TREK XI Enterprise models on display (Now w/even more pics)

[DaveyNY]

Now that we have some Official Views of the NuEnterprise that include side profiles, can we figure out approximately how big She is by the size of the Docking Ports on the Neck and Secondary Hull?


(miraclefan, click on the EDIT button in your post and then the DELETE button to get rid of that post.)

That assumes that we know how big the docking ports are.

Simply because they're round doesn't mean that they're no larger than the TMP ship's, any more than this ship being shaped like the old Enterprise means it's the same size. There was no external logic to the size of the airlocks, so they could now be twelve feet in diameter...or fifteen, or twenty.

Be that as it may, wouldn't there be some kind of Inherent Design Logic (since Humans built this ship) to making a docking port no more than slightly taller than the height of one and slightly wider than perhaps two human beings?

As well as there being some size restriction because of the height of the ships' decks?

And there was some logic to the size of the TMP Airlocks... they were just the right size for the Travel Pods, as well as Spocks' Shuttle, to dock with.

 

[M'Sharak]

I posted it, I can't UN-post it! sorry for this guys I'm still trying to get the image to get bigger, my BAD!

It's fine. All you have to do is click on the image and you will see the larger (800x516) one behind it.

 

[DaveyNY]

Someone up-thread mentioned Rearward facing Torp-tubes....

Looking at miraclefans' pic post, the only thing I see are two small triangles right under the Impulse Engines...

Is that what they meant?

 

[M'Sharak]

Someone up-thread mentioned Rearward facing Torp-tubes....

Looking at miraclefans' pic post, the only thing I see are two small triangles right under the Impulse Engines...

Is that what they meant?

No idea -- I can't find the mention. There was some speculation in the trailer screencaps thread about the nature of some stuff seen on the bottom of the secondary hull, and I think aft-facing torpedo launchers was one proposed purpose.

Edit:

Is this post the one you were thinking of?

 

[DaveyNY]

Someone up-thread mentioned Rearward facing Torp-tubes....

Looking at miraclefans' pic post, the only thing I see are two small triangles right under the Impulse Engines...

Is that what they meant?

No idea -- I can't find the mention. There was some speculation in the trailer screencaps thread about the nature of some stuff seen on the bottom of the secondary hull, and I think aft-facing torpedo launchers was one proposed purpose.

Edit:

Is this post the one you were thinking of?

That's probably it... I've read so many posts in different threads this evening, I most likely got them mixed up... thanks.

 

[Praetor]

I'd thought the recess on the bottom of the secondary hull that appears lit was what people thought was a rear torpedo launcher.

 

[miraclefan]

Now that we have some Official Views of the NuEnterprise that include side profiles, can we figure out approximately how big She is by the size of the Docking Ports on the Neck and Secondary Hull?


(miraclefan, click on the EDIT button in your post and then the DELETE button to get rid of that post.)

That assumes that we know how big the docking ports are.

Simply because they're round doesn't mean that they're no larger than the TMP ship's, any more than this ship being shaped like the old Enterprise means it's the same size. There was no external logic to the size of the airlocks, so they could now be twelve feet in diameter...or fifteen, or twenty.

Be that as it may, wouldn't there be some kind of Inherent Design Logic (since Humans built this ship) to making a docking port no more than slightly taller than the height of one and slightly wider than perhaps two human beings?

As well as there being some size restriction because of the height of the ships' decks?

And there was some logic to the size of the TMP Airlocks... they were just the right size for the Travel Pods, as well as Spocks' Shuttle, to dock with.

^That's why I said, more then likely this ENTERPRISE will be about the same length as the Refit.

Someone up-thread mentioned Rearward facing Torp-tubes....

Looking at miraclefans' pic post, the only thing I see are two small triangles right under the Impulse Engines...

Is that what they meant?

No idea -- I can't find the mention. There was some speculation in the trailer screencaps thread about the nature of some stuff seen on the bottom of the secondary hull, and I think aft-facing torpedo launchers was one proposed purpose.

Edit:

Is this post the one you were thinking of?

Ya, I was wondering what those triangles were too? Oh, and M'Sharak I just wanted to say that the picture I put up of the NU E, you will notice I put some stars in the background just to give it ''more'' depth!

 

[Stag]

I expect that this will be this year's Star Trek Christmas ornament by Hallmark.

No I thought I read somewhere that it was too late for this year for some reason. That the design had to be locked in and handed to Hallmark by last year sometime.

 

[M'Sharak]

Someone up-thread mentioned Rearward facing Torp-tubes....

Looking at miraclefans' pic post, the only thing I see are two small triangles right under the Impulse Engines...

Is that what they meant?

No idea -- I can't find the mention. There was some speculation in the trailer screencaps thread about the nature of some stuff seen on the bottom of the secondary hull, and I think aft-facing torpedo launchers was one proposed purpose.

Edit:

Is this post the one you were thinking of?

That's probably it... I've read so many posts in different threads this evening, I most likely got them mixed up... thanks.

Believe me, I do know what you mean about keeping track of where you saw what.

