Ain't It Cool News (

Better Intel On ENTERPRISE Ship Design!!

I am – Hercules!!

Intelligence from far more reliable sources now indicates that the designs on the German site are indeed bogus.

Though official graphics remain elusive, we are now told by these far more reliable sources that Archer's Enterprise will essentially look like Kirk's Enterprise and Picard's Enterprise -- only turned upside down! That's right: the warp nacelles and the saucer section (Yes, Virginia, there will be a saucer section) now reside slightly beneath the middle section.

(There being no up or down in space, all one need do is flip any photo of Kirk's Enterprise upside-down to get the basic idea.)

Also, expect the middle piece to be wider and flatter than those on Kirk's and Picard's Enterprises, and the saucer to be smaller in proportion to the rest of the ship than we're used to. Look for the entire ship to look flatter, with a very short or non-existent "neck" connecting the middle to the saucer section.

Readers Talkback
comments powered by Disqus
    + Expand All
  • June 27, 2001, 11 p.m. CST

    How retro can they get?

    by Eugene O

    I'll believe it when I see it. I can't imagine Rick Berman & Thugs okaying a design that would fit into the Roddenberry continuity. They seem to have little respect for the original series.

  • June 28, 2001, 12:08 a.m. CST

    I Hope You're Only Describing A Concept Design For The Ship, Her

    by Cowblaster

    Have you guys seen some of the rejected starship designs for both The Next Generation and Voyager? I can remember at least one drawing that fits this description. . . and a lot more that were far worse. I mean, how flat can that mid-section get? I assume that Archer's Enterprise will be about the same size (if not smaller) than Kirk's ship. If I see a midsection that's too flat on a ship that's too small, I'm thinkin' about crewmembers who keep banging their heads into the ceiling. Oh, well. It doesn't really matter to me anyway. . . Austin doesn't even get UPN anymore. Which, I'm starting to think, is a GOOD thing.

  • June 28, 2001, 12:30 a.m. CST

    I think I liked the fake better

    by Razor42

    It's bad enough they can't give it an original name, but then they make some lame crap like that? Shouldn't it more closely resemble a daedelus class ship or something like that ?

  • June 28, 2001, 12:53 a.m. CST

    I'd rather see the giant penis from Lexx

    by theharm

    adventures at the Tossoff 3-the world of Galactic Masturbation

  • June 28, 2001, 1:06 a.m. CST

    hmm...good point

    by DerBeppo

    Well it would be if I had half a clue about what a daedelus class ship was. I think the rabid obsession with continuity and uniformity by the hardcore fans is what turns people off from star trek. I for myself despise the original series and DS9. However I've seen every episode of The Next Generation and liked most of Voyager. That being said, I don't give half a crap about whether the exact design of this stage in the warp drive didn't come until so-in-so. 1) If you know stuff like that I'm just so very sorry. 2) I seriously doubt the people who stuff like that would matter to is not the target demographic Paramount is selling to. Each new series has brought in new fans of that specific show and, ideally, subsequent shows. I'm interested, i'll watch it, and as long as the ship isn't pink with royal blue pinstripes i'll be happy.

  • June 28, 2001, 1:20 a.m. CST

    How many more letters of the alphabet?

    by Visa Geeza

    So hang on a minute, Kirk's Enterprise had no letter at the end of it's reg. number, his second Enterprise was obviously 1701-A. What's this one going to be, -A? Jeez, I don't know why they couldn't let Kirk's be the original, as it is, and go with something else without messing with everything. I look forward to seeing this, but with much sceptisism.

  • June 28, 2001, 1:33 a.m. CST

    New Design really Old Design?

    by Unicorn

    Does anyone out there have a copy of Stephen Whitfield's "The Making of Star Trek" or David Gerrold's "The World of Star Trek". I swear that in one of these two books were several sketches of the original USS Enterprise for the 1st series, and that one of the sketches was this EXACT concept! Maybe someone up there has a strange respect for continuity after all. Because, if this is true AND I am correct, then this follows continuity as much as the addition of "Capt. (Commordore) Robert April" to the animated episode "The Counter-Clock Incident". He, too, was an early concept that was re-utilized later on as part of Trek History (i.e., the first captain of NCC 1701). And, whatever book I am referring to (World of or Making of), *that* tidbit can be found in there, too! Shit, Mr. Gerrold has his own website...I might just run and ask him myself!!

