I think the reason is that it had so many middling episodes. if the best episodes of season 1 and 2 were combined as just Season 1, the temporal war didn't last quite as long as it had (just being season 2), and the last season was season 3 (without killing Trip), it could easily have gone 5 or more seasons IMO. The last season was (minus a mis-step or two) really really good. and I would have loved to see the 'refit' with the secondary hull added (which is the variant NX we have in STO) in the show.
I think it was just the fact there were so many slow/filler episodes in the first few seasons that turned a lot of people off because they wanted to see the founding of the Federation and just never came back to the show.
I think it was a lot of spoiled, gatekeeping Trek "fans" dumping on the show because it was #notmytrek, combined with a poor marketing effort to draw everyone back in, and after that, the episode quality. Just about every Trek show started slow. TNG was virtually unwatchable for its first season, and it's the one everyone just went wild about in the *Star Trek Picard* reunion. So I don't think a few middling episodes was the problem.
Having said that, I remember being completely turned off by Trip. I know they were trying to show humans as even less disciplined and evolved than they were in James T Kirk's day, but he was beyond infantile. No space program should have allowed him aboard a ship. I threw up my hands when they foisted him on T'Pol, even though they later did a passable job of demonstrating that she was, by Vulcan standards, a wildly emotional xenophile.
Enterprise ended in 2005 so everything you typed is non-sense as this when the Internet was relative new, in fact YouTube started in 2005.
The reasons why Enterprise failed were many, to start there was a fatigue being set as TNG started in 87 but more importantly, DS9 and Voyager almost run concurrently that leads me to the one thing that matters.
**Ratings.**
TNG started with 8.55 Million and ended with 4.00 Million, it peaked with 11.50 Million in season 5 but TNG is so unique as it had growth until the 5th season and then it starts to drop, now there are reasons for that besides quality such as syndication, time slots and so on and had no competition, a issue is that DS9 and Voyager running at the same time but also there were other Sci-Fic series running at the time, this lead to TNG being a massive runaway success as the others were smaller successes.
And now lets talk about Enterprise ratings.
It started with a very respectable 12.5 million viewers with Broken Bow Part I and II but the collapse started with the season I ending with about 5 million viewers and season II had even less viewers with a average of 4.4 million and this trend continued into season III with 3.8 million.
But its not just that, Enterprise now had to content with a show you might have heard of, Battlestar Galactica.
It was cancelled because Star Trek was never that popular, it was always a niche series were its runaway success was TNG, you cannot blame the audiences for its failure, people watch it because they want to and not due to some kind of "true Star Trek fan", I shouldnt feel I must watch something because I am a *true fan*, this is fanatism and you cannot blame the people for "not giving it a chance" when 12 million people watched the show premiere and they started to tune out, its absurd to tell someone "no, you need to watch 2 seasons and then it gets good, I promise" since I am still watching 2 seasons of mid-bad episodes before I see the "good ones", nobody sane does that.
1.Your first point is gibberish
2. Ds9 and voy overlapped a good deal but Ent basically ran on its own
3. The show was having trouble from the studio for advertising after the attempt to separate enterprise from the rest of trek backfired and they funneled the money into other projects.
4. Shows that told an overarching story were doing more popular at the time and enterprise never adopted that. They would have season long plots but individual episodes were really never connected to each other.
5. Battlestar galactic wasn't an extremely popular show and was objectively less popular than star trek. It was rates well by critics but suffered from a lot of viewership issues.
6. Star Trek has only become a niche interest in recent years for decades the show was as mainstream as Hogan Heroes, Dukes of Hazzard, and Friends.
1. Yes but Enterprise started pretty much when Voyager ended meaning it still well over a decade of Star Trek running on TV.
2. Enterprise was definitely a flagship for UPS and it wasnt syndication (yet), yes UPS didnt want it or Voyager and were pushed from above but you cannot really argue since we know what its timeslot were, Wednesday 8 pm for Season I to III and Friday 8 pm for season IV, those are prime time slots.
