Page 2 of 2
Posted: 2002-12-03 01:32am
by Vympel
Do we have any evidence that the thing actually is a turret though?
Posted: 2002-12-03 10:10am
by Alyeska
Vympel wrote:Do we have any evidence that the thing actually is a turret though?
http://www.shiporama.org/images/sovereign/1701e-59.jpg
And if you watch Insurrection you will see something similar. Indications are it can traverse at or near 90 degrees to each side.
Posted: 2002-12-03 11:21am
by Vympel
Is it traveresed in that shot? Looks dead ahead....
Posted: 2002-12-03 12:23pm
by Alyeska
Vympel wrote:Is it traveresed in that shot? Looks dead ahead....
It is aimed dead ahead, but you can see the space to either side. It looks like it can traverse to either side. I used to be skeptic about it being a turret, but when I saw this picture that confirmed it for me. It has to be turreted to a degree.
Posted: 2002-12-03 08:50pm
by Vertigo1
There was also concept art which had the forward qtorp launcher actually come out of the hull and fire. (ala B5's defense grid) Pity they didn't keep that design. That would've been wicked.
Posted: 2002-12-03 10:14pm
by Vympel
Vertigo1 wrote:There was also concept art which had the forward qtorp launcher actually come out of the hull and fire. (ala B5's defense grid) Pity they didn't keep that design. That would've been wicked.
I prefer it the way it is- there's no reason to add pointless complexity like weapons that come out of hatches. Sure it would've been cool, but would it have been pragmatic?
Posted: 2002-12-03 11:24pm
by Howedar
It would have been funky, but it would not have been in keeping with established Trek design doctrine.
Posted: 2002-12-05 04:20pm
by Lord Pounder
I bought a model of the Enterprise E just after it came out. There is no rear launcher on it. It seems to me the SFX team are making specs up as they co along.