  • June 28, 2001, 3:35 a.m. CST


    by Stainles Steel

    Oh shit! Upside down? give me a break! THAT is the best they can do? How much money does Paramount have? 10 dollars? NOT a good sign!

  • June 28, 2001, 4:39 a.m. CST

    No Imagination Anymore

    by Watson

    When was the last time you saw Paramount do something right? They have no imagination, in regards to the Star Trek "Voyager Finale" with Time Travel. Their DVD department is behind everybody else in the industry with their constant disregard of what fans want.

  • June 28, 2001, 4:46 a.m. CST

    Old Idea

    by Sevrin

    When Matt Jefferies designed the original Enterprise, some of his drawings had what has been described here, with the primary hull and nacelles below the secondary hull. Roddenberry is the one who told him to flip that design over to become the Enterprise we know and love. So if the intel is correct, all they are doing is UN-doing one of Roddenberry's design decisions.

  • June 28, 2001, 5:45 a.m. CST

    Uhm... anyone else worried???

    by m.i.r.k.o

    Now I very much liked DS9's "Trials and Tribble-lations" buuuuuuut... Am I the only one who thinks that the Classic atmosphere and the DS9 computer graphics didn't match? I mean Star Wars Episode I has proven that it's a bad idea to have a movie play before its predecessors but make it with more elaborate SFX. I had the same feeling with the above mentioned DS9 episode and I'm afraid the new series will not be any different... Personally I don't think Berman and company will be able to pull this one off...

  • June 28, 2001, 6:03 a.m. CST

    Can't this thing be stopped?

    by ewem

    It's time for another Save Star Trek campaign, exceot this time the fans that care should rally against a series being aired. This debacle from Berman and his thugs should not see the light of day. They shouldn't be able to milk another cent out of it. People, bomb Paramount with letters, emails, and phone calls. Just stop this evil!

  • June 28, 2001, 6:08 a.m. CST


    by Bahdu

    Damn, I swear this site attracts the most negative motherfuckers I've ever seen.

  • June 28, 2001, 6:18 a.m. CST

    Enterprise design

    by m2298

    Yes, THE MAKING OF STAR TREK shows some early "upside down" design concepts (has anyone got a copy of the ART OF STAR TREK book to check? Lincoln Enterprises used to sell early concept designs as well). Also, does anyone recall the recreation deck in STAR TREK -- THE MOTION PICTURE? Along the wall were pictures of all the ships bearing the name "Enterprise". Among them was a design never used for any broadcast program. I doubt they will use it for this "prequel" show either, even if continuity says they should.

  • June 28, 2001, 6:49 a.m. CST

    by Vampgirl

    God guys are NEGATIVE. The new enterprise is based on a retro looking Akira class Starship..which is VERY cool. Find a pic at The Akira has the qualities of which this article talks about. Plus Paramount has a ton of money invested in this show and I do not expect a disappointment at all. If you guys dont like..dont watch.

  • June 28, 2001, 7:21 a.m. CST

    Sounds like they copied an old design...

    by Sibling

    If you want a good idea what the "upside-down" ship will look like, just watch ST2-Wrath of Khan. The USS Reliant seems a good bit like this design they're talking about.

