# 1/2500 '09 Movie Enterprise?



## Magesblood (May 12, 2008)

At 1/2500 scale, the JJPrise will only be just over 5 1/2 inches long. That's tiny!

I think they would have been far better off going with 1/1000 scale which would bring it to just under 14 1/2 inches long. That's a much more manageable scale.


----------



## cozmo (Nov 29, 2004)

Are you sure its that big?

There are some folks who like 1/2500 scale.

Ships named Enterprise


__
Image uploading. Refresh page to view










I don't like the new Enterprise, but would consider including it.


----------



## Magesblood (May 12, 2008)

yeah. Given a "real" length of 366 meters, I used scalemaster to calculate its size if it were kitted in 1/2500 and 1/1000 scales.


----------



## cozmo (Nov 29, 2004)

Well dang, that would make it an inch longer than the TOS Enterprise, and a half inch longer than the refit.


----------



## miraclefan (Apr 11, 2009)

cozmo said:


> Are you sure its that big?
> 
> There are some folks who like 1/2500 scale.
> 
> ...


No offence, but your Ent-J is Fugly! 
And which NX-O1 do you have? The Romando, F-TOYS, Johnny Lightning?


----------



## miraclefan (Apr 11, 2009)

Magesblood said:


> yeah. Given a "real" length of 366 meters, I used scalemaster to calculate its size if it were kitted in 1/2500 and 1/1000 scales.


So you don't belive the Nu-E is over 2,000 Feet? R2 has said at 1/2500 the JJPRISE will be almost 1 foot.


----------



## Seashark (Mar 28, 2006)

You've touched upon a real hot-button issue here. The 'official' lenghth of the JJprise is roughly 2,500 feet. That put's a 1/2500th scale model at about 12 inches.

Edit: As I see miraclefan has already stated.


----------



## miraclefan (Apr 11, 2009)

Seashark said:


> You've touched upon a real hot-button issue here. The 'official' lenghth of the JJprise is roughly 2,500 feet. That put's a 1/2500th scale model at about 12 inches.


Well I guess if someone feels it's at the same length as the REFIT then they can just call there Nu-E model at 1'1000 Scale. And I know ALL to well about the hot-button topic that is the E's scale. (I Debated it on the Trektoday forums.)


----------



## Seashark (Mar 28, 2006)

miraclefan said:


> Well I guess if someone feels it's at the same length as the REFIT then they can just call there Nu-E model at 1'1000 Scale.


Which is why it was a stroke of genius on Round2's part, scaling it as they did.


----------



## derric1968 (Jun 13, 2003)

Hey Magesblood, this topic has been talked to death already, but apparently, you're not up to speed. At the risk of re-opening old wounds, I'll give you the scoop.

The '09 Movie Enterprise model is going to be about 11.5" long. In other words, the new Enterprise is BIG. Like, Enterprie-D big.


----------



## Magesblood (May 12, 2008)

derric1968 said:


> Hey Magesblood, this topic has been talked to death already, but apparently, you're not up to speed. At the risk of re-opening old wounds, I'll give you the scoop.
> 
> The '09 Movie Enterprise model is going to be about 11.5" long. In other words, the new Enterprise is BIG. Like, Enterprie-D big.


Thank you. That makes me feel loads better!

I got the length from Ex Astris.


----------



## Zombie_61 (Apr 21, 2004)

miraclefan said:


> No offence, but your Ent-J is Fugly!


It's not his fault; the Ent-J is just a fugly ship.


----------



## Bruce Bishop (Jan 17, 1999)

What is an Enterprise J? Where did it come from, etc.? I've never heard of it, but I also don't hang out on Star Trek type forums so maybe I've missed something.


----------



## bccanfield (Nov 17, 2002)

Enterprise J

From the 26th Century Temporal Wars in Star Trek Enterprise

These are the best concept pics I have seen so far.
http://legacy.filefront.com/screenshots/File/95457/2


----------



## Magesblood (May 12, 2008)

http://drexfiles.wordpress.com/category/ent/enterprise-j/


----------



## miraclefan (Apr 11, 2009)

Anyone else hoping R2 makes a U.S.S. KELVIN in the same scale?


----------



## PixelMagic (Aug 25, 2004)

Yes, I want a Kelvin model more than I do an Enterprise.


