. If they're not willing to negotiate you just need to defend yourself enough to warp the fuck outta there. But like real naval battleships, the bridge is always up top surrounded by big guns. Sensors and viewscreens make that concept obsolete but I always felt that the bridge on top of the saucer was a way to show any new race that you come in peace, that your willing to be open and vulnerable instead of hiding inside your big armoured ship, prefering to wave out the window "hello!". Me and my brothers would get very zen about all the symbolism that may be in the design.

I love the Enterprise.

 

[Deckerd]

But it WAS a flying saucer. The designer just thought oops I'd better add bits to distract people.