Loks really splendid ...bravissimo!V:DDD.Hugsxx

I think the cool factor was involved in the original constitution class as well as the more modern ships. Notice the streamlined appearance, sinple and elegant, which is what folks thought of as cool back in the 60s. Compare it to the 69 corvette, simple and sleek. Of course a lot had to do with technical limitations as well. And TOS had a really low budget compared to the later series. I personally thought the NX-01 was cooler looking than the 1701. She just had a more stylish look. I think my favorite is actually the Voyager, I love the variable geometry warp nacelles. Keep up the good work. You should compile a series of all of the major classes in high res.

Fantastic image! Great use of lighting. I love the composition!

I admit, I'm not all too familiar with Enterprise. I watched it a few times, but it didn't really do it for me. To the designer's credit, there is supposed to be a reason why it looks like a ship 200 years its junior, not unlike how some airplane designs are still in use today after some decades. Plus, the Klingons apparently had used the same basic design for a couple centuries. The problem I have with the NX-01 isn't so much it's design, but that it simply looks more modern than it should - it looks out of place within Star Trek. There is the budget of TOS and technology of the time to keep in mind, but that still doesn't excuse the fact that in many regards (at least from what I've seen of Star Trek: Enterprise) Enterprise seems more 'advanced' than that of ships from the TOS era. Sure, looks aren't everything, but they do make the first impression. With the Akiraprise... er, excuse me, Enterprise NX-01, take a look at its predecessor, the XCV-330, which was decommissioned 28 years before Enterprise launched - you can see it briefly in Star Trek: The Motion Picture (after the space shuttle Enterprise on the wall) and in an episode of Enterprise. In less than 30 years (the time needed to design and build the ship), the basic design changed from a relatively simplistic and seemingly Vulcan-inspired design to one not unlike that which for the most part has lasted into the 24th century and beyond. I have to wonder about the design, being more like ships that came along 100 years later than a predecessor retired around the time the Warp 5 project was started. Then again, the earlier Enterprise could have been more than Vulcan-inspired; it could have actually been a Vulcan designed and/or built ship. The Phoenix had warp nacelles, yet this Enterprise took a different approach, then the nacelles returned to Earth starships later. If the ship is indeed Vulcan in origin, this make some sense, but little is known about this first Warp 2 capable ship, so it's really hard to say. Also, consider some of the other designs in between that of the Phoenix and that of Enterprise. All things considered, I think the NX-01 is not a good design considering Star Trek as a whole and where it fits into the history. I don't really know how I would've made the Enterprise were it up to me. And that's kind of the problem with prequels. I expect that we may see more of the same in practice with the next Star Trek movie, which is supposed to pre-date TOS and the Constitution Class Enterprise, if I'm not mistaken. Then again, Star Trek isn't the only one guilty of this. I still stand by my earlier comment though, about the Enterprise-E being better than the Prometheus (the ship that could split into three sections) or the pointy, sleek, curved surfaces of the Relativity's exterior - although the Relativity comes from the 29th Century, so there may be other things contributing to its design. I think the basic design used from TOS onward works. Some designs are downright ugly, but looks aren't everything; still, there are some designs that I really have to wonder about. Sure, maybe there are better ways to go about Starship design, but Starfleet settled on a basic idea and once they did, they chose to stick with it and constantly revise and improve it. Just another 2 cents' worth from me. Maybe a little more. I don't consider myself a hard-core Trekkie, but I grew up with reruns of TOS and then TNG. When I saw what the new( (old) Enterprise looked like, all I could think was that it was wrong. I admit, part of it is the overall appearance (I have the same issue with the Star Wars prequels as well), but there's more to it than that. Okay, I'm done now.

kewl models....sleek is the coolness part...does it have anything to do with space itself? The ships of tv are shrouding in a field anyways, so the aero dynamics wouldnt really come into play unless they were in ultra low orbit or landing...like ST Voyager would do....anyhoo...trek nerd here..lol...I really like your modeling in this.. Ron

Nice ships ^^

Nice render, from what I remember the Ent model actually was inspired by the akira class, it was admitted. That said, I don't see anything wrong with that. Ent was an NX prototype (and thus bound to look more complicated and less standardized), whereas the TOS enterprise came after the Earth-Romulan war (when simple to mass produce starships in modular form were seen as beneficial). Besides, if you're making a Trek show in 2000 you're NOT going to make the ship look like a 1960s model. Star wars had a similar problem in trying to make the prequels progress (regress) from sleek starships to the blocky greeble laden late 1970s types we all know and love.