Why the Enterprise is an Amazing Design

For everything Star Trek related, that isn't covered by the other forums.
User avatar
Captain Robert April
Erratic Ensign
Erratic Ensign
Posts: 18
Joined: Sat Apr 21, 2018 11:44 pm

Re: Why the Enterprise is an Amazing Design

Post by Captain Robert April » Thu Apr 26, 2018 12:27 am

I'm pretty sure Roddenberry's main dictum was no fins, no flames, and it's gotta look like it's got power. Other than that, Jefferies was on his own.

User avatar
patrickivan
Charismatic Commander
Charismatic Commander
Posts: 392
Joined: Fri Nov 09, 2012 3:40 pm
Location: Central Ontario
Contact:

Re: Why the Enterprise is an Amazing Design

Post by patrickivan » Thu Apr 26, 2018 12:52 pm

Captain Robert April wrote:I'm pretty sure Roddenberry's main dictum was no fins, no flames, and it's gotta look like it's got power. Other than that, Jefferies was on his own.
Which is funny how the Nacelles were initially conceived as the power housing, and referenced in series as such, but have been relegated to essentially to being something the power is moved through.

I actually went through all the scripts for TOS, plugged in key word search terms relating to nacelles, power pods, engines, matter, anti-matter et c... And there was enough to convince me to this day, that TOS Enterprise had it's matter/antimatter engines in the nacelles, and engineering was a secondary power plant for the ship, as well as a transfer station for the power from the nacelles as needed.

And I have no issue with the main warp core starting out in ships, then moved to nacelles, then back inside again. Technology fluctuates.

Anyway, my point is, those nacelles conveyed power to me. Nothing ever suggested to me "rocket". Just huge power plants needed for things that required incredibly amounts of incomprehensible energy. And that was part of what made the Enterprise beautiful to me.

That power. That simplicity of design. It was more than just a saucer and "cigar" that a lot of people say. The convex and concaved shapes of the saucer. The tapered leading edge. The tear drop top decks. The secondary hull that starts bold up front, gently tapering back to that upturned ship like stern. The strength and technology conveyed in those nacelle struts, impossibly connecting all that incredible power to the ship. Nacelles tapering back, gently mimicking the secondary hull for aesthetics.

And in no way have I ever thought this ship would look like this if used in a modern programme. Not in the sense of how it was constructed in the 1960's anyway. It could look almost exactly the same. But the devil in the dark is in the details. Get a little closer and add those faint details of hull paneling. Windows that shutter (as happened in TOS). RCS units around the ship that on a 1960's show and TV would have been pointless to have. Better lighting. Make parts of the ship look more detailed. But the overall shape? I defy anyone to take an updated CGI version of this ship, who has NEVER seen Star Trek before, and tell me this was a design from 1966.
"I drink to make people interesting"

George Nathan

tmlindsey
Lemme At Em Lieutenant
Lemme At Em Lieutenant
Posts: 54
Joined: Tue May 21, 2013 12:22 am

Re: Why the Enterprise is an Amazing Design

Post by tmlindsey » Thu Apr 26, 2018 4:16 pm

I had a steady diet of "Lost in Space" and B movies, so saucers and rockets were all I knew. The model a friend had of the Enterprise interested me was was so different it was somehow off-putting.

When I saw ST:TMP in the theater (which was my first viewing of any ST, and I actually liked TMP) I fell in love with the Enterprise (still my favorite version) and it is actually what prompted me to start building models (I still have that badly built TMP smoothie somewhere :lol: ). As I learned more about design I felt that the reason, apart from the obvious sleekness of the design aesthetically, was that it looked like it worked.

The Enterprise's design makes sense to me. With older rockets and saucers you get few, if any, external details apart from the main exhaust. With the 1701 you see the details that make it look like it could really work. Those details are sort-of still there with the JJPrise but everything looks so squished and bloated and off-balance that I simply loathe its design. What I've seen of the version from STD looks good but I don't think the ship needed much, if any help; though I understand they had to change to design for legal reasons.

I feel that it's like Jefferies didn't just design a vehicle, he designed a character.
Tim L.

User avatar
Tesral
Bear with me
Bear with me
Posts: 3366
Joined: Tue Dec 18, 2012 12:58 pm
Location: Dearborn, Mi -- at my desk.
Contact:

Re: Why the Enterprise is an Amazing Design

Post by Tesral » Thu Apr 26, 2018 4:28 pm

tmlindsey wrote:I had a steady diet of "Lost in Space" and B movies, so saucers and rockets were all I knew. The model a friend had of the Enterprise interested me was was so different it was somehow off-putting.

The Enterprise's design makes sense to me. With older rockets and saucers you get few, if any, external details apart from the main exhaust. With the 1701 you see the details that make it look like it could really work. Those details are sort-of still there with the JJPrise but everything looks so squished and bloated and off-balance that I simply loathe its design. What I've seen of the version from STD looks good but I don't think the ship needed much, if any help; though I understand they had to change to design for legal reasons.

I feel that it's like Jefferies didn't just design a vehicle, he designed a character.
That is how I see the ship in Trek. They are as much a character as any actor on the show.

