ATTENTION: The Boards will be closed permanently on May 28th, 2014. Posting will be disabled on April 28th, 2014. More Info

New Enterprise High Res Images Released

Admiral_BlackCat

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 1048

Report this Sep. 25 2009, 11:07 am

Quote (starbase63 @ Sep. 25 2009, 7:19 am)
Quote (Admiral_BlackCat @ Sep. 25 2009, 8:38 am)
Quote (starbase63 @ Sep. 24 2009, 9:04 am)
Quote (Admiral_BlackCat @ Sep. 23 2009, 4:31 pm)
Quote (Narada @ Sep. 23 2009, 1:11 pm)
I am feeling the two designs are very similar and do not see much difference. In the quote from Abrams he also feels this way. I will check the designs on TOS board thank you!

I agree, the new design is immediately recognizable as the USS Enterprise. They got all the design elements right.

So as long as it's a disc-shaped primary hull, some kind of semi-cylindrical hull underneath and two tubular engines you're good to go?

To me, it's immediately recognizable as a Federation starship, just not the Enterprise.

:logical:

The design elements I refer to do indeed consists of a saucerlike primary hull, separate from and dorsally connected to a cylindrical secondary hull, with angled pylons that support the engines in two nacelles.
It is also layed out in the same configuration as a Constituion class starship.
So yes, as long as the same design elements are present (and this includes the Constituion class configuration of the individual elements) I am good to go.

It's also laid out the same as numerous other Federation starship classes we saw in Trek, not just the Constitution class.

:logical:

Could you name a few of those classes please so I can compare and contrast?

I think the new Enterprise is MOST recognizable as a Constitution class layout above any other layout of starship and therefore recognizable as the USS Enterprise, the most famous of said starships. But I would appreciate some other examples so I can better understand what other layouts you are refering to.

Admiral_BlackCat

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 1048

Report this Sep. 25 2009, 11:54 am

The Enterprise is the most famous of that class, when I see a Constitution design my first thought is "That's the Enterprise." Not "Hey a Connie, I wonder what ship that is?"

And I think I made it clear about the design elements combined WITH the layout and configuration of the Constitution class.
Excelsior class: wrong neck and engineer design.
Ambassador: nacelles are below the saucer section and on 90 degree pylons.
Galaxy: The differences are obvious.
The STXI does not even come close with its individual design elements in combination with the layout and configuration of those ships.

Captain_Storma

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 11836

Report this Sep. 30 2009, 2:34 pm

Quote (starbase63 @ Sep. 25 2009, 8:16 pm)

Ambassador class

:logical:

The most underrated Starfleet Ship ever.

She is a beauty!

Vice_Adm_Baxter

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 0

Report this Sep. 30 2009, 2:43 pm

Quote (Captain_Storma @ Sep. 30 2009, 11:34 am)
Quote (starbase63 @ Sep. 25 2009, 8:16 pm)

Ambassador class

:logical:

The most underrated Starfleet Ship ever.

She is a beauty!

Most  :logical:  :logical:  :logical:

Admiral_BlackCat

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 1048

Report this Sep. 30 2009, 4:48 pm

Quote (starbase63 @ Sep. 30 2009, 11:45 am)
Quote (Admiral_BlackCat @ Sep. 25 2009, 11:54 am)
The Enterprise is the most famous of that class, when I see a Constitution design my first thought is "That's the Enterprise." Not "Hey a Connie, I wonder what ship that is?"

And I think I made it clear about the design elements combined WITH the layout and configuration of the Constitution class.
Excelsior class: wrong neck and engineer design.
Ambassador: nacelles are below the saucer section and on 90 degree pylons.
Galaxy: The differences are obvious.
The STXI does not even come close with its individual design elements in combination with the layout and configuration of those ships.

Actually you did not make that distinction earlier.

:logical:

Oh, I thought my:
:rookie:

Thanks by the way for getting me to think about how to best describe the STXI Enterprise and explain why IMHO it is immediately recognizable as the USS Enterprise.  :logical:

Narada

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 4010

Report this Sep. 30 2009, 5:04 pm

This is true and also how I feel. Providing there are the same elements in the same general configuration I believe this is very recognizable for the Enterprise. I do not expect everyone else will feel this way but it is my view.

SaturnsRings

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 0

Report this Sep. 30 2009, 7:18 pm

Quote (Captain_Storma @ Sep. 30 2009, 2:34 pm)
Quote (starbase63 @ Sep. 25 2009, 8:16 pm)

Ambassador class

:logical:

The most underrated Starfleet Ship ever.

She is a beauty!

That I can agree with. Another beauty that has been underused.

PhantomCrunk007

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 5088

Report this Sep. 30 2009, 8:29 pm

Quote (starbase63 @ Sep. 23 2009, 9:04 pm)
Quote (Admiral_BlackCat @ Sep. 23 2009, 4:31 pm)
Quote (Narada @ Sep. 23 2009, 1:11 pm)
I am feeling the two designs are very similar and do not see much difference. In the quote from Abrams he also feels this way. I will check the designs on TOS board thank you!

I agree, the new design is immediately recognizable as the USS Enterprise. They got all the design elements right.

So as long as it's a disc-shaped primary hull, some kind of semi-cylindrical hull underneath and two tubular engines you're good to go?

To me, it's immediately recognizable as a Federation starship, just not the Enterprise.

:logical:

Then you're in an extremely tiny minority who didn't recognize it as the enterprise. Every person I've talked too recognized it instantly.

And yeah If it has the general design elements then it's good to go. I am curious (still) what exactly you would have wanted?