3. Err, yes and no ... that is were about it started and you cannot really blame Enterprise writers from doing the same formula that previous worked, even Babylon 5 that had a long overarching story arcs was still very much episodic story format.
4. Battlestar Galactica is a example, if you look at TNG the closest you had as competition was V and V is a very different show, same with Alien Nation that is also very different ... you can say Battlestar Galactica is not the same as Enterprise but its a lot closer, that didnt help Enterprise at all.
5. No, please stop ... the original series was cancelled due to low ratings, with The Motion Picture there were plans for Phase II that was a TV series but the movie didnt do well enough for Phase II to go ahead, neither DS9 or Voy come close to TNG audience numbers and in fact there was a steady decline with DS9 having less viewers that TNG and Voyager having less viewers that DS9, TNG is the only one that had mainstream appeal, not the rest.
Some Trekkies should not believe their own propaganda, Star Trek was never a very popular show were yes, it have popular culture significance but its not mainstream, its not Marvel and even Marvel is no longer Marvel, Enterprise could be said it had a lot against it but acting as if its a "diamond on the rough if only people gave it a chance" is the type of cope I see of hardcore fans, its not as if it was cancelled without reason just like the original series was cancelled.
1. But enterprise had little overlap with other series. You are also falling into the trap that Berman and the fandom perpetuated. That is franchise fatigue but when you look at evidence of the time it wasn't people being sick of Star Trek constantly being in it was Star Trek not innovating with the times.
2. It had prime time but on a bad day. Wednesday is arguably the least desirable day for a show to air. Combined with very little poor marketing it's unsurprising that it lost many viewers and failed to bring in new ones to replace them.
3. Yes the episodic format was already outdated in the 90s for more serious shows like Star Trek and that's why Star Trek and other episodic shows didn't perform well. Which includes Babylon 5.
4. Comparing Star Trek to Battlestar Galactic is like comparing The Simpsons to Bob's Burgers. Both are very popular shows but one is vastly more well known than the other.
5. Star Trek is the second most known sci-fi IP in the world. Everyone from America to Turkey to Laos to Lesotho. On top of that, it's one of the most referenced series in all of media. You are either a fool or a troll if you say otherwise.
6. No one is coping besides you. Star Trek is one of the most popular series of all time full stop. You are coping and beliving your own propaganda by saying no one knew about compared to shows like Babylon 5 and Battlestar Galactica.
7. No one is saying it's a diamond in the rough. It is a good show but it was made with an old head mindset that doomed it to fail from the start but also saying other factors involved is true it got a not so great time slot and it got little marketing. Which is all fact.
You are clearly either a troll or extremely uneducated on the topic at hand either way I have better stuff to do.
>No one is coping besides you. Star Trek is one of the most popular series of all time full stop.
Looking at Wikipedia that is not exactly something I like doing but there is a list ... during TNG run the most watched show was "The Cosby Show", "Roseanne", "Cheers" and "60 Minutes", you making a lot of claims and so I am now backing mine.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Top-rated_United_States_television_programs_of_1990%E2%80%9391
Here, 1991 that was the high point of TNG, not even top *30*, now lets look at the movies, not counting the reboot ones we look at the distant year of 1996 and the box office ... Star Trek: First Contact is ranked 14 in Box Office Mojo for that year behind such movies as The First Wives Club that was Paramount highest movie that year but lets be even MORE fair and see Star Trek: The Motion Picture that was in the even more distant year of 19*79*, it ranked 4 that is very and I do mean very respectable since above is Superman at 3rd, The Amityville Horror at 2nd and Rocky II with Alien at 5th with Apocalypse Now at 6th.
https://www.boxofficemojo.com/year/1979/?grossesOption=calendarGrosses
And we do know Phase II was planned, it didnt go ahead because despite The Motion Picture success it still wasnt what the studios expected to give the greenlight to the TV show, it was successful enough to greenlight Star Trek II that was a commercial success but didnt had the budget of The Motion Picture (a lot because some of budget for Phase II was rolled into that movie budget) so it was a larger success considering costs/revenue.
Also this is before we go into merit, Babylon V is a incredible well written show, The Expanse is also a incredible good series and if we go outside television its a even larger world ... Dune, Foundation, Star Wars obviously ...
