• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

1701C makeover

B

Bryan B)

Lieutenant Junior Grade
Red Shirt
I think most might agree that Enterprise C got the short end of the design stick compared to her big-screen siblings A, B, D, & E... just a quickly-built TV model that wasn't able to capture much of Probert's original concept. I figured this 'forgotten' Enterprise could use a bit more elegance, so I started thinking...

What if the C's next-gen nacelles seen in "Yesterday's Enterprise" were a relatively recent upgrade to the Ambassador class? If so, here's an idea of what the C might have looked like with its original nacelles:

concept1701c_small.jpg


Larger image: http://bloss1.home.comcast.net/concept1701c.jpg

It's basically Mike Swantak's 1701C illustration from ex-astris-scientia.org, with a 1701B nacelle (from the same site) scaled up and grafted on with a tiny bit of strut flaring. Overall length is comparable to 1701D, and nacelle length is similar to 1701E. I left off the B nacelles' upper fins since I don't think they work well with the circular lines of the 1701C (or the 2000).

Let me know what you think...
 
Last edited:
You know this DOES look alot better than what we saw on Yesterdays Enterprise :) :techman:
 
Sumeria looks like a good layout, more along the lines of Probert's 1701C design.

My thoughts were that the C might have been built with then-standard engine tech (formerly known as 'transwarp', until that term gained such a bad rep), and that later the C was selected for operational eval of the lighter, more efficient dual-field nacelles. Enterprise has a tradition of being a testbed for the latest tech (i.e. the M-5).
 
I'll never forget the week in 2007 when I was BORED as ALL HECK, and I decided it might be cool to take up the hobby of plastic modelmaking again.

I had a Ent-C kit laying around in the box, about 1/6 built, and the engines were missing. I had a Ent-E with the saucer warped and ruined, so it was unbuildable.

I had always thought that the "C" held the promise of some really graceful lines, that were hidden by unbalanced clunky-ness. The nacelles were too short and fat and stubby. The deflector dish was pointed in the wrong way. The saucer seemed slapped-on.

So here's pics of what I did. I never did finish it, because my skills were not up to the level of perfection I demanded, and it fell WAY short. Too frustrating. Maybe someday, if I can learn how to do 3D digital, I try her again.

The nice, long nacelles seem to balance the saucer better.
dscf66051.jpg



I used a plastic egg to replace the deflector dish, and turn it into a deeper concave dish "housing" for the "actual" dish, which I had intended on being MUCH smaller and it sticking about where the circle is.
dscf66101.jpg



I shaved off a lot of material from the "lip" surrounding the shuttle bay and blending into the nacelle struts. I think it made the struts look much more long and graceful, and allowed the nice shape of the secondary hull to really make a statement.
dscf66111.jpg


I also had an Ent-B sitting in a scrap box, so it donated its impulse section to the cause.
dscf6614.jpg
 
Last edited:
I also think that the beauty of working my re-imagined Ent-C in digital 3D would be that it would be MUCH easier to go back and change details if they look wrong.

And filling in grid lines in the saucer! Jeeze!

I think I would "backdate" the warp nacelles a bit, make them less angular, and more of the Ent-C era.
 
MadMan1701A said:
Hmm, I like this... I wonder how it would look with an Excelsior saucer on it too?
Click to expand...

Too small.

Besides, I don't think there's anything wrong with the Ent-C saucer, except that it wasn't detailed out well.

On my model, I realized that I popped an Ent-B bridge on top, and an Ent-B dome on the bottom. That gussied it up!
 
Erifah, I like the plastic model. :bolian: Maybe an 'Improved Ambassador Class'? Looks like we agree on nacelle length, and also that the 1701C's dish looked wrong somehow... probably the brass button in the center.
 
Bryan B) said:
... the 1701C's dish looked wrong somehow... probably the brass button in the center.
Click to expand...

I always thought it looked wrong simply because it was aimed in the wrong direction, instead of sweeping the path of travel clear.
c_at_g.jpg
 
very nice Model you have there :) :techman:

another good 1701C make over is the Dawnstar class :) :techman:
 
Always thought of the dishes as multi-purpose, multi-directional--but if you were to mount a forward-facing dish within the larger one as you intended, it would probably look better.

Btw, looks like it's actually the Yamaguchi version with the downward-facing brass-button mini dish, which wasn't on the Enterprise C.
 
It's funny, as much as I understand that the Ent-C model was done quickly and doesn't necessarily have all the detail of some other ships, it's still always been one of my favorites for some reason, pudgy nacelles and all. ;)

That having been said, I'm VERY interested in seeing people's ideas of how it could have been improved.

Not sure about the Excelsior-ish nacelles, though, if for no other reason than the fact that this ship is supposed to be the next generation design, so it seems to me we would expect the nacelles to be different, perhaps with some similar design elements (in the way that the Ent-B and Ent-C "neck" both have "ribbing", but look very different.)

It would also be very interesting to see something different done with the nav deflector.

Looking forward to seeing how this progresses.
 
I love what you did with the impulse deck on the Ambassador saucer. That looks perfect.

Proberts own kit
http://probertdesigns.com/Folder_STORE/Folder_CONCEPT-KITS/Ambassador_Kit.html

Similar---Jeff Robbs Council class, taken from the initial wall sculpture from TNG. A better write up can be found in one of the old GEC logbooks IIRC
http://www.treknology.org/history3.htm

Another version from earlier art
http://i112.photobucket.com/albums/n167/aridas_sofia/trek/apollo.jpg

Alaska/Ambassador class
http://www.shipschematics.net/startrek/images/federation/battlecruiser_alaska1.jpg
http://www.shipschematics.net/startrek/images/federation/battlecruiser_alaska_refit.jpg
FASA's Ambassador class
http://home.comcast.net/~ststcsolda/federation/envoy/envoy.html
http://home.comcast.net/~ststcsolda/federation/ambassador_canon/ambassador_canon.html
 
Great set of links... and yeah, Excelsior parts look good with almost anything ;)

How's this for a plausible timeline... As the prototype Ambassador NX-10521 (i.e. Probert's) was being completed and another hull begun, technical delays and political pressures resulted in the 2nd ship being hurriedly completed at another yard with a more conventional engineering hull and engines (original post). Dubbed Enterprise C, its success led to more 'Ambassadors' of the same proven design, and it was several years before the more advanced design re-appeared, generally known as the Council class. Forerunner of the Galaxy class, its success in turn led to numerous projects to port the newer technology back to the Ambassadors, resulting in one of the most varied 'classes' in the fleet...and the confusion & rivalry which put the 'wrong' ship on Picard's wall, according to JOAT.

Anyway, I'd like to see how any of these variants look in 3D (my current toolset has been reduced to MS Paint). And here's another suggestion- has anybody tried upgrading the Intrepid class, perhaps with a pair of Prometheus nacelles?

B)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top