www.ditl.org

So we see the E-Nil along with most other ships of that era having a very specific design. Smooth hull, thin pylons ect ect.

Then we get the Excelsior. That has to be the biggest single difference in design that we have seen in trek.

Every other generation we see is an evolution from one design to another, with obvious steps and improvements.

But the Constitution class to Excelsior class is such a dramatic design difference as to be almost missing 2 steps in between.

Is there any canon or logical reason behind this? Anything in universe to explain the huge difference in style?

Experimental Transwarp engines needing a sleeker shape?

I got nothing. Nexer struck me as that much of a leap, but looking at the different Enterprises over the years, it does seem to take a bit of a leap.

For me anyway the biggest leap was Excelsior->Ambassador.

kostmayer wrote:Experimental Transwarp engines needing a sleeker shape?

I got nothing. Nexer struck me as that much of a leap, but looking at the different Enterprises over the years, it does seem to take a bit of a leap.

Pretty good guess, actually. Remember, Excelsior was the testbed for the technology that was supposed to change everything.

For me anyway the biggest leap was Excelsior->Ambassador.

Really, I see that as a fairly subtle change compared to the Constiture to Excelsior. The Ambassidor to Galaxy was the least change we see.

The Galaxy to the Soverign was a big change, but less when you put the Intrepid in the middle.

I was just thinking that an Excelsior is really just a stretched Constitution.

In the Blu-Rays they state that the main changes to "look" of the Excelsior were for strength reasons. The neck was made much thicker because the thin neck of the Constitution was at major risk of being severed in battle. It was think and weak. They state similar reasons for the change of nacelle pylons. Their shape was changed to make them stronger for the new nacelles and also make them less vulnerable during battle.

Jim wrote:In the Blu-Rays they state that the main changes to "look" of the Excelsior were for strength reasons. The neck was made much thicker because the thin neck of the Constitution was at major risk of being severed in battle. It was think and weak. They state similar reasons for the change of nacelle pylons. Their shape was changed to make them stronger for the new nacelles and also make them less vulnerable during battle.

Good point. The Excelsior was quite a bit bigger (and intended to be much faster) than anything previous, but without any noted advances in materials technology. If you need to use the same steel to handle a lot more weight, then you use a bigger piece of steel.

Strength would be as logical idea. But then you have to wonder why the Constitution has such purposefully small shafts.

Teaos wrote:Strength would be as logical idea. But then you have to wonder why the Constitution has such purposefully small shafts.

Probably to keep the mass of the ship down while keeping the nacelles as far away from the ship (and the primary hull as far away from the engineering hull) as possible. It's not a huge leap to assume that shielding improved in the forty years between the Connie and the Ex.

Teaos wrote:Strength would be as logical idea. But then you have to wonder why the Constitution has such purposefully small shafts.

That's what she said... sorry...

Potentially because that is all that was actually "needed" at the time. Advancements in the power and therefeore stresses made the thinner versions obsolete. The engineers also realized that while originally capable of doing the job, they were a potential design flaw in the arena of battle. Therefore, the new Excelsior versions were potentiall a bit of an over-reaction attempt to "fix" those issues. The Ambassador, and Galaxy, kept the same basic nacelle form. Necks did get a little thinner again though (save for the ships that did away with the neck)

As it seems more modular in build.

Could be just that the design for the Transwarp Drive required that hull. I doubt the hull and the drive were independent of each other. I always figured that once the drive failed, Starfleet found the hull to be sound and extremely sound for standard use. Perhaps over engineered which is why is stayed for so long.

The hull certainly looks more structually sound. And it seems as if all future designs had a more steamlines design behind them.