May 19, 2009
How Big is the Starship Enterprise?
A 135-inch long model of the USS Enterprise used in the original Star Trek series can be found on display in the National Air and Space Museum's gift shop. (Image courtesy of NASM.)
The first Starship Enterprise hangs in the National Air and Space Museum’s gift shop. It is 11-feet long.
“But is it 134-inches long or 135-inches long?” Star Trek fans would ask space history curator Margaret Weitekamp. For years, the precise measurement was a raging debate on Trekkie Web forums. The fans needed the exact length of the 11-deck ship so they could be sure their own models were at scale with the original. Finally, Weitekamp broke out the measuring tape.
Matt Jefferies designed the Smithsonian’s Enterprise model on behalf of Star Trek creator Gene Roddenberry for the failed 1966-1969 television series. Through Star Trek’s various reincarnations for film, television and video games, every Starship Enterprise featured has been some variation on the saucer and cigar shapes of Jefferies’ design. To fans, the original model is considered a “material touchstone of the Trek canon,” Weitekamp says. “It’s a living cultural object.”
The model arrived at the Air and Space Museum in 1974. It came in a box, disassembled and dirty. To the curators, it was nothing more than a prop from a canceled television show that was a nice example of what human space flight might look like. They restored the model and hung it up for display.
As the Trekiverse grew, along with the number of fans, the Smithsonian’s Enterprise became a popular stop in the Air and Space Museum. Weitekamp gets regular complaints from fans and collectors about how the Air and Space Museum displays the the model. They offer money and manpower for what they consider to be a better restoration. She always turns them down. “It’s not broken,” she says.
However, for those that do ask about the model’s length, she has the number cold: 135-inches long.
Sign up for our free email newsletter and receive the best stories from Smithsonian.com each week.
13 Comments »
RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI
It most certainly *is* broken. The current hideous paint job looks *nothing* like the orginal filming miniature used to create the series.
It really horrifies me that the Smithsonian is OK with altering the appearance of an artifact they are supposedly preserving. Hey, wouldn’t Lincoln’s trademark stovepipe hat be cooler if it were leopard print with a flourescent green fake fur hat band? Wouldn’t The Spirit of St. Louis look much faster with flames and racing stripes painted on the sides? I know, let’s photoshop Barney the Dinosaur into historic photos to make them more kid friendly!
The model certainly has been defaced. It NEVER looked the way it does in the above picture. Presenting the model in this marred fashion violates the Smithsonian’s mission to display artifacts in their original state.
The “restorer” had his own agenda and made the model look like He thought it should! So much for historical accuracy! Seeing the model at the museum was the highlight of our trip to DC. Unfortunately even though the sheer size of the Enterprise is spectacular to view in person seeing that “paint job” makes it also quite sad! Why the Smithsonian chose to approve this restoration is beyond comprehension! Go ahead and paint the Wright Bros. flyer in WW1 German camo! That would look cool too! NOT!!!
What a HACKJOB. “It’s not broken”? It would look better painted all white than what that guy did to it. It is nowhere near it’s original color or weathering, and needs to be fixed.
Not only that, the so called “weathering” looks like exactly what it is- purple streaks with an airbrush. Nothing realistic about that “paint job” whatsoever. What a HACK.
I have loved the design of the Enterprise since I was three years old ( when the series was originally on NBC ). I have seen the model at the NASM several times over the last thirty years, but I was stunned when I first saw the Mirarecki restoration when it was unveiled in ’91.
While the physical repairs were much needed, and appreciated, the overdone paint job was a shock. It really changed the ‘character’ of the miniature and does not properly represent the model as it appeared during the run of the series. I agree with previous posters that it violates the Smithsonian’s mission to preserve our country’s heritage. I hope that eventually the powers-that-be will see fit to listen to the complaints and restore this artifact to it’s original sixties filming appearance.
Looks totally crappy-The person/s who did the “restoration” obviously never watched an episode of Star Trek or even looked at a photo of the Enterprise.I agree with the other posters-restore this model to it’s original filming condition.
Wow! Look at all the negative comments! Yes, they are justified, BUT there is a silver lining in that dark cloud. Yes, all the weathering Ed did IS supposed to be there, but much more subdued and not quite as sloppy. All you need do to prove this is compare it with the TOP of the saucer section (which still sports original paint, minus, of course, the bridge section) and you can see it’s no where near as heavy handed. Yes, the original saucer paint is aged (yellowed), but the intensity of the weathering as originally painted can still be judged. Therefore (and here’s that silver lining part), the weathering PATTERNS on the model nevertheless do provide good reference to those of us building model replicas. We just have to tone down the weathering a bit to match what’s seen on the top of the saucer.
Oh, and, BTW, the photo at the top of this page needs colour correction. The model is overall a light gray with the tiniest hint of green, not sky blue. The Enterprise “C” was more that blue colour.
What a disappointment. The adage holds true. Since they display it like garbage in the back of the basement, it gets treated as garbage in the back of the basement.
The original color is Ford Truck Primer Gray.
When filmed under the bright lights of a soundstage, the weathering washes out to match what everyone remembers.
Try a flash photo, you’ll see the same effect.
I know how much research, time and effort went into the restoration. I was one of those who voluenteered my time to help with the restoration.
Eveyone is an expert. Until you actually meet an expert. Like Mr David Mc (previous posting) and the others who volunteered their time to save our heritage. Even modern TV studios with modern sensitive cameras use huge 2K and elipsoidal lights. Imagine the big lights in Paramount Studios 1966 or Desilu 1968. To get any detail at all you had to be heavy handed with the paint. I’ve been to the original Enterprise and I’ve sat in Captain Kirk’s actual chair back around 1995. My visit to the Smithsonian was outstanding. Like a trip to Mecca for a Trekkie like me. Now THAT’S your tax dollars at work. A sincere Thank you to the Smithsonian and to the unsung heroes: the volunteers.
“The failed 1966-1969 television series…” I don’t want to come off like some outraged Trekkie, but how exactly the heck do you measure “failure”?
Yeah, it wasn’t a ratings hit in its original run (though I’ve read that by the way they measure ratings now it would be, i.e., the audience was not huge but it was a hot demographic). But more to the point, the show did last three seasons, it was a major success for independent stations when it went into syndication, and it launched a multibillion dollar entertainment franchise that to date has generated ten feature films (with another in production), five spinoff series which ran for a collective 26 seasons, and generated a fortune with merchandise of every imaginable stripe.
And that’s a FAILURE? I wish all my failures could be so successful.