----------



## derric1968 (Jun 13, 2003)

PixelMagic said:


> Yes, I want a Kelvin model more than I do an Enterprise.


Ditto!!!


----------



## Trek Ace (Jul 8, 2001)

I think they mentioned that as a distinct possibility early on. In fact, I wouldn't mind them releasing it in several scales. I like the _Kelvin_ as much as I dislike the _"JJPrise"_.


----------



## Asmenoth (Feb 27, 2009)

I want both Kelvin and Enterprise, but the advantage of them making a Kelvin is that we will be able to make the other ships form the movie. Can't use the parts from the Enterprise to make any other ship...unless we make new ships.


----------



## ClubTepes (Jul 31, 2002)

I don't get the facination with the Kelvin.


----------



## cozmo (Nov 29, 2004)

miraclefan said:


> No offence, but your Ent-J is Fugly!
> And which NX-O1 do you have? The Romando, F-TOYS, Johnny Lightning?


I don't know what NX-01 I have. I got a couple of them a long time ago and they came in baggies with nothing else. Sorry, I don't remember.

The Enterprise reboot is now the size of the the E-D? Well okay, I guess I don't need one now.


----------



## Asmenoth (Feb 27, 2009)

ClubTepes said:


> I don't get the facination with the Kelvin.


It could be a bit of "It's not the JJ Prise, so it's cool to like this one.".


----------



## Richard Baker (Aug 8, 2006)

I also like the Kelvin and the other fleet ships over the NuE. They remind me of the old classic Trek ships with distinct models and regular geometry in the engineering deisgn. The NuE, ignoring the weird scale/size/ is too swoopy-goopy- I will build a kit of it, but a modded one.

.


----------



## Dr. Brad (Oct 5, 1999)

I know it might seem a bit goofy, but even though I don't like the JJPrise, I would have bought one had they not gone all nuts with the size of the thing. Since I don't have single 1/2500 kit, I won't get it. Course, I could just pretend it's really 1/1000. But I'm sure of you will do great builds of it and I look forward to seeing them....


----------



## CaptFrank (Jan 29, 2005)

ClubTepes said:


> I don't get the fascination with the Kelvin.


I don't understand my own interest in it.
Yet, I want a nice sized kit of it!


----------



## bccanfield (Nov 17, 2002)

Its the nacelles (2009 movie Enterprise). They are out of proportion to the rest of the ship and too close together. This odd configuration and the way it flew in the movie kind of reminded me of a fish.


----------



## Richard Baker (Aug 8, 2006)

Thw whole engine/pylon/secondary hull area is not proportioned correctly IMO. SOme features do work well- the saucer pylon blending into the strongback and the undercut details in the secondary hull look great. When the model kit is released I really want to work with the design and see how it can get balanced out.


----------



## Dave P (Jan 5, 2005)

cozmo said:


> The Enterprise reboot is now the size of the the E-D?


After doing 5 min. of research, I came up with the TOS-E being 948 ft., the E-D 2,106 ft.

The ILM art director was quoted in Cinefex as saying they scaled up the original from 947 ft. (pretty darn close to what I found) to 1,200 ft. to accommodate a larger shuttle bay and a slightly grander appearance.

Just watching the movie you can tell it's not the size of the D. Misleading propaganda that I think was put out there before the movie came out, possibly before they were allowed to talk about it.


----------



## razorwyre1 (Jan 28, 2004)

Dave P said:


> After doing 5 min. of research, I came up with the TOS-E being 948 ft., the E-D 2,106 ft.
> 
> The ILM art director was quoted in Cinefex as saying they scaled up the original from 947 ft. (pretty darn close to what I found) to 1,200 ft. to accommodate a larger shuttle bay and a slightly grander appearance.
> 
> Just watching the movie you can tell it's not the size of the D. Misleading propaganda that I think was put out there before the movie came out, possibly before they were allowed to talk about it.


is that big enough for a brewery?


----------



## robiwon (Oct 20, 2006)

I think if the neck was just moved forward on the secondary hull it would balance out a LOT better! Can anyone photoshop that from a side view?


----------



## bccanfield (Nov 17, 2002)

> Thw whole engine/pylon/secondary hull area is not proportioned correctly IMO. SOme features do work well- the saucer pylon blending into the strongback and the undercut details in the secondary hull look great. When the model kit is released I really want to work with the design and see how it can get balanced out.