Did I ever said Star Trek isnt recognizable in popular culture? no, I said the exact opposite but it never had the mass appeal of a mainstream series, its a niche and honestly why are so so stuck on "Star Trek always been megapopular"? One of my favorite movies is Tremors and its a very small, relative unknown movie that had a few sequels (6 apparently, I kinda stop at the 3rd one) and a TV series that was cancelled with just 13 episodes, does it in any way changes my opinion of that movie? no just like I enjoy TNG and consider it one of the best sci-fic shows even if I am not going to say all episodes are great or that "it got good at season 3" as if there werent good episodes before or bad episodes after.
And yes, Star Trek never really been popular outside a niche, this is the truth as I shown ... the movies did well yes, if we discount the bomb that was Insurrection that I am sure is someone favorite movie and even the reboot been struggling to get a 4th movie out, there are reasons for that besides the decreasing box office revenue.
Should it matter for the people that enjoy it? no, I also never stated anything about Enterprise because OP seems to really like the show and that is fine but what **isnt** fine is trying to pretend *the audience disagreed* and stop watching it as is in their right and for the network that was all that mattered.
1. TNG ran in syndication and wouldn't appear on major ranking lists for networks.
2. Star Trek outside of the Kelvin movies which I didn't look up only had 2 movies not in the top 25 year of release and even beat movies like Star Wars Episode 6. Having movies that are constantly in the top 25 and even more movies in the top 15 and 10 is impressive and shows that they were culturally relevant.
3. TNG was also critically acclaimed winning a multitude of awards including over a dozen Emmy awards, the only syndiatcted show to ever receive the Emmy for best dramatic show, two Hugo awards, Peabody award, several more I'm to lazy to list. Star trek as a whole was one of the largest shows for its time and one of the most popular as a result trying to claim its a minor part of American culture is disingenuous.
4. Phase 2 was scrapt and became the motion picture which has spawned decades of shows and movies. Why do you keep bringing it up? Its not a good point for you.
5. You said star trek is niche and never was mainstream. Which means unpopular you have presented zero eveunce to back your claim besides information you didn't know how to use. Star trek was megapopular. Just be a use you can't accept that doesn't make it any less true.
6. No one is saying the audience disagreed and that's why enterprises failed. Enterprise thought having the Star Trek name would carry it even in a climate of changing interest of viewers and failed to adapt along with other compounding problems like a bad slot and poor advertisement.
Thanks for the discussion but you are either trolling or are uneducated about the topic. Have a nice day.
I disagree with gatekeeping, it just wasn't that good, and didn't deliver on the premise for the first two seasons. Unfortunately it didn't get the chance to continue the upward trend of season 3 and 4.
In my opinion it would have been better served by embracing that lack of technology, avoiding phase cannons and "spatial torpedoes", going with missiles and mass drivers or lasers at the most. Transporter should definitely have been a no go. That said it didn't matter in the face of better storylines and story arcs in season 3 and 4, which I think is the real issue. BSG prob gave everyone their sci fi fix plus a more modern story arc set up, doesn't help that one of the best Trek writers left to create BSG.
I actually disagree, I don't think the nx fits in with those very much at all. It has a different pattern of hull, very different nacelles that are much closer to TOS style, a unique deflector dish, it's far smaller than those ships, and just a little more geometric and less curved than its descendants. Yeah it has a similar hull layout to the Akira, but like-all the enterprises share the same basic hull pattern…
The most common criticism was that they flipped a Akira, its not entirely fair but the similarity is there.
Also I agree entirely, if we did what the OP said it would be now a flipped Akira, also we already have a TMP skin with the Columbia in the 10th Anniversary Pack and the Refit also in the 10th Anniversary or in the Lobi store, we really dont need a 2410 version of the ship as we can see with Columbia it ends up looking more of a upside TMP Akira with a small Excelsior Engineering Hull attached that a NX class and there is no way to escape that.
>its not entirely fair but the similarity is there.
