View Single Post
Old July 23 2013, 10:24 AM   #728
Fleet Captain
Belz...'s Avatar
Location: In a finely-crafted cosmos... of my own making.
Re: Starship Size Argument™ thread

King Daniel Into Darkness wrote: View Post
It reads like one of James Dixon's, but with Okuda as God instead of Franz Jopseph. There is so much wrong with this it's not funny. And Bernd is an engineer? Why doesn't he understand basic perspective?
That second picture was provided by me, actually, back in the day when I wasn't sure the scaling was consistent. I have, obviously, seen the light since then.

Bernd is an nice guy, but he has preconcieved notions about what Trek should be, and he spends way too much time on minutiae, in my opinion.

Killerprise wrote: View Post
The dome on the saucer's top is actually a sensor as is the dome on the bottom of the saucer.
You don't know that. It was so in some blueprints of the original Enterprise but I'm not sure they were official. With the reboot, all bets are off.

Yeah this blue ring is directly under that dome.
No it's not. How can you possibly say it is ? Look at the picture again, and consider the perspective.

I would have accepted the 725 meter length if they had accurately scaled the ship to reflect that and included blueprints but unfortunately it isn't accurately scaled and there are no blueprints so their empty claims are just that.
Star Trek never really produced blueprints of their ships in an official manner, nor were they in the habit of mentioning the size of their ships on-screen; and yet fans always accepted the 289/305 length of the ship/refit as gospel, despite the fact that it didn't come from official sources. Now you have official sources and refuse to accept the length. This isn't about official sources. This is about you not wanting the Enterprise to be that much different from the original.
And that's my opinion.
Belz... is offline   Reply With Quote