I would really be interested in seeing some pics of some modified design kit bashes. I think they should have consulted one of Chip Foose's 23rd century descendants when they did the 2009 Enterprise design.


----------



## Richard Baker (Aug 8, 2006)

robiwon said:


> I think if the neck was just moved forward on the secondary hull it would balance out a LOT better! Can anyone photoshop that from a side view?


http://i41.photobucket.com/albums/e267/RBaker2164/secondary_hull_for_oldschoo.jpg
(From the TrekBBS.com)


----------



## Nektu (Aug 15, 2001)

So much better... 
having seen Church's original sketches and paintings, who'd idea was it to mess with the dorsal?

KK


----------



## miraclefan (Apr 11, 2009)

Richard Baker said:


> http://i41.photobucket.com/albums/e267/RBaker2164/secondary_hull_for_oldschoo.jpg
> (From the TrekBBS.com)


I don't know...I kinda like the Nu-E better the way it is. It looks more Streamlined and compact over the ''Original'' looking Nu-E.


----------



## jbond (Aug 29, 2002)

I like it fine too but I'm SURE the producers will adopt every fan's special modified version that's so much better for the next movie...


----------



## bccanfield (Nov 17, 2002)

> http://i41.photobucket.com/albums/e2...r_oldschoo.jpg
> So much better...


I agree. Spread the Nacelles about 15% further apart (top view) and I think you got a neat looking variation on the design.


----------



## Richard Baker (Aug 8, 2006)

That and add some mass to the rear of the secondary hull- it is just to pinched small looking to have the massive engines above it.
I did not get any of the existing replicas of this ship- I am waiting for the kit so I can explore the potentials of the deisgn. It has some good things happening with it, it just needs to be a bit more balanced...

.


----------



## JeffG (May 10, 2004)

http://legacy.filefront.com/screenshots/File/95457/2
Wow. And some folks call JJ's design ugly! Anyway, I still think the size of the Abrams design Enterprise kit will be waaay underwhelming especially in light of how big it really is and how impressive the 1/350th refit is.

Granted there's no way the recent film's ship could be made at 1/350th, but personally, I think it should be roughly the same size as the large refit kit. Just my take on it. I'll still buy it anyway.


----------



## HabuHunter32 (Aug 22, 2009)

I like the JJprize more than I did when I first viewed it in the film. It kinda grows on you after a while! I wish this kit and the forthcoming Moebius Galactica were going to be larger but in this economy you cant blame the manufactures for going for lower pricepoints for increased sales potential. With a little luck these smaller kits will sell enough units to justify larger scale versions later! I sure hope so...a 36in NU series Battlestar Galactica would be fine indeed! :thumbsup::thumbsup:


----------



## Richard Baker (Aug 8, 2006)

One interesting thing about the design of the NuE is that is was created to look good in motion on film, not instatic shots where you get a good look at it. It is like the Cloverfield creature- when you see it on film it looks bizarre but new and cool. When you see it in a full body static shot it looks way out of proportion and just plain silly.

.


----------



## CaptFrank (Jan 29, 2005)

Why is everyone using "Nu" to describe the 
new Star Trek movie, or _Enterprise_?
Is it really that hard to type "new"?



> *Nu* (uppercase Ν, lowercase ν; also transcribed as Ny; modern Greek: Νι [ni] Ni), is the 13th letter of the Greek alphabet. In the system of Greek numerals it has a value of 50. Its Latin Alphabet equivalent is N, though the lowercase resembles the Roman lowercase v.
> 
> The name of the letter is written νῦ in Ancient Greek and traditional Modern Greek polytonic orthography, while in Modern Greek it is sometimes written νι [ni]. In English, the name of the letter is pronounced /ˈnuː/ or /ˈnjuː/.
> 
> ...


----------



## Richard Baker (Aug 8, 2006)

Why does everyone use 'JJPrise'?
The Nu is what I use for shorthand for 'reimagined' concepts- NuBSG for example.
This is a distinction from New which is the latest iteration (of the fleet of ships named Enterprise in this case).


----------



## Magesblood (May 12, 2008)

shorthand, to be cute, clever, whatever.

Enterprise is 10 letters. JJPrise is 7 letters. NuEnterprise is 12 letters.


