The Akiraprise : my old, old analysis

Bounty · Post by **Bounty** » 2005-12-12 08:46am

Looky what I found on my harddrive

EAS did a much better breakdown of why the NX-01 was a rip-off, and this picture only works for the top view when resized so that the saucer outline matches, but here goes ayway :

1 Identical deflector housing
2 Box section starts at the exact same point
3 Bridge superstructure starts at the same point
4 Bridge dome starts at the same point
5 Bridge dome ends at the same point
6 Pieces of unspecified equipment on the catamaran hulls in nearly the same place
7 Virtually identical impulse engine housing at a similar location on the saucer
8 Catamaran hull extends inward at the end of the saucer
9 Nearly identical shuttlebay details (specifically the little structure above the centerline)
10 Pod at same location

Did I miss anything

(note : I have grown to like the NX class, and I know it looks sufficiently different from other angles. But you have to admit, they really did try hard to make it an Akira clone...)

Tyrian2000 · Post by **Tyrian2000** » 2005-12-12 09:12am

Heh, I knew it was rip-off.

Zor · Post by **Zor** » 2005-12-12 11:16am

This Whole "Akiraprise" thing always seemed somewhat Trivial to me. So what if it looked like a latter ship, i have seen worse done designs than the NX-01. That and since there has been several threads on this subject already, this thread seems to be just using precussive force to inflict damage on a Deceased Ugulate to me.

Zor

Thag · Post by **Thag** » 2005-12-12 12:34pm

Keep in mind, if you throw the Akyazi class PA's into the mix, you can link it into the Akira.

Crazedwraith · Post by **Crazedwraith** » 2005-12-12 12:58pm

That bit at the front of the akira isn't the deflector though. It a torp array. The Deflector hangs off the bottom of the saucer.

How about you take other view points and show how they're similar? Oh wait they're not.

Bounty · Post by **Bounty** » 2005-12-12 04:19pm

That bit at the front of the akira isn't the deflector though. It a torp array. The Deflector hangs off the bottom of the saucer.

Yes, you're right. I just didn't really know what to call the recessed area.

How about you take other view points and show how they're similar? Oh wait they're not.

Like I said...

this picture only works for the top view

Crazedwraith · Post by **Crazedwraith** » 2005-12-12 04:39pm

Bounty wrote:
Yes, you're right. I just didn't really know what to call the recessed area.

What's wrong with recessed area?

Like I said...

this picture only works for the top view

You're right you did. My apologies.

tumbletom · Post by **tumbletom** » 2005-12-12 07:46pm

Is the Akira the same length as the Enterprise?

Spanky The Dolphin · Post by **Spanky The Dolphin** » 2005-12-12 08:34pm

tumbletom wrote:Is the Akira the same length as the Enterprise?

No, the Akira-class is about 440 meters whille the NX-class is 225 meters.

Solauren · Post by **Solauren** » 2005-12-12 08:59pm

Bah, you are all wrong!

Both the Akira and NX are variants of the old FASA Loknar class frigate, put out years before either of them.

The Dark · Post by **The Dark** » 2005-12-12 09:05pm

The Production Designer (Herman Zimmerman) said the NX was based off "a minor vessel that had been used in a battle in one of the features that had been created by ILM." Given the similarities to the Akira, I'd say the two together provide at least a decent probability that the NX class is, indeed, based off the Akira.

Crossroads Inc. · Post by **Crossroads Inc.** » 2005-12-12 09:15pm

Which says something about the 'creative' process in trek that they have to 'borrow' other ship ideas rather then making something that would fit into the Design lineage of Enterprise or maybe something ORIGINAL.

Bounty · Post by **Bounty** » 2005-12-13 04:25am

Crossroads Inc. wrote:Which says something about the 'creative' process in trek that they have to 'borrow' other ship ideas rather then making something that would fit into the Design lineage of Enterprise or maybe something ORIGINAL.

The story goes that the original idea was to make an all-new "primitive" ship ship - something along the lines ofthis - but B and/or the other B stepped in and said, "the fans like the Akira, so just make something resembling it".

Fortunately, the other ENT-era ships were a lot less derivative (the Vulcan ship lineage, in particular, was very well-done, and I really like the Intrepid design)

The Dark · Post by **The Dark** » 2005-12-13 05:29pm

Crossroads Inc. wrote:Which says something about the 'creative' process in trek that they have to 'borrow' other ship ideas rather then making something that would fit into the Design lineage of Enterprise or maybe something ORIGINAL.