And I agree about the JJprise. It takes everything beautiful about the Big E and ruins it. "How ugly can we make this?" The rest of their designs are just as ugly. Starships crossed with a DeSoto.

And Discovery, what is with holes where holes should not be? And can we stop having transformer Starships?
Garry AKA --Phoenix-- Rising above the Flames.
"I saw it done on Voyager" is no excuse for anything, even breathing.

User avatar
Captain Robert April
Erratic Ensign
Erratic Ensign
Posts: 18
Joined: Sat Apr 21, 2018 11:44 pm

Re: Why the Enterprise is an Amazing Design

Post by Captain Robert April » Thu Apr 26, 2018 8:27 pm

patrickivan wrote:
Captain Robert April wrote:I'm pretty sure Roddenberry's main dictum was no fins, no flames, and it's gotta look like it's got power. Other than that, Jefferies was on his own.
Which is funny how the Nacelles were initially conceived as the power housing, and referenced in series as such, but have been relegated to essentially to being something the power is moved through.

I actually went through all the scripts for TOS, plugged in key word search terms relating to nacelles, power pods, engines, matter, anti-matter et c... And there was enough to convince me to this day, that TOS Enterprise had it's matter/antimatter engines in the nacelles, and engineering was a secondary power plant for the ship, as well as a transfer station for the power from the nacelles as needed.
Go through those scripts again. You'll note that the references that point to nacelles are somewhat vague, and after a while, contradictory, and how the problem at hand had nothing to do with working on the engines but something external, like talking a supercomputer into blowing up, whereas if the crisis at hand involved actually fixing what was wrong with the engines, we get a fairly consistent picture of an internal matter/antimatter reactor feeding power to the nacelles. "Elaan of Troyius" and "That Which Survives" are the clearest examples, but the precedent was set way back with "The Naked Time" and that experimental intermix formula.
I defy anyone to take an updated CGI version of this ship, who has NEVER seen Star Trek before, and tell me this was a design from 1966.
1964, actually.

tmlindsey
Lemme At Em Lieutenant
Lemme At Em Lieutenant
Posts: 54
Joined: Tue May 21, 2013 12:22 am

Re: Why the Enterprise is an Amazing Design

Post by tmlindsey » Thu Apr 26, 2018 9:59 pm

Tesral wrote: And I agree about the JJprise. It takes everything beautiful about the Big E and ruins it. "How ugly can we make this?" The rest of their designs are just as ugly.
Yep! All of the ships in JJTrek are terrible. Transforming indeed, ugh. But then I don't care for most ships TNG and after,so...

Now please excuse me, I have to go yell at a cloud :lol:
Tim L.

User avatar
patrickivan
Charismatic Commander
Charismatic Commander
Posts: 392
Joined: Fri Nov 09, 2012 3:40 pm
Location: Central Ontario
Contact:

Re: Why the Enterprise is an Amazing Design

Post by patrickivan » Fri Apr 27, 2018 11:10 am

Captain Robert April wrote:
patrickivan wrote:
Captain Robert April wrote:I'm pretty sure Roddenberry's main dictum was no fins, no flames, and it's gotta look like it's got power. Other than that, Jefferies was on his own.
Which is funny how the Nacelles were initially conceived as the power housing, and referenced in series as such, but have been relegated to essentially to being something the power is moved through.

I actually went through all the scripts for TOS, plugged in key word search terms relating to nacelles, power pods, engines, matter, anti-matter et c... And there was enough to convince me to this day, that TOS Enterprise had it's matter/antimatter engines in the nacelles, and engineering was a secondary power plant for the ship, as well as a transfer station for the power from the nacelles as needed.
Go through those scripts again. You'll note that the references that point to nacelles are somewhat vague, and after a while, contradictory, and how the problem at hand had nothing to do with working on the engines but something external, like talking a supercomputer into blowing up, whereas if the crisis at hand involved actually fixing what was wrong with the engines, we get a fairly consistent picture of an internal matter/antimatter reactor feeding power to the nacelles. "Elaan of Troyius" and "That Which Survives" are the clearest examples, but the precedent was set way back with "The Naked Time" and that experimental intermix formula.
I defy anyone to take an updated CGI version of this ship, who has NEVER seen Star Trek before, and tell me this was a design from 1966.
1964, actually.
Thanks for pointing out my typo on the date. That helped.

I had not just gone through quite literally EVERY single script (downloaded into a one large searchable document), using specific key word searches, but made note of the results. The only chance of human error is in the terms selected, and I chose words that would reflect either position. The weight to the nacelles containing the main power sources for the engines, far outweighed any other position.

The only reasonable explanation to the contradictory dialogue, was my point that the nacelles (power pods) were the main source of power for the engines. And Engineering also had another m/a system and power conversion/ transfer system to and from the main engines (nacelles). There is no way those nacelles didn't contain power sources.

That said, the amount of information was on the low side. There wasn't a hell of a lot to go on.
"I drink to make people interesting"

George Nathan

Post Reply

Return to “General Trek”