Size Of The New Enterprise (large images)

Discussion in 'Star Trek Movies: Kelvin Universe' started by Strat, May 11, 2009.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Praetor

    Praetor Vice Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Apr 18, 2004
    Location:
    NC
    Re: Size Of The New Enterprise

    I believe the Enterprise-E underwent similar modifications during "First Contact" and between FC and "Nemesis." ;)
     
  2. DiSiLLUSiON

    DiSiLLUSiON Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2004
    Location:
    The Netherlands
    Re: Size Of The New Enterprise

    I've done a little analysis -- aside from the fact that some people might not like the 700 meter length, it's actually quite consistent with what's shown on screen.

    First off, the shuttles:
    [​IMG]
    If you go by an average length of 1.80m for a person, then the doorway on the shuttle is about that size, since one can just stand upright. Extrapolating the length means that the entire shuttle is about 2.63m high.

    Next, the shuttlebay:
    [​IMG]
    If you assume the height of 2.63m for a shuttle, the shuttlebay interior is about 13m high. The lower part under the shuttlebay is usually one deck high (for servicing shuttles); this can be seen on Voyager amongst others. That part seems to be about 4m high. If you assume a deck height of a bit bigger then 4m, you can exactly fit 4 decks, if you count the outer hull. You can fit 5 if you count the deck below.

    Now for the bridge:
    [​IMG]
    If you look at this sequence in animation, you can somewhat make out people moving. It seems the windows are slightly curved (the people seem to be shot from slightly above as well). Extrapolating that, I've marked what might be one full deck.

    The slits on the back of the bridge:
    [​IMG]
    I don't know what these slits are (observation room windows?), but they seem to be on the same level as the bridge viewscreen window. As we know the bridge is always somewhat higher due to the dome, these should be one deck high.

    And last but not least, the extrapolated decks:
    [​IMG]
    (thumbnail; click to enlarge)

    When taking all this 'evidence' into account, we can puzzle a bit. Drawing lines where we see they probably are from the above screen evidence and assuming a completely regular deck height (seems to be slightly off in the front lower engineering hull, though) we can extrapolate where the decks are, how many there are and how high they are.

    The new Enterprise has a (supposed by Bad Robot) length of 725.35m, an extrapolated height of 164.87m, a deck height of 4.15m and 32 decks in total.

    At least, if this is correct. We, of course, have no way to know yet. Especially since the outline might be incorrect. But at least it seems to be a lot more correct then Ex Astria's representation or the various ortho's of fan-made Enterprises I've seen as of yet.

    Why have I used Bad Robot's length? Because it was the only one that seemed to fit. Certainly, the only one that seemed to fit both on-screen evidence and the placement of windows. Extrapolating from known points, the others had windows between decks or a ridiculously small or large deck height. This only has window inconsistencies in the lower front engineering hull; that might be due to inconsistent deck heights or the fact that engineering is so damn large.

    Also, and perhaps most importantly, the windows in the saucer rim seem to suggest the "old" deck size of 2 is out of the question. As you can see, there are two rows of windows just above each other. If you count it as 4 decks, the topmost and lowermost decks have no windows. If you count it as 2 decks, the upper deck has windows that are too low for even midget people to look through. Either that, or the Enterprise has reversed gravity on that entire deck, just to line up the windows with a normal viewing height. Doesn't seem all that logical, though.
     
    Last edited: May 15, 2009
  3. Groknard

    Groknard Ensign Newbie

    Joined:
    May 11, 2009
    Re: Size Of The New Enterprise

    Very well done, DiSiLLUSiON.

    And another reason to go with Bad Robot's figure? It doesn't sound like someone's just fudging to a high round number like "2000", "2500" or "3000".
     
  4. Praetor

    Praetor Vice Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Apr 18, 2004
    Location:
    NC
    Re: Size Of The New Enterprise

    Agreed, that's a pretty flawless analysis, DiSiLLUSiON. Regardless of the varying sizes that people may have supposed while the film was being made, it does seem to hold a surprising amount of water as the "final" figure. :techman:
     
  5. Hyperspace05

    Hyperspace05 Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2005
    Re: Size Of The New Enterprise

    Yes good work, DiSiLLUSiON... I did lots of analysises like that in my B5 heydays... ;)

    I think your efforts also work well with the ILM figure of 2000 ft / 610m. That would indicate a deck height of 3.5 meters which I think makes a little more sense. ~30 decks looks very reasonable based on that drawing.
     
  6. Gepard

    Gepard Vice Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2007
    Re: Size Of The New Enterprise

    I gave a link to DiSiLLUSion's post over on Doug Drexler's blog, where people are heatedly debating the issue (including Bernd).
     
  7. DiSiLLUSiON

    DiSiLLUSiON Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2004
    Location:
    The Netherlands
    Re: Size Of The New Enterprise

    A deck height of 3.5 meters might also work.