----------



## machgo (Feb 10, 2010)

The newly designed starship Enterprise featured in the movie directed by J.J. Abrams is the only thing in the movie I liked! :tongue:


----------



## Magesblood (May 12, 2008)

Magesblood said:


> shorthand, to be cute, clever, whatever.
> 
> Enterprise is 10 letters. JJPrise is 7 letters. NuEnterprise is 12 letters.



to clarify, I didn't mean that people who abbreviate or shorten the name are running with the same crowd who replace letters with numbers or spell things the short way to be lazy like a lot of kids do on the internet. I'm just saying that we as a group recognize "JJPrise" as the NuEnterprise/Enterprise from the '09 movie. That's just our vernacular as geeks.


----------



## Magesblood (May 12, 2008)

I hope people feel less insulted by what I wrote or did I kill the thread?


----------



## machgo (Feb 10, 2010)

I wasn't insulted. I was just being silly.


----------



## greg8365 (Dec 31, 2008)

Magesblood said:


> Thank you. That makes me feel loads better!
> 
> I got the length from Ex Astris.


I know this has been debated a lot, but anyone that has any questions about the size of the new movie Enterprise needs to check out ex-astris-scientia.com. Despite what JJ would like folks to believe, the on screen evidence depicts the correct size of the new ship. My hope is that someone like Starcrafts comes out with a "properly scaled" version, especially since they have released what looks like a properly scaled fleet. If not, then maybe I can kitbash one from the existing Starcrafts ships.


----------



## CaptFrank (Jan 29, 2005)

greg8365 said:


> I know this has been debated a lot, but anyone that has any questions about the size of the new movie Enterprise needs to check out ex-astris-scientia.com. Despite what JJ would like folks to believe, the on screen evidence depicts _the correct size of the new ship_. My hope is that someone like Starcrafts comes out with a "properly scaled" version, especially since they have released what looks like a properly scaled fleet. If not, then maybe I can kitbash one from the existing Starcrafts ships.


What is "the correct size"?


----------



## greg8365 (Dec 31, 2008)

CaptFrank said:


> What is "the correct size"?


Based on the analysis on the ex-astris-scientia website, it is approximately 366 meters. This was arrived at from numerous screenshots, as well as this quote from the website: "The eighth Enterprise as designed by Ryan Church was originally 366m long and later scaled up at ILM without any changes to the design. The new huge size was made up way too late and was evidently insufficiently communicated and accounted for." Here is the link if you want to review it for yourself. 

http://www.ex-astris-scientia.org/articles/new_enterprise_comment.htm#size 

Now, if the Narada was also supersized like the new Enterprise, then would actually be closer to 4,000 meters (or about 3 times the length of a Romulan Warbird), instead of well over 8,000 meters (Super Star Destroyer range). The smaller size also makes sense here as well. It's just kind of funny what happens when you have Star Wars folks work on a Star Trek movie...everything gets bigger! I REALLY like this movie by the way, even with the inconsistencies. 

Trust me, being a fan of just about every Sci Fi show there is (Star Wars, B5, BSG, Stargate, etc), I really wish that Star Trek ships were more comparable in size. But you also have to respect the design lineage.


----------



## charonjr (Mar 27, 2000)

Oh boy! I just found an oldie but goodie. After Star Trek 3 came out, I first tried my hand at an Enterprise redesign. I ended up going with a bigger, faster, stronger, etc. approach. Later on, after TNG came out and I hand my first experience working with Aldus Freehand on a Macintosh, I drew my comparison chart and dubbed her the Enterprise E at 2625 feet.

Anyway, I'm attaching the chart for fun.


----------



## Zombie_61 (Apr 21, 2004)

greg8365 said:


> Trust me, being a fan of just about every Sci Fi show there is (Star Wars, B5, BSG, Stargate, etc), I really wish that Star Trek ships were more comparable in size. But you also have to respect the design lineage.


I can understand and agree with the size increases between the various Enterprise classes (i.e., the NCC-1701, -A, -B, -C, -D, and -E), but Abrams arbitrarily scaling up his Enterprise without altering the design cues makes no sense whatsoever. That said, I concur with the assessment on the Ex Astris Scientia website, and consider the JJPrise to be only marginally longer than the Refit regardless of what Abrams says.


----------

