Comments on: How Big is the Starship Enterprise?

By: Mike Woolson

Mike Woolson — Mon, 01 Oct 2012 23:05:43 +0000

“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.

By: Doug Pearce

Doug Pearce — Wed, 21 Mar 2012 22:05:42 +0000

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.

By: David Mc

David Mc — Sat, 07 Jan 2012 20:37:46 +0000

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.

By: DAN

DAN — Tue, 04 Oct 2011 18:52:21 +0000

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.

By: EjIMBo

EjIMBo — Sun, 05 Jun 2011 21:34:40 +0000

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.

By: EjIMBo

EjIMBo — Sun, 05 Jun 2011 21:31:36 +0000

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.

By: Trekman

Trekman — Mon, 10 May 2010 13:22:19 +0000

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.

By: dep1701

dep1701 — Tue, 23 Mar 2010 17:27:43 +0000

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.

By: EAGLE

EAGLE — Thu, 21 Jan 2010 10:11:16 +0000

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.

By: EAGLE

EAGLE — Thu, 21 Jan 2010 10:04:55 +0000

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.

By: M.Barnes

M.Barnes — Sat, 12 Dec 2009 07:10:02 +0000

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!!!

By: Ron Headley

Ron Headley — Sat, 03 Oct 2009 17:10:24 +0000

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.

By: B.J. West

B.J. West — Tue, 21 Jul 2009 17:45:54 +0000

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!