I mean it's literally true though, the story according to Doug Drexler was that the producers wanted an Akira to be the hero ship because they liked the way it looked but Doug and the other Trek fans working on the show didn't want that at all so the NX-01 was designed to look like the Akira to please the producers while also making something original
these same producers are why there's a random D7 in ENT that's supposed to be a D4, they rejected the proposed the D4 design because "it had too many windows" and opted to use the D7 because once again they just liked it and that rejected D4 is actually the basis for the Korotinga design in STO
Oh I know but this is also why eventually a NX will turn into a Akira because that is the lineage unless you remove struts connecting to the nacelles but then you kinda end up with a Miranda with the nacelles up.
Enterprise was absolutely great.
I don't care about those who killed the show. They were pseudo religious fanatics. Nothing more, nothing less. Archer, T'Pol, Trip, Reed, Phlox, Mayweather, Shran, Soval and of course,( Yes, seriously) Daniels, were great characters, with great actors. Period.
Was a good show, a good tv series, and a good Star Trek.
LLAP.
#
rewatching Enterprise as we speak, the early series stand up really well, and i didnt like them at the time.
But Trip, man, he's way too emotional to be left in charge of anything,
I wish there was an updated 25th century skin for this. I usually fly the legendary version, that skin is cool, but would like newer nacelles and such.
There's an article (https://www.ex-astris-scientia.org/articles/enterprise\_design\_comment.htm) on Ex Astris Scientia detailing all the similarities between the NX-01 Enterprise and the Akira class.
I liked ENT too, despite some of its flaws. Like most Trek series, it only really caught its stride in the 3rd season, and just as it got consistently good in the 4th season...it got canceled.
And I really wanted to see more of that secondary hull refit...that would have been so sweet...
ENT doesn't get the respect it deserves. NX-01 is my favourite starship, and Archer is the Federation DILF.
Same for me.
I think the reason is that it had so many middling episodes. if the best episodes of season 1 and 2 were combined as just Season 1, the temporal war didn't last quite as long as it had (just being season 2), and the last season was season 3 (without killing Trip), it could easily have gone 5 or more seasons IMO. The last season was (minus a mis-step or two) really really good. and I would have loved to see the 'refit' with the secondary hull added (which is the variant NX we have in STO) in the show. I think it was just the fact there were so many slow/filler episodes in the first few seasons that turned a lot of people off because they wanted to see the founding of the Federation and just never came back to the show.
I think it was a lot of spoiled, gatekeeping Trek "fans" dumping on the show because it was #notmytrek, combined with a poor marketing effort to draw everyone back in, and after that, the episode quality. Just about every Trek show started slow. TNG was virtually unwatchable for its first season, and it's the one everyone just went wild about in the *Star Trek Picard* reunion. So I don't think a few middling episodes was the problem. Having said that, I remember being completely turned off by Trip. I know they were trying to show humans as even less disciplined and evolved than they were in James T Kirk's day, but he was beyond infantile. No space program should have allowed him aboard a ship. I threw up my hands when they foisted him on T'Pol, even though they later did a passable job of demonstrating that she was, by Vulcan standards, a wildly emotional xenophile.
Enterprise ended in 2005 so everything you typed is non-sense as this when the Internet was relative new, in fact YouTube started in 2005. The reasons why Enterprise failed were many, to start there was a fatigue being set as TNG started in 87 but more importantly, DS9 and Voyager almost run concurrently that leads me to the one thing that matters. **Ratings.** TNG started with 8.55 Million and ended with 4.00 Million, it peaked with 11.50 Million in season 5 but TNG is so unique as it had growth until the 5th season and then it starts to drop, now there are reasons for that besides quality such as syndication, time slots and so on and had no competition, a issue is that DS9 and Voyager running at the same time but also there were other Sci-Fic series running at the time, this lead to TNG being a massive runaway success as the others were smaller successes. And now lets talk about Enterprise ratings. It started with a very respectable 12.5 million viewers with Broken Bow Part I and II but the collapse started with the season I ending with about 5 million viewers and season II had even less viewers with a average of 4.4 million and this trend continued into season III with 3.8 million. But its not just that, Enterprise now had to content with a show you might have heard of, Battlestar Galactica. It was cancelled because Star Trek was never that popular, it was always a niche series were its runaway success was TNG, you cannot blame the audiences for its failure, people watch it because they want to and not due to some kind of "true Star Trek fan", I shouldnt feel I must watch something because I am a *true fan*, this is fanatism and you cannot blame the people for "not giving it a chance" when 12 million people watched the show premiere and they started to tune out, its absurd to tell someone "no, you need to watch 2 seasons and then it gets good, I promise" since I am still watching 2 seasons of mid-bad episodes before I see the "good ones", nobody sane does that.