According to the designer, it was deliberate because they wanted to show there was a continuity between the shows, that even the early Starfleet's ships had an influence on future Federation vessels. They chose the Akira because they had trouble designing anything similar to the Enterprise that wasn't either fugly or too similar to the original.

ngc7293 · Post by **ngc7293** » 2005-12-14 02:24am

I know this has all been talked about and anything I say will be a repeat, but I'm new and I would rather not dig up old stuff. (Most forums hate when people go digging)

Anyway, no matter the excuse, the Enterprise group were lazy so they got something people already liked rather than trying something new. Why gamble on a new idea, when you can guarantee peoples interest by stealing an old ship.

If two shows can get away with totally different designs and do reasonably well, then why not this one? A super primitive ship can be made to look very cool.

Trek could have shown a true evolution of trek ship design, but instead it shows true lazyness of its creators.

I imagine nothing new, but I had to say it anyway.

KeVinK · Post by **KeVinK** » 2005-12-14 09:54pm

Okay, I'm computter inept and don't know how to make pictures appear in my posts. From what I've read in this thread, this is an old debate.

Both the Akyra and the NX were -- according to an article years ago -- based on the WWII P-38, hence the shared twin-boom design. Also seen on the Steamrunner, IIRC. The vessels share a silohuette when viewed from above or below, but three dimensional imaging -- or just looking from the side -- shows they are in fact quite different in many respects.

The problem with trying to show continuity of design over centuries is the things look basically the same. Only the Defiant class and the Saber class starships depart from the engines on pylons design.
http://www.simonsays.com/content/featur ... re_id=4347
The winner of the design competition for the Luna-class Titan -- Captain Will Riker's ship in the Titan series of novels -- did an excellent job of different but with a strong family resemblance.

If/when movies come out depicting the Luna class vessels it should be quite interesting to see how they hold up in three-dimensions.

Grasscutter · Post by **Grasscutter** » 2005-12-14 11:25pm

KeVinK wrote:http://www.simonsays.com/content/featur ... re_id=4347
The winner of the design competition for the Luna-class Titan -- Captain Will Riker's ship in the Titan series of novels -- did an excellent job of different but with a strong family resemblance.

If/when movies come out depicting the Luna class vessels it should be quite interesting to see how they hold up in three-dimensions.

That's the winner? Looks like the ugly lovechild of a Nebula and an Intrepid. The roll-bar placement is really awkward.

Gildor · Post by **Gildor** » 2005-12-15 01:28am

Well, looking at the three runners up, they definitely chose the best of the batch. That said, the Luna still sucks. Deleting the rollbar and the Akira-esque lobes on the saucer might make the design somewhat more presentable.

ngc7293 · Post by **ngc7293** » 2005-12-15 01:57am

So, the Titan's choice looked like either the tennis racket ship or the spatchula ship.

I wouldn't mind the rolebar, if it was actually integrated into the design of the ship. It just looks added on.
......so someone basically made an Akirpid

......or (now that I look it up) it is a Sovira. Since Simonsays made Starship Creator, it almost looks like a cross between a Sovereign and an Akira (and a pretty lousy stepchild at that)

I say loose the Akira-pods and the Akira-bar and give it standard fare, and you have a decent looking ship; not another 'fanboy'.

KeVinK · Post by **KeVinK** » 2005-12-15 06:54am

I can't debate the design merits, not being a real starship engineer. I think it works well. And -- since one of the design criteria was that it fit into established Starfleet design conventions, it's not surprising it in corparates themes and elements evokative of other vessels. As I said before -- or meant to say if I didn't -- I'd like to see a 3d cgi in action. That may make all the difference.

In the meantime, judges Paula Block, Margaret Clark, Doug Drexler, Jennifer Heddle, Elisa Kassin, Michael Okuda, David Rossi, Edward Schlesinger, Scott Shannon, Rick Sternbach, and John Van Citters all liked it. They're the ones with the opinions that matter as far as the contest goes.

Though the debate ended months ago, all of its merits were discussed quite thoroughly on the TrekBBS when Marco Palmieri made the annoiuncement. http://www.trekbbs.com/threads/showflat ... 93&fpart=1. Pretty thorough explaination of how the selection process worked. (Over the course of 300+ posts)