  • June 28, 2001, 7:51 a.m. CST

    I'd say something...

    by JackBurton

    But then my post would probably just get deleted for the eigth time in two weeks. And why? Maybe it's because when I have any criticisms of this site and the people who contribute to it I don't just shout out "You guys suck!", instead I actually try to make a proper point, or maybe it's just because you don't like any real criticisms raised just in case it starts to erode the hold you have over the rest of the sheep. And I bet I'm not the only one that has seen such posts deleted, just like I'm sure that this one will go soon enough as well (although now that I've said that maybe it won't). Either way regardless of what over inflated opinions that many of the contributors on this site seem to hold of themselves I'm here to tell ya that it aint true that their shit don't stink, and whenever you guys produce another whopper I'll still be here to pull you up on it. You aint Gods, you're just second string geeks with delusions of gradure that happen to run a well titled website, and the true coolness that the site used to be when it started out (and I've been around since the newsgroup days) has slipped substantially in recent times, as the egos took hold and the contributors became more important (at least in their own minds) than the actual news they were presenting. And yet I still find myself hoping for a comeback, and a return to the coolness of old when this site did indeed mean something to many film fans, including myself. Ah well, whatever, no more ranting, you can delete me again now I guess...

  • June 28, 2001, 9:02 a.m. CST

    Upside Down Enterprise

    by J. Bubba

    I seem to recall that the TOS Enterprise was designed to be like this. Roddenberry looked at the sketches and said, "I like it, but flip it over."

  • June 28, 2001, 9:21 a.m. CST


    by toshiba

    Hey Jack Burton, Take a pill buddy. Jeez, is this all you have to worry about? It's just a website.

  • June 28, 2001, 10:24 a.m. CST

    The original

    by Ciggy

    Its true what m2298 said about the recreation deck on the original. The ship IS actually the 'S.S. Enterprise', designed by Jeffries for an abandoned series idea for Roddenberry (I guess he thought about a prequel at one point as well) and if you want to see roughly what it looks like, go to

  • June 28, 2001, 10:43 a.m. CST


    by Wolverines dad

    I hear this is the new Enterprise-- - I also heard the new ship could look like an upside-down Akira class.

  • June 28, 2001, 10:45 a.m. CST

    Upside-down starship? Sounds like...

    by _jerkwad_loser_

    Sounds like it will look like a Star Wars Pod Racer to me... I just hope they have a "Trials and Tribble-ations" type episode where they go FORWARD in time to meet Kirk or Picard, etc. C' KNOW they will...

  • June 28, 2001, 10:46 a.m. CST

    Cowblaster (and other Austinites)

    by Ophelia 's twin

    Austin will once again have UPN (on Time-Warner) as of August 2.

  • June 28, 2001, 11:59 a.m. CST

    "Making of Star Trek"

    by occoquan1

    Why the heck don't they just pull a design from the "Making of Star Trek"? I mean, there are plenty of "old" starship designs representing earlier versions of the "Enterprise." One of those would be just fine, and at least it wouldn't ignore the past established history of Trek like some of the more recent series have managed to do. If I recall, there is a design that has a very cylindrical starship with a globe attached towards the front (kind of where the saucer would be later). That would be a more logical design...

  • June 28, 2001, 12:22 p.m. CST

    That's Daedelus, occoquan1

    by Spoons

    You're describing the aforementioned Daedelus class ship mentioned above. (I know I'm misspelling it, but I'm lazy). I agree that it would make a lot of sense, but it's kind of an ugly design, in my opinion. The ship I always wanted to see more of was the nebula class, which as I recall, is sort of like an upsidedown Enterprise D, but with this strange triangle shaped wedge (I call it the spolier) located behind and above the saucer section. It's way to advanced-looking to be used in ENTERPRISE, though.

  • June 28, 2001, 2:37 p.m. CST

    sounds funky

    by Tall_Boy

    and yes, I agree most of the ppl who post on topics on this site are just angry jerkwards who need to vent thier frustration at something. As for this design, sounds interesting. Smaller & sleeker. And besides, so far EVERYTHING I've heard about the pilot will rock pretty hard. Me = pumped for ENTERPRISE

  • June 28, 2001, 3:37 p.m. CST

    Not "upside down" -- but "flatter"

    by VarietyWriter

    My prediction: It won't look entirely like the standard Starfleet ship upside-down but instead will be "flatter". The saucer and main body will be a sleek one-piece design -- there won't be a "neck" connecting the saucer to the body. Also, the saucer will be situated just SLIGHTLY above the body but the entire section will be one and the same with the body. And below the saucer, right at the arc where it rises slightly above the body, is where a radar dish will be situated. The warp nacelles will look "bolted on" to the body, indicating that they were not part of the ship's original design. But, rather, they are pieces of Vulcan technology that have been added on to the ship. The design of the nacelles will complement the design of the saucer-body ship, but the two design styles won't look exactly as if they were originally meant for one another.

