Hobbyist Forums banner

1 - 20 of 33 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,791 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Hi,Everyone calls the Movie Enterprise the refit.I think the changes to the Enterprise were more drastic than that,the ship was completely redesigned.My friend and I have discussed this many times.That is whether it was possible to redesign to what it was in STTMP.He said it was impractical to do it to the extent it was done.He said it would have made sense to just build an entirely New Ship than to go to all the effort that was done to the Enterprise.I truly Loved the Motion Picture Enterprise,and that wouldn't have been possible if I didn't believe to was in Part the Original T.V.series Enterprise still,Guy S.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,665 Posts
According to the dialogue in ST:TMP (which I assume is "canon"), the "new" Enterprise was an extensive REFIT of the TOS Enterprise. When you compare the dimensions, proportions, and overall layout of both versions, that's just about impossible — it makes much more sense for the TMP E to be a new ship from the keel up. (Or whatever's at the bottom of a starship.) But . . . who cares? IT'S NOT REAL!! IT'S SCIENCE FREAKIN' FICTION! — (I say, as I duck for cover).
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
133 Posts
scotpens said:
According to the dialogue in ST:TMP (which I assume is "canon"), the "new" Enterprise was an extensive REFIT of the TOS Enterprise. When you compare the dimensions, proportions, and overall layout of both versions, that's just about impossible — it makes much more sense for the TMP E to be a new ship from the keel up. (Or whatever's at the bottom of a starship.) But . . . who cares? IT'S NOT REAL!! IT'S SCIENCE FREAKIN' FICTION! — (I say, as I duck for cover).
Exactly! It does not matter anyway, it's NOT real!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,235 Posts
I'll bet there isn't one piece that has the same shape as the original. I'll also bet they called it the refit so they could say " it's still the same Enterprise from the TV show".
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
923 Posts
At the time of the writing of ST:TMP, it was actually supposed to be a script for ST: Phase II and the ship designed for for series was mostly a modified version of the original design.

Besides, when comparing Jefferies original drawing with the 11 foot miniature, Howard A. Anderson Company didn't stay completely true to what they were asked to build. The Phase II Enterprise was much closer to Jefferies designs of that ship and the Enterprise in ST:TMP could have been a refit/upgrade of that version.

The key thing is that (in the story) it was the original ship with many of the original crew still serving onboard. And visually I don't think that it was that big a jump to go from the TOS Enterprise to the TMP Enterprise...


And if we are talking about major changes in design, I'd point out that when originally laid the USS Lexington (CV 2) and the USS Saratoga (CV 3) were to be battle cruisers, not aircraft carriers. And an even more extensive refit was done to the collier USS Jupiter (AC 3) to turn it into the first aircraft carrier USS Langley (CV 1).

The work done on the TOS Enterprise doesn't seem nearly as extensive when compared to those historical references.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,665 Posts
[IMG-LEFT]http://www.hobbytalk.com/bbs1/attachment.php?attachmentid=36396&stc=1[/IMG-LEFT]
Shaw said:
. . . visually I don't think that it was that big a jump to go from the TOS Enterprise to the TMP Enterprise...
Perhaps not, until you start comparing the shapes and sizes of the saucer, the engineering hull and the totally different warp nacelles.


IIRC, this issue has already been discussed ad nauseam in a previous thread, but I can't remember how long ago or who started it.
 

·
Oxidation Genius
Joined
·
31,279 Posts
Hell, this issue has already been discussed ad nauseum as long as there's been an internet, and in fanzines going back to 1979 before THAT! guy, did you just come out of a coma? ;)

As for the engines, they're obviously 100% replacements - pop the old nacelles off, pop the new ones on, then totally gut the secondary hull because the new engines have completely different plumbing.

The saucer is bigger. My rationalization is that the new RCS units were scabbed on at the four quarter points, and a peripheral corridor was added to fill in the space between them. The old A/B/C deck unti was removed and a a new one plugged in.

Other visual contour differences you just have to accept and ignore, because they told us it's a refit and that's that! :)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
586 Posts
Indeed - discussed and discussed to death, over and over again...

I still like to refer to the WW2 Essex class carriers as a classic example of what can be done (over half a century ago) with a ship:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Essex_class_aircraft_carrier

Just look at the pics of what they looked like during the war, vs what many looked like at the end of their careers... If we could do that then, what would be possible in 2-300 years?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,665 Posts
John P said:
Hell, this issue has already been discussed ad nauseum as long as there's been an internet, and in fanzines going back to 1979 before THAT! guy, did you just come out of a coma? ;)
No, just spent the last 25 years living in a cave!
The saucer is bigger. My rationalization is that the new RCS units were scabbed on at the four quarter points, and a peripheral corridor was added to fill in the space between them. The old A/B/C deck unti was removed and a a new one plugged in.
Excellent retconning job! Now, if someone could just explain why the secondary hull is both longer and fatter... :confused:

Aw, the hell with it!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,946 Posts
scotpens said:
No, just spent the last 25 years living in a cave!Excellent retconning job! Now, if someone could just explain why the secondary hull is both longer and fatter... :confused:

Aw, the hell with it!
Stripped down to the frame and rebuilt from the inside out? :confused:
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
8,335 Posts
Ad naseum, indeed! I've been part of these dicussions in various forums so many times it makes my head hurt just thinking about that, let alone the topic of the thread. :freak:

My belief is that it's really not any different than already mentioned when extensive refitting has been done to Real World naval vessels. Not sure why other folks find it so hard to believe, but that's their right - to believe differently than the rest of us. Does it make sense when a civilization is as advanced as that of the UFP in ST:TMP's time? Maybe not, but as already mentioned, it fits in well w/the theme of the movie.

Anyhow, yes, this has been discussed to death and likely will continue to be discussed. Just because some of us have been in this very discussion in the past - here or at other forums - doesn't mean others have, so let's please remember that. If you don't want to be part of the discussion and/or think it's "stupid", then stay away from the thread.

We also don't need every other person popping in here and telling us that they've seen it over and over and over and over and over... I think that, thus far in this thread, we get that.

Again, if you don't like the topic and it bugs you, stay out of the thread. It really is that simple. ;)

Let's just keep it civil, folks. Many thanks in advance for that. :)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
983 Posts
From the Script

SCOTT
(carefully)
Admiral, the Enterprise has just
finished eighteen months redesign-
ing and refitting.
She needs
testing, a shakedown...


Perhaps this is why the refer to her at the Refit......

Simple enough....
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
142 Posts
Will Decker to James Kirk:
"Admiral, this is an almost totally new Enterprise. You don't know her a tenth as well as I do."

I would say anyway you cut it, that’s a good indicator that the refit Enterprise (which I contend is an Enterprise-class vessel, just as Andrew Probert intended) is at least 90% “new.”
 
1 - 20 of 33 Posts
Top