1.Your first point is gibberish 2. Ds9 and voy overlapped a good deal but Ent basically ran on its own 3. The show was having trouble from the studio for advertising after the attempt to separate enterprise from the rest of trek backfired and they funneled the money into other projects. 4. Shows that told an overarching story were doing more popular at the time and enterprise never adopted that. They would have season long plots but individual episodes were really never connected to each other. 5. Battlestar galactic wasn't an extremely popular show and was objectively less popular than star trek. It was rates well by critics but suffered from a lot of viewership issues. 6. Star Trek has only become a niche interest in recent years for decades the show was as mainstream as Hogan Heroes, Dukes of Hazzard, and Friends.
1. Yes but Enterprise started pretty much when Voyager ended meaning it still well over a decade of Star Trek running on TV. 2. Enterprise was definitely a flagship for UPS and it wasnt syndication (yet), yes UPS didnt want it or Voyager and were pushed from above but you cannot really argue since we know what its timeslot were, Wednesday 8 pm for Season I to III and Friday 8 pm for season IV, those are prime time slots. 3. Err, yes and no ... that is were about it started and you cannot really blame Enterprise writers from doing the same formula that previous worked, even Babylon 5 that had a long overarching story arcs was still very much episodic story format. 4. Battlestar Galactica is a example, if you look at TNG the closest you had as competition was V and V is a very different show, same with Alien Nation that is also very different ... you can say Battlestar Galactica is not the same as Enterprise but its a lot closer, that didnt help Enterprise at all. 5. No, please stop ... the original series was cancelled due to low ratings, with The Motion Picture there were plans for Phase II that was a TV series but the movie didnt do well enough for Phase II to go ahead, neither DS9 or Voy come close to TNG audience numbers and in fact there was a steady decline with DS9 having less viewers that TNG and Voyager having less viewers that DS9, TNG is the only one that had mainstream appeal, not the rest. Some Trekkies should not believe their own propaganda, Star Trek was never a very popular show were yes, it have popular culture significance but its not mainstream, its not Marvel and even Marvel is no longer Marvel, Enterprise could be said it had a lot against it but acting as if its a "diamond on the rough if only people gave it a chance" is the type of cope I see of hardcore fans, its not as if it was cancelled without reason just like the original series was cancelled.
1. But enterprise had little overlap with other series. You are also falling into the trap that Berman and the fandom perpetuated. That is franchise fatigue but when you look at evidence of the time it wasn't people being sick of Star Trek constantly being in it was Star Trek not innovating with the times. 2. It had prime time but on a bad day. Wednesday is arguably the least desirable day for a show to air. Combined with very little poor marketing it's unsurprising that it lost many viewers and failed to bring in new ones to replace them. 3. Yes the episodic format was already outdated in the 90s for more serious shows like Star Trek and that's why Star Trek and other episodic shows didn't perform well. Which includes Babylon 5. 4. Comparing Star Trek to Battlestar Galactic is like comparing The Simpsons to Bob's Burgers. Both are very popular shows but one is vastly more well known than the other. 5. Star Trek is the second most known sci-fi IP in the world. Everyone from America to Turkey to Laos to Lesotho. On top of that, it's one of the most referenced series in all of media. You are either a fool or a troll if you say otherwise. 6. No one is coping besides you. Star Trek is one of the most popular series of all time full stop. You are coping and beliving your own propaganda by saying no one knew about compared to shows like Babylon 5 and Battlestar Galactica. 7. No one is saying it's a diamond in the rough. It is a good show but it was made with an old head mindset that doomed it to fail from the start but also saying other factors involved is true it got a not so great time slot and it got little marketing. Which is all fact. You are clearly either a troll or extremely uneducated on the topic at hand either way I have better stuff to do.