  • June 28, 2001, 4:23 p.m. CST

    UPSIDE DOWN !?!?!?!?!?!?

    by not_the_real

    HAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!! Come on, this has GOT to be a joke!!!! A number of years ago, one of Australia's more pathetic supermarket tabloid magazines ran a story on the entire Star Trek phenomenon, in the article, they had a photo of Picard's Enterprise - UPSIDE DOWN!!! I laughed for a week at seeing that, and I think I will laugh just as long after hearing this. Star Trek Enterprise may be a fanboy's masturbation fodder, but THIS SHOW WILL SUCK!!!!! Let nobody doubt that Roddenberry would be turning over in his grave and that Berman is the great Satan. Star Trek is dead. It died when The Next Generation ended. Get over it.

  • June 28, 2001, 4:43 p.m. CST

    Visa Geeza and another image

    by coop

    For those of you who haven't been paying attention (Visa), This is not a Federation ship so calling it the Enterprise is not changing the show's mythology any more than building a tanker and calling it the Enterprise. As far as that German site, did you notice on an inside page they had a cooler junkier version that I liked a hell of alot. To go directly to the image go to:

  • June 28, 2001, 5:38 p.m. CST

    Matt Jefferies' Flipped Design

    by Tash

    I almost hate to add this, but for those interested in a look at Matt Jefferies' design and some speculation around it, take a peek at: Based on comments by John Eaves, I suspect that the actual design will be somewhere between this and the Akira-class seen in First Contact. A saucer (of some sort) lower than or close to the nacelles, a smaller secondary hull up above that. Of course, everything is digital and until they hit that final "render" button, nothing is for sure.

  • June 28, 2001, 6:17 p.m. CST

    What happened to Shatner's third wife

    by KingKrypton

    The truth of the matter is, Shatner's third wife Nerine--the one who died--was an alcoholic. Her addiction was so bad that it nearly drove Shatner to file for divorce, but they decided to keep that marriage together and she went into counseling for her drinking problems. However, one night, Shatner was coming home from a visit with one of his daughters and found his wife dead at the bottom of their swimming pool. (That's right, FOUND HER DEAD. He didn't kill her.) The death was ruled as an accident, although many close to the couple believe that Nerine's alcoholism had a lot to do with what happened. Simply put, she was an addict who ended up meeting an unexpectedly nasty end.

  • June 28, 2001, 6:29 p.m. CST


    by dontef

  • June 28, 2001, 7:08 p.m. CST

    Enterprise design

    by chrisd

    Check out the Starfleet Museum site at Too bad they didn't look at those ships and try to follow some of the design logic there. I am cautiously pessimistic about the design considering John Eaves designed Enterprise-E. Nothing against him but E-Eis not the prettiest design. Akira is interesting, but we want some that looks previous to TOS, but still looks cool, like the designs at the Starfleet Museum, but we'll see. Meanwhile, check that site out!

  • June 28, 2001, 7:28 p.m. CST

    Regarding the bathrooms on the Enterprise...

    by Redbeard_NV

    During an appearance at Hofstra University many years ago, an audience member asked William Shatner where were the bathrooms. His reply: "Do you remember that big chair I sat in?"

  • June 28, 2001, 8:05 p.m. CST

    sounds like voyager

    by me-spocko

    squished, no neck, flatter....sounds like Voyager. Upside down sounds dumb, I hope they don't try something that stupid. Make it a ship we can

  • June 28, 2001, 9:11 p.m. CST

    Chrisd, that is the funkiest, freshest, superdope FLYEST site I'

    by Sith Lord Jesus

    WORD. If Berman & Braga are reading this I hope like hell they take a look at that thing, get in touch with the creator and hire him to work on ENTERPRISE. Add decent scripts and my ass would be GLUED to the set every time it came on! And chrisd, in gratitude I give you this--the closest thing I've seen to an actual space museum on the web: Enjoy. As for me, back to droolin' over them purty pictures. ^_^

  • June 29, 2001, 6:10 a.m. CST

    peace and serenity to you for you are of the body

    by journalist

    From reading some of these postings, it is apparent that a few individuals would benefit from a week of ... FESTIVAL! FESTIVAL! AAAAAHAHAHAHAH FESTIVAL!