PhantomCrunk007

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 5088

Report this Sep. 30 2009, 8:33 pm

Quote (starbase63 @ Sep. 24 2009, 8:14 pm)
Quote (Admiral_BlackCat @ Sep. 25 2009, 11:07 am)
Quote (starbase63 @ Sep. 25 2009, 7:19 am)
Quote (Admiral_BlackCat @ Sep. 25 2009, 8:38 am)
Quote (starbase63 @ Sep. 24 2009, 9:04 am)
Quote (Admiral_BlackCat @ Sep. 23 2009, 4:31 pm)
Quote (Narada @ Sep. 23 2009, 1:11 pm)
I am feeling the two designs are very similar and do not see much difference. In the quote from Abrams he also feels this way. I will check the designs on TOS board thank you!

I agree, the new design is immediately recognizable as the USS Enterprise. They got all the design elements right.

So as long as it's a disc-shaped primary hull, some kind of semi-cylindrical hull underneath and two tubular engines you're good to go?

To me, it's immediately recognizable as a Federation starship, just not the Enterprise.

:logical:

The design elements I refer to do indeed consists of a saucerlike primary hull, separate from and dorsally connected to a cylindrical secondary hull, with angled pylons that support the engines in two nacelles.
It is also layed out in the same configuration as a Constituion class starship.
So yes, as long as the same design elements are present (and this includes the Constituion class configuration of the individual elements) I am good to go.

It's also laid out the same as numerous other Federation starship classes we saw in Trek, not just the Constitution class.

:logical:

Could you name a few of those classes please so I can compare and contrast?

I think the new Enterprise is MOST recognizable as a Constitution class layout above any other layout of starship and therefore recognizable as the USS Enterprise, the most famous of said starships. But I would appreciate some other examples so I can better understand what other layouts you are refering to.

So any Connie that you see is immediately the Enterprise?

Okay, so you said the design elements are enough for you.


Excelsior class


Galaxy class

To name two...

:logical:

For one, the enterprise sensor dish isn't set inside the hull, instantly recognizable as NOT the enterprise.

Secondly, Galaxy class ships don't have a cylindrical primary hull or warp nacelles. Instantly recognizable as NOT the Enterprise.

irishmann

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 29

Report this Oct. 01 2009, 5:21 am

Quote (Narada @ Sep. 17 2009, 5:00 pm)
Here is a picture for Original Series fans!




Probably the best pic I've seen yet. This just became my wallpaper, Thanks!

CptHowdy

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 586

Report this Oct. 01 2009, 6:35 am

My how things have changed  the original Constitution class 1701 getting dist, who would have thunk it ?  I guess this is what happens when you live by the axiom, any Star Trek is better then no Star Trek.

Admiral_BlackCat

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 1048

Report this Oct. 01 2009, 11:53 pm

Quote (starbase63 @ Oct. 01 2009, 6:16 am)
Quote (PhantomCrunk007 @ Sep. 30 2009, 8:29 pm)
Quote (starbase63 @ Sep. 23 2009, 9:04 pm)
Quote (Admiral_BlackCat @ Sep. 23 2009, 4:31 pm)
Quote (Narada @ Sep. 23 2009, 1:11 pm)
I am feeling the two designs are very similar and do not see much difference. In the quote from Abrams he also feels this way. I will check the designs on TOS board thank you!

I agree, the new design is immediately recognizable as the USS Enterprise. They got all the design elements right.

So as long as it's a disc-shaped primary hull, some kind of semi-cylindrical hull underneath and two tubular engines you're good to go?

To me, it's immediately recognizable as a Federation starship, just not the Enterprise.

:logical:

Then you're in an extremely tiny minority who didn't recognize it as the enterprise. Every person I've talked too recognized it instantly.

And yeah If it has the general design elements then it's good to go. I am curious (still) what exactly you would have wanted?

Who you calling tiny??

What makes me laugh is people see a Federation starship...and immediately think it's the Enterprise...?

Sorry if I'm the kind that would ask "Is that the Enterprise?

;)

What would I have wanted to see?

Go to this thread on the TOS board:

http://boards.startrek.com/communi....3335152



:logical:

Seeing the Enterprise was expected as part of the STXI viewing experience. We knew we were gonna see it.
In TMP, we knew we were gonna see the Enterprise, and when we finally saw this new ship (the refit) we just KNEW that it was the Enterprise because it is what we were expecting.
The end of TVH when the Enterprise-A is revealed, yes we were surprised, but immediately KNEW it was the Enterprise.
IMHO STXI is the same way.
Also, the Enterprise is a character to us. Create a refit model or redesign it for STXI, we will recognize the design elements, and we will WANT to believe it is the Enterprise.

Thats what it is, some people believe the ship we see in STXI is the Enterprise, others do not believe this. Which is fine.
The Enterprise is not JUST a Federation starship, it is the most famous Federation starship, the most famous of the Constitution class design, and it's an iconic character of Star Trek and just as important as Kirk, Spock and the rest of the crew. That's why some people immediately think it's the Enterprise.

nextgeneration14

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 463

Report this Oct. 02 2009, 12:31 am

Quote (Narada @ Sep. 17 2009, 4:00 pm)
Here is a picture for Original Series fans!




I miss the blue phasers  :cry:

Kesfan74656

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 1119

Report this Aug. 29 2010, 3:33 pm

To Narada:THANK YOU!!!! Awesome pics, particularly of the first one posted. I would LOVE to have a poster of that-but, I'll settle for adding it to my voluminous pic files. Next time I get some more ink, expensive as it is, I'll be tempted to print that...only it needs to be BIGGER!!!Really appreciate the post.


''If I were captain, i'd open every crack in the universe, and peek inside, just like Captain Janeway does''-Kes, ''The Cloud''

Forum Permissions

You cannot post new topics in this forum

You cannot reply to topics in this forum

You cannot delete posts in this forum