>No one is coping besides you. Star Trek is one of the most popular series of all time full stop. Looking at Wikipedia that is not exactly something I like doing but there is a list ... during TNG run the most watched show was "The Cosby Show", "Roseanne", "Cheers" and "60 Minutes", you making a lot of claims and so I am now backing mine. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Top-rated_United_States_television_programs_of_1990%E2%80%9391 Here, 1991 that was the high point of TNG, not even top *30*, now lets look at the movies, not counting the reboot ones we look at the distant year of 1996 and the box office ... Star Trek: First Contact is ranked 14 in Box Office Mojo for that year behind such movies as The First Wives Club that was Paramount highest movie that year but lets be even MORE fair and see Star Trek: The Motion Picture that was in the even more distant year of 19*79*, it ranked 4 that is very and I do mean very respectable since above is Superman at 3rd, The Amityville Horror at 2nd and Rocky II with Alien at 5th with Apocalypse Now at 6th. https://www.boxofficemojo.com/year/1979/?grossesOption=calendarGrosses And we do know Phase II was planned, it didnt go ahead because despite The Motion Picture success it still wasnt what the studios expected to give the greenlight to the TV show, it was successful enough to greenlight Star Trek II that was a commercial success but didnt had the budget of The Motion Picture (a lot because some of budget for Phase II was rolled into that movie budget) so it was a larger success considering costs/revenue. Also this is before we go into merit, Babylon V is a incredible well written show, The Expanse is also a incredible good series and if we go outside television its a even larger world ... Dune, Foundation, Star Wars obviously ... Did I ever said Star Trek isnt recognizable in popular culture? no, I said the exact opposite but it never had the mass appeal of a mainstream series, its a niche and honestly why are so so stuck on "Star Trek always been megapopular"? One of my favorite movies is Tremors and its a very small, relative unknown movie that had a few sequels (6 apparently, I kinda stop at the 3rd one) and a TV series that was cancelled with just 13 episodes, does it in any way changes my opinion of that movie? no just like I enjoy TNG and consider it one of the best sci-fic shows even if I am not going to say all episodes are great or that "it got good at season 3" as if there werent good episodes before or bad episodes after. And yes, Star Trek never really been popular outside a niche, this is the truth as I shown ... the movies did well yes, if we discount the bomb that was Insurrection that I am sure is someone favorite movie and even the reboot been struggling to get a 4th movie out, there are reasons for that besides the decreasing box office revenue. Should it matter for the people that enjoy it? no, I also never stated anything about Enterprise because OP seems to really like the show and that is fine but what **isnt** fine is trying to pretend *the audience disagreed* and stop watching it as is in their right and for the network that was all that mattered.
1. TNG ran in syndication and wouldn't appear on major ranking lists for networks. 2. Star Trek outside of the Kelvin movies which I didn't look up only had 2 movies not in the top 25 year of release and even beat movies like Star Wars Episode 6. Having movies that are constantly in the top 25 and even more movies in the top 15 and 10 is impressive and shows that they were culturally relevant. 3. TNG was also critically acclaimed winning a multitude of awards including over a dozen Emmy awards, the only syndiatcted show to ever receive the Emmy for best dramatic show, two Hugo awards, Peabody award, several more I'm to lazy to list. Star trek as a whole was one of the largest shows for its time and one of the most popular as a result trying to claim its a minor part of American culture is disingenuous. 4. Phase 2 was scrapt and became the motion picture which has spawned decades of shows and movies. Why do you keep bringing it up? Its not a good point for you. 5. You said star trek is niche and never was mainstream. Which means unpopular you have presented zero eveunce to back your claim besides information you didn't know how to use. Star trek was megapopular. Just be a use you can't accept that doesn't make it any less true. 6. No one is saying the audience disagreed and that's why enterprises failed. Enterprise thought having the Star Trek name would carry it even in a climate of changing interest of viewers and failed to adapt along with other compounding problems like a bad slot and poor advertisement. Thanks for the discussion but you are either trolling or are uneducated about the topic. Have a nice day.
