Federation Starship – U.S.S. Enterprise – NCC-1701-F – Orthographic views…

Here are the orthographic views of the Odyssey Class U.S.S. Enterprise, NCC-1701-F. It would be nice if there were some detailed schematics released for this beauty. I’m sure someone will create them eventually…


6 comments on “Federation Starship – U.S.S. Enterprise – NCC-1701-F – Orthographic views…

  1. Hi. Glad you’re welcoming my comments. Gladder still that the Odyssey Class’s final design doesn’t feature that horrible turkey-neck dorsal that appeared in the second cut. That double-dorsal design’s very interesting; am I wrong to assume that it’s meant to help the saucer hull “pop off” much more quickly than a Galaxy or Sovereign saucer can in the event that said hull has to get away from the stardrive hull?

  2. I went back and re-read the Developer’s Diaries on this and, honestly, they give a technical reason for going with the double-dorsal design. They liked it because it was different, something new, but still within the overall design philosophy of the Enterprise lineage. I like your take on it, though, as I think it would contribute to a faster separation time than that of the Galaxy or Sovereign classes.

  3. I would like to point out that the Sovereign does not have the ability to seperate.

    Now, as for the Odyssey, I would love to get my hands on a high quality mesh for it and render up some sweet pictures.

    • Dear Moonsword: Actually, the Sovereign class does have the ability to separate into two sections. Please check the Federation Starship Datalink: Starship Concept Art website, especially John Eaves’ notes on designing the Enterprise-E. (No blame, though, as Eaves did a pretty good job of hiding the seam, and in any case the subject simply never came up before the 2009 Abrams reboot.)

      • I am basing my argument that it can’t because:

        A: All the impulse engines are on the saucer, and the only thrusters on the stardrive section are on the warp nacelles, so this would leave the stardrive section with no propulsion and very limited maneuverability.

        B: The design is to compact for it to have a seperation ability and because the secondary hull reaches so far forwards, and there is no seam on the front part of the secondary hull there is joins the saucer.

        C: Finally, the Sovereign is designed more as a battleship than an explorer, and having a join in the middle would actually effect the structural integrity of the entire design, because it is designed to be a lot more maneuverable than the Galaxy class.

      • I still think you should look up John Eaves’ comments on designing the Enterprise-E. Good point about the impulse drive, though. And you left out a point (D): Because this starship class is meant more for battle than for exploration (hence the class name “Sovereign,” after the British Navy’s “Royal Sovereign” class of battleships), separating its hulls would just be asking for trouble — especially for the captain fool enough to do it in the middle of a fight!

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s