StarDestroyer.Net BBS

I found this interesting picture set where the creator substituted the original Enterprise into the movies instead of the refit.

Cool pics. I know it is heresy, but I much prefer the refit to the original though.

Knife wrote:Cool pics. I know it is heresy, but I much prefer the refit to the original though.

I think I do, although I do like how the original turned out in the remastered TOS and in DS9 etc...

nice pics, though I think some of them could have been blurred a bit more to match the "plate".

the refit or the alternative versions aren't bad and DS, TOS remaster and ENT did a pretty decent job of making the Connie look like it wasn't a plastic toy.

IIRC the Enterprise was originally going to be upside down from what we consider it today. Not only that but the tubes in the rear of the warp nacelles were supposed to be for the output of the huge rocket engines the nacelles were originally intended to be. No warp drive, just really big engines.

Baffalo wrote:IIRC the Enterprise was originally going to be upside down from what we consider it today.

That was actually the Reliant in TWOK, which was meant to have nacelles atop the saucer and a torpedo launcher slung underneath it. And before that they were just going to use the Enterprise model for both ships, until someone pointed out that audiences wouldn't be able to tell which ship was shooting which in the battle sequences.

As for the OP pics, I think that while the refit Enterprise definitely fit the visual aesthetic of the TOS movies better, they show that the pre-refit design could well have worked in the new movies.

I will agree that on the handful of occasions where they redid the TOS Enterprise, it looked really good. For instance in Enterprise when they had the Defiant actually being seen at warp and going into combat...that made me squeal with nerd-delight. The Connies really are good looking ships when portrayed correctly.

I always loved how elegant the Connie looks. Compared to later, and earlier, Feddie ships it just appears so much more graceful. It doesn't look like a big heavy ship. Ships like the D just look, I dunno, chunky and ugly compared.

The Abrams Enterprise isn't too bad but just seems a bit less elegant then the original.

My main problem with the refit is just the nacelles. The Enterprise should be smooth lines, the blocky nacelles just clash.

This is just my opinion, but one thing I really liked about the E-Nil was that it *didn't* look like a vessel that could support itself under an atmosphere. I looked at the seemingly delicate design, and thought right away "yeah, that's a spaceship".

I have never been a fan of the pre-refit Constitution class, but I do like it coming out of the water. The others are "meh" to me. My favorite "E-nil" is the Abrams one. I think it strikes the right balance between being instantly recognizable while putting something new on the table.

My favourite Constitution is still the movie era refit, but the DS9+ redos did a very good job of making the original design look good.

DaveJB wrote:

Baffalo wrote:IIRC the Enterprise was originally going to be upside down from what we consider it today.

That was actually the Reliant in TWOK, which was meant to have nacelles atop the saucer and a torpedo launcher slung underneath it. And before that they were just going to use the Enterprise model for both ships, until someone pointed out that audiences wouldn't be able to tell which ship was shooting which in the battle sequences.

As for the OP pics, I think that while the refit Enterprise definitely fit the visual aesthetic of the TOS movies better, they show that the pre-refit design could well have worked in the new movies.

As Baffalo implied, one of Jeffries designs did indeed show an upside-down orientation which Roddenberry favored (and had a small model built with that orientation). Jeffries didn't like it and won in the end.