[kevin]

Possibly as the teaser was created early on, some design elements were altered before the final approval. But generally I think they seem to match.

[jesustrek]

pleaseeeeeeee this version is FANTASTIC, don't liked the "Abramprise" is UGLY.

an Preyer so that be, the Original Constitution Class with a naclles Experimental NICE.

[Hodo]

its a Constitution class Cruiser..... Other than the flaw that they have the ships name on it before its complete is uh all wrong even today. Ships dont get the name on them till they are NEAR completed. I think the new E, is just a minor variant on the original artist drawing of the E.

[tomcatjosh]

I'll Take What We Get

[thypentacle]

Seems to be the same ship from the first trailer in the second trailer... as for if it seems anything like the original E from TOS... I'll just post this text I found on another forum... that I agree with:


"Rachel said,
November 19th, 2008

I tend to prefer SW to ST, and I never much liked the original Enterprise. However, the movie version should have at least looked like it could have been modified into the original version. The proportions on the 1701-2.0 are completely wrong.

This was not supposed to be a new model built as a tribute to the original. It was supposed to be the original, or at least a believable original version of the original. I am sure it will look great on screen, but it won’t look like the Enterprise, and I thought that was the point.

I will still see the movie because I like space movies, but what I really wanted to see was a Star Trek movie.

~ RF"

[matty]

cant help thinking a little too many TOS blinkers are still on here, it is instantly recognisable as Enterprise, therefore job done? A few design tweaks here and there but the shape and style is there..

[thypentacle]

I tend to think more along the lines of it's a recognizable 'Constitution Class' starship... however nothing about it screams Enterprise 1701 to me.

[matty]

Originally Posted by thypentacle

I tend to think more along the lines of it's a recognizable 'Constitution Class' starship... however nothing about it screams Enterprise 1701 to me.

in what way?

primary hull, nacelles, saucer section, all laid out in the same way with the same general look, just fathead nacelles...its a bit more sleak..how doesnt it scream 1701?

[thypentacle]

Like I said, it is easy to see it is the same class ship(form,parts,etc).. but the
proportions are off compared to original Enterprise(see comparison pics of two ships on this forum), it's not important in the look of the new ship parts in and of themselves, so much as how they are connected/sized. In this new form it portrays no sense of balance from front to back/fore to aft... but like I've said many times this is just a small thing with me...

Star Trek is more about the people than the ship.

[The Saint]

Originally Posted by matty

in what way?

primary hull, nacelles, saucer section, all laid out in the same way with the same general look, just fathead nacelles...its a bit more sleak..how doesnt it scream 1701?

The same way the 1701-B, C, D or E don't. Is this really such a tricky concept? Does anyone here confuse a HMMWV for a Ferrari Enzo? Seats, wheels, hood, trunk, engine, windows -- is it your opinion that those two vehicles are identical as well?