I'd thought the recess on the bottom of the secondary hull that appears lit was what people thought was a rear torpedo launcher.

I think so, too. That's the post I linked to above.

No idea about what the triangles below the impulse engines (TBtIE) might be, though.

 

[DaveyNY]

I expect that this will be this year's Star Trek Christmas ornament by Hallmark.

No I thought I read somewhere that it was too late for this year for some reason. That the design had to be locked in and handed to Hallmark by last year sometime.

Anybody seen anywhere what the ornaments ARE going to be this year...

Did a Google but got bubkis.

 

[gastrof]

Re: TREK XI Enterprise models on display (Now w/pics)

Frakkin beautiful.

I'm sorry, but when I put my wish they hadn't changed it aside, I still look at the new ship and say "Umm...does it have a thyroid problem?"

Look at those nacelles! Something just isn't right.

I know it's "our" Enterprise from now on, but it just doesn't look right. (To this day I still feel something isn't right about Enterprise-D either, just so you know.)

 

[LutherSloan]

I expect that this will be this year's Star Trek Christmas ornament by Hallmark.

No I thought I read somewhere that it was too late for this year for some reason. That the design had to be locked in and handed to Hallmark by last year sometime.

Anybody seen anywhere what the ornaments ARE going to be this year...

Did a Google but got bubkis.

Generally within the time period of the next month or two we should find out. Usually it ends up on Hallmark's website in one fashion or another.

 

[Tinkertoyz76]

Re: TREK XI Enterprise models on display (Now w/pics)

I will be waiting and seeing it at The Mann Village theatre. Arclight is biggest waste of money in L.A.

Anyone see these over at Sci fi wire?

http://scifiwire.com/2009/03/new-enterprise-models-go.php#more

Saw those mentioned in the TrekMovie article about the Arclight being the first theater to take advance orders for tickets to the movie. They look pretty nifty.

 

[ncc-1017-e]

Great mode! That is the ugliest ship I have ever seen! It is almost like they made it look like shit on purpose!

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

Be that as it may, wouldn't there be some kind of Inherent Design Logic (since Humans built this ship) to making a docking port no more than slightly taller than the height of one and slightly wider than perhaps two human beings?[/I]

No.

At least one of the designers on TMP did complain that Roddenberry's insistence that docking ports be round structures bigger in diameter than a deck height was nonsense.

And you only have to introduce the possibility of, say, a twenty percent variance in the diameter of the docking port to make any attempts to extrapolate consistently from it meaningless.

The ship has a Busch brewery for an Engineering deck - it's either going to be quite a bit bigger than the TOS ship, or there are going to be a lot fewer decks in the secondary hull.

 

[ancient]

The only picture where the scale of the Enterprise might be suggested is the one on the ground with Kirk looking at it. From that shot we know that it's...really big!

There are other ways to guess, like assuming the saucer is still 2 decks at the rim and pasting a TOS ENT pic over it for comparison, but that's still making some big assumptions.

 

[Ghrakh]

Seems like the most attractive views are ones where the nacelles are partially or completely hidden.

 

[Brent]

My Poor Photochopping skills at making the Model go to Warp

 

[Ptrope]

Re: New photos from the Enterprise replica

This is just a stunningly beautiful update to a stunning classic, I cannot for the life of me understand why people hate it. It screams 'Enterprise'...

"And if my grandmother had wheels, she'd be a wagon!" Screaming "Enterprise" doesn't necessarily make it good.

Some of us just think it's an ungainly duck of a design, made worse by the contentions that "the original just wouldn't work on the big screen/with today's 'sophisticated' audience." There are a couple of artists on this board who've proven that false, with updates to the design from TOS that are every bit as detailed and beautiful as anything on the screen today. the other argument is that on the one hand, people say that non-fans won't know the difference (so why not use the 'real' design?) and on the other hand, looking like the original Star Trek makes it look too hokey for non-fans (so why do it at all?)

There's just no rational reason for the redesign in the producers' hype about the movie, so it's hard to admire their efforts, esp. when this particular effort isn't as substantial and thoughtful as the one from 40 years ago. Frankly, I don't see why people not liking the ship design is such a bone of contention to those who do ; none of us on this board is actually considered to be the movie's target audience by its producers, after all.

Incidentally, painting it up like a UPS truck sure puts it in perspective .

 

[ancient]

Re: New photos from the Enterprise replica

I think the new design is pretty good. There was nothing wrong with the original ship design, but Abrams wanted this movie to be as NEW! and SHINEY! as possible, so this is the Enterprise we're getting.

I have my fair share of nitpicks about the new design:
-the curved pylons look like they were bent by mistake, like someone damaged the model, at least from some angles.
-The cutaway part of the engine hull is waaaay too big.
-those 'hoods' on top of the nacelles are too blob-like and sort of ruin the sense of 'biggness'.

...and so forth. But I'm not too upset over it, it won't bother me while I'm actually watching the movie. Just when I'm sitting here looking at the pics with nothing better to do.