    However, even though the Enterprise shouldn't have Jeffries' Tubes (the original didn't have them), all that water must come from somewhere, seeing as they don't have replicators yet. And there should be enough plumbing. As such, I believe a substantial amount of space would be needed for tubing and the like. Then a 4.15m height would work, with about a meter between decks for the plumbing and electrical systems; accessible perhaps from panels in the ceiling and the floor.

    That's assuming there are no service corridors, which we only saw once (in STV). Or that they are accessible from those service corridors which then would have to be higher then the regular corridors.

    Edit: If we go by this picture, the corridors are about 2 meters high, which would make even the 3.5m figure a bit on the high side, but you can't realistically get any lower then 3.5m if you go by the exterior shots.
    I don't see it yet; is it the first time you post there? The software might make your post wait for moderation for anti-spam reasons. If not, can you give me the link? I'd like to follow that discussion as well.
     
    Last edited: May 15, 2009
  8. Gepard

    Gepard Vice Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2007
    Re: Size Of The New Enterprise

    It hasn't shown up yet, no. I assumed the moderation requirement was because I put a link in the post.
     
  9. DiSiLLUSiON

    DiSiLLUSiON Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2004
    Location:
    The Netherlands
    Re: Size Of The New Enterprise

    I just tried and it did show up.

    However, I did state your nickname on the possibility that your post might end up lower in the chain; I thought it only fair to acknowledge your post first.
     
  10. Gepard

    Gepard Vice Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2007
    Re: Size Of The New Enterprise

    Well thankee, sir. :adore: I posted under my RL name, there though. :lol:
     
  11. Peter the Younger

    Peter the Younger Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    Oct 4, 2001
    Location:
    San Francisco, CA, USA
    Re: Size Of The New Enterprise

    That's really fine work, DiSiLLUSiON.
     
  12. ST-One

    ST-One Vice Admiral

    Joined:
    Oct 28, 2004
    Location:
    Germany - with UHC since the early 1900s
    Re: Size Of The New Enterprise

    You're right.
    She's from Iowa. She only works in outer space.
     
  13. ST-One

    ST-One Vice Admiral

    Joined:
    Oct 28, 2004
    Location:
    Germany - with UHC since the early 1900s
    Re: Size Of The New Enterprise

    :techman:
     
  14. Squiggy

    Squiggy FrozenToad Admiral

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2006
    Location:
    Left Bank
    Re: Size Of The New Enterprise

    I just realized...Kirk actually - technically - is from outer space!

    Ohh...that's crafty JJ...what with the raping and all.
     
  15. Cky

    Cky Captain Captain

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2008
    Location:
    Cky
    Re: Size Of The New Enterprise

    Think about it - bigger is better. A bigger ship in the TOS era than ones in the TNG era, imagine the size of the nuTNG era ships! When you got massive structures like Borg cubes running around, an extra 100 metres here or there will definately come in handy.

    I keep thinking though, the Naranda dwarfed the Enterprise, it must be like, planet sized.
     
  16. Squiggy

    Squiggy FrozenToad Admiral

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2006
    Location:
    Left Bank
    Re: Size Of The New Enterprise

    There's no reason to assume JJ's "TNG" era ships will be any larger than TNG prime's ships. Cars today aren't any larger than cars of 50 years ago.
     
  17. Trekker4747

    Trekker4747 Boldly going... Premium Member

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2001
    Location:
    Trekker4747
    Re: Size Of The New Enterprise

    Problem is we can work this out so that the Kelvi was likely ridicuously larger too.

    Ugh.

    Ant Ent-nil almost the size of a Galaxy-class is a LOT to swallow. :rolleyes:

    Of all the things for them to...

    :rolleyes:
     
  18. Squiggy

    Squiggy FrozenToad Admiral

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2006
    Location:
    Left Bank
    Re: Size Of The New Enterprise

    Really? The size of an imaginary spaceship (that hasn't ever has a canonical size to begin with) is bigger (maybe). You're really rolling your eyes at that?
     
  19. Cky

    Cky Captain Captain

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2008
    Location:
    Cky
    Re: Size Of The New Enterprise

    But, we don't have all of space to occupy our roads, and we don't need to fit countless people inside them (although car companies seem to think they need to fit as many gymnists in as possible).
     
  20. Squiggy

    Squiggy FrozenToad Admiral

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2006
    Location:
    Left Bank
    Re: Size Of The New Enterprise

    We don't need to fit countless people inside a starship. The only reason the E-D was as large as it was was because they (the writers) wanted to have families on board. How many other HUGE ships do we see in Trek? None. They're all much smaller than a Galaxy class. Intrepid: smaller. Defiant: smaller. Sovereign: smaller.

    I can't think of a legitimate reason to have families on a starship. Remember, space is a disease wrapped in darkness and silence - why anyone in their right mind would want their children to tag along is beyond me.

    Also, this incarnation of Star Trek seems to be much more gritty and dangerous than any incarnation we've seen before. Hell, JJ killed 6,000,000,000 plus 6 starships and a Robau in the first half of the movie...just because he could.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.