"that I am sure is someone favorite movie" lol.
I hope someday you find the comment you were replying to, because not a word of that responded to anything I said.
I disagree with gatekeeping, it just wasn't that good, and didn't deliver on the premise for the first two seasons. Unfortunately it didn't get the chance to continue the upward trend of season 3 and 4. In my opinion it would have been better served by embracing that lack of technology, avoiding phase cannons and "spatial torpedoes", going with missiles and mass drivers or lasers at the most. Transporter should definitely have been a no go. That said it didn't matter in the face of better storylines and story arcs in season 3 and 4, which I think is the real issue. BSG prob gave everyone their sci fi fix plus a more modern story arc set up, doesn't help that one of the best Trek writers left to create BSG.
As much as I love Picard, Archer has always been my favorite captain. Though I do really like Captain Pike.
That’s Sisko, and Pike is Daddy.
I love this ship, got a special place in my soul for the refit
🎵 It's been a long road, getting from there to here 🎵
We really need the NX bridge available. Would absolutely buy it.
I actually disagree, I don't think the nx fits in with those very much at all. It has a different pattern of hull, very different nacelles that are much closer to TOS style, a unique deflector dish, it's far smaller than those ships, and just a little more geometric and less curved than its descendants. Yeah it has a similar hull layout to the Akira, but like-all the enterprises share the same basic hull pattern…
The most common criticism was that they flipped a Akira, its not entirely fair but the similarity is there. Also I agree entirely, if we did what the OP said it would be now a flipped Akira, also we already have a TMP skin with the Columbia in the 10th Anniversary Pack and the Refit also in the 10th Anniversary or in the Lobi store, we really dont need a 2410 version of the ship as we can see with Columbia it ends up looking more of a upside TMP Akira with a small Excelsior Engineering Hull attached that a NX class and there is no way to escape that.
>its not entirely fair but the similarity is there. I mean it's literally true though, the story according to Doug Drexler was that the producers wanted an Akira to be the hero ship because they liked the way it looked but Doug and the other Trek fans working on the show didn't want that at all so the NX-01 was designed to look like the Akira to please the producers while also making something original these same producers are why there's a random D7 in ENT that's supposed to be a D4, they rejected the proposed the D4 design because "it had too many windows" and opted to use the D7 because once again they just liked it and that rejected D4 is actually the basis for the Korotinga design in STO
Oh I know but this is also why eventually a NX will turn into a Akira because that is the lineage unless you remove struts connecting to the nacelles but then you kinda end up with a Miranda with the nacelles up.
That looks pretty neat
Enterprise was absolutely great. I don't care about those who killed the show. They were pseudo religious fanatics. Nothing more, nothing less. Archer, T'Pol, Trip, Reed, Phlox, Mayweather, Shran, Soval and of course,( Yes, seriously) Daniels, were great characters, with great actors. Period. Was a good show, a good tv series, and a good Star Trek. LLAP. #
rewatching Enterprise as we speak, the early series stand up really well, and i didnt like them at the time. But Trip, man, he's way too emotional to be left in charge of anything,
I use the refit version that extends down a bit.
What's the bridge your using please? 🖖
I wish there was an updated 25th century skin for this. I usually fly the legendary version, that skin is cool, but would like newer nacelles and such.
There are dozens of us! I always try new ships on my main toon, but keep coming back to the NX Refit. It's pretty and balanced for my play style.
There's an article (https://www.ex-astris-scientia.org/articles/enterprise\_design\_comment.htm) on Ex Astris Scientia detailing all the similarities between the NX-01 Enterprise and the Akira class.
I liked ENT too, despite some of its flaws. Like most Trek series, it only really caught its stride in the 3rd season, and just as it got consistently good in the 4th season...it got canceled. And I really wanted to see more of that secondary hull refit...that would have been so sweet...