  • June 29, 2001, 11:58 a.m. CST

    the new pic at trek web looks good

    by theharm

    I gotta admit the upside down thing bites major-but the new shot of some guy standing in front of a trailer with a drawing of the alleged new ship looks pretty good. Check it out at or could be a decent looking ship as long as it isn't upside down.

  • June 29, 2001, 12:55 p.m. CST


    by Scarab

    Captain Picard had a nice collection of all the ships carrying the name Enterprise decorating a wall in a conference room. If this were the predecessor to the original Enterprise, you'd think it would also have had a place on that wall. Upside down or not. Berman will never rhyme with consistency.

  • June 29, 2001, 4:11 p.m. CST


    by theharm

    I hear you man-but really consistency went out the door way back in TNG the first time they decided that a starship can't manuever at warp-remember "Elaan of Troyius" where Kirk told Sulu to pivot at warp 2 and fire all photon tubes? Ever since it's been impulse this and sublight that. And it's not like I really sit there and write all this shit down but hell sometimes it's something that sticks in your head-like the pivot at warp thing- that when it gets contradicted it just pulls you out of the story. Hell that whole movie was inconsistent-Picard had dealt with his Borg feelings so many times after Wolf 359 :( Drumhead; I, Borg ;and Descent 1&2) that when he suddenly went Rambo on them in that movie it was strained and out of left field. to B&B the only consistency is lack there of. But I am still going to give the show at least 5 episodes to suck me in- Bakula did good work on Q leap and the ship looks okay- if it turns into another Voyager I'm going to change channels at warp 2.

  • June 30, 2001, 4:43 a.m. CST

    Hold on a second, Naysayers......this is consistent !

    by RobinP

    When the design of the original USS Enterprise was being considered and brainstormed prior to Jeffery Hunter's appearance in "The Menagerie" as the original choice for Captain, designs were drawn up. Roddenberry took one, turned it upside down and said THAT was the design he wanted, with the nacelles up, rather than down like a couple of skis. So having the design look like an inverted original Enterprise is actually going way back to the original concept of the original design. The original designs can actually be seen in "The Making of Star Trek" a worthwhile read not only to Trekkies, but to anyone wih an interest in how they got shows on the air in the sixties....unless of course it's out of print.

  • June 30, 2001, 12:38 p.m. CST

    I wonder

    by Xpertinspace

    What do you think will happen to this enterprise after this series? I say it gets decommishend, Although it might be destroyed.

  • June 30, 2001, 8:39 p.m. CST


    by Drath

    (For those of you easily unsettled by negativity please skip to next post, the rest may read for their own amusement) Eaves ruined the design of the Enterprise by removing the graceful neck. His rationale was that it could get blown off too easily. That's why they have shields, you dumbass! The Enterprise E's design is an aesthetic eye soar thanks to the omission of the neck. Eaves wasn't responsible for lopping off the neck on Voyager, but that design also suffered for removing a staple of the ship designs. It's amazing, they'll keep the same old time travel mind twisting and holodeck terrors but the stuff that works they toss?!! ARRRRGGGGGHHHHH! And this new ship is supposed to be from a time of exploration, why take away the neck for concern about it being blown off? The only ship that didn't need a neck was the Defiant, and that's because it was deliberately designed to be a war ship. Even if you want to say that's what the Enterprise E was supposed to be, which is deviating too much from what the Enterprise ships are supposed to be about, this older Enterprise shouldn't be designed for battles . . . or is this more of Brannon Braga's sick disrespect for established canon meddling again? Damn you, BRAAAAAAAAAAAAAGA!