|
Welcome! The Trek BBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans. Please login to see our full range of forums as well as the ability to send and receive private messages, track your favourite topics and of course join in the discussions. If you are a new visitor, join us for free. If you are an existing member please login below. Note: for members who joined under our old messageboard system, please login with your display name not your login name. |
|
|||||||
| Star Trek Movies XI+ Discuss J.J. Abrams' rebooted Star Trek here. |
![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools |
|
|
#1 |
|
Commodore
|
What I Don't Like About the USS Kelvin
The ship also does not appear to have any conventional lifeboats and instead just has shitloads of shuttlecraft which are used apparently as lifeboats. The ship (due to the lack of a separating saucer or lifeboats, and instead requiring buttloads of shuttles) is apparently monstrous in size just looking at the shuttlebay. I think I also saw a size comparison of the new Enterprise with the USS Kelvin and it also reflected that the Kelvin was a very large vessel, and when in combination with the 800-man crew, in most likelyhood, is larger than the (original) Constitution-Class (Which as of 2265, 32 years after the Kelvin's destruction, was the largest class of ship in the Federation inventory) The engineering-hull looks quite small in size (not to mention, it looks like the bridge would be in the way of the deflector field) compared to the primary hull. The warp-engine looks gigantically oversized, and the back has a glowing blue exhaust even when not at warp (Considering the ship has regular impulse engines, the argument that this is an impulse engine is moot). Gene Roddenberry specifically said when he created Star Trek that he did *NOT* want to see flamin' rocket-like exhaust shooting out the back of the ship (granted he also said he wanted warp-engines in pairs but that view actually seems to have varied over time) something which has been maintained all the way up to Star Trek Nemesis (which in my opinion sucked) The interior of the ship looks completely trashy and junky, particularly that gigantic elevator shaft that extends right down into the shuttlebay if I recall. In every Starfleet ship shown in Star Trek, even the NX-01 Enterprise did not look that crude, trashy and junky, nor did it have a long giant elevator shaft hanging down all the way into the shuttlebay like that. The turbolifts always seemed to be "behind doors" and you never actually saw the elevator shaft. The point-defense cannons the ship has was never seen on any other Federation-Ship, and the sheer number of overall weapons was ludicrous for that timeframe. While this isn't really a complaint, or a gripe about the Kelvin, I am wondering why the Kelvin didn't blow up after just one volley, or just one shot for that matter. The Constitution Class vessel shown in TOS had been refitted two or three times from when it was first commissioned and was in most likelyhood fitted with far more powerful shields and weapons. The Refit Enterprise in TMP, had substantially more powerful deflectors than the TOS Enterprise, and apparently it would seem that it's force-fields were several times more powerful than the K'Tinga's which themselves had more shielding and deflectors than the D-7's which were about rivalable to the Constitution-Class. The Refit Enterprise first flew in 2272 or 2273, and Nero's ship, while not a fleet-vessel (Romulan in this case) would have most likely been around during the Dominion war, and during wars even transport ships are often fitted with guns, generally ones that can at least do a little bit of damage to defend themselves against hostiles. Considering Nero's ship was from 2387, 114 or 115 years after the Enterprise Refit (TMP), in which time, shields, and weapons technology has increased DRASTICALLY (Particularly during the dominion war and conflicts the Federation had with the Borg) The difference in shielding capability and weapons capability the Kelvin would have had would have been virtually nonexistant compared to the Narada, and I'm just amazed the ship didn't get cut up in one volley... CuttingEdge100 |
|
|
|
|
|
#2 |
|
Vice Admiral
Location: Chicago, Illinois, USA
|
Re: What I Don't Like About the USS Kelvin
__________________
I was Jeri before she was. Isis made animated by Carpe Occasio; thanks! |
|
|
|
|
|
#3 |
|
Rear Admiral
|
Re: What I Don't Like About the USS Kelvin
__________________
--DonIago It was the best of Trek, it was the worst of Trek... "If I lean over, I leave myself open to wedgies, wet willies, or even the dreaded Rear Admiral!" |
|
|
|
|
#4 |
|
Vice Admiral
Location: Star Trekkin Across the universe.
|
Re: What I Don't Like About the USS Kelvin
|
|
|
|
|
#5 |
|
Commodore
Location: Somewhere Far Beyond
|
Re: What I Don't Like About the USS Kelvin
__________________
Use Only As Directed |
|
|
|
|
#6 |
|
Vice Admiral
Location: Chicago, Illinois, USA
|
Re: What I Don't Like About the USS Kelvin
__________________
I was Jeri before she was. Isis made animated by Carpe Occasio; thanks! |
|
|
|
|
|
#7 |
|
Commodore
|
Re: What I Don't Like About the USS Kelvin
You, sir, have no taste! ![]() I also think you could have saved yourself some typing by renaming the thread "What I *like* about the Kelvin" - Because clearly that is a very, very, very short list.
|
|
|
|
|
#8 |
|
Rear Admiral
Location: With the Cylons in a Coffee Shop
|
Re: What I Don't Like About the USS Kelvin
__________________
I am so very thankful for Battlestar Galactica. 2008. |
|
|
|
|
|
#9 | |
|
Rear Admiral
|
Re: What I Don't Like About the USS Kelvin
![]() OT: I think the OP missed the entire point of the Kelvin in the movie. I was MEANT to be seen as an 'old clunker' from the TOS past-- especially in comparison to the shiny new USS Enterprise. This was the main purpose of the Kelvin in the movie. Period.
__________________
“The test of our progress is not whether we add more to the abundance of those who have much; it is whether we provide enough for those who have too little.” -FDR
God gives us what we can handle, even if we don't believe it ourselves. |
|
|
|
|
|
#10 |
|
Lieutenant Commander
|
Re: What I Don't Like About the USS Kelvin
__________________
0010 1011 OR ! 0010 1011 = -1
|
|
|
|
|
|
#11 |
|
Vice Admiral
Location: Chicago, Illinois, USA
|
Re: What I Don't Like About the USS Kelvin
__________________
I was Jeri before she was. Isis made animated by Carpe Occasio; thanks! |
|
|
|
|
|
#12 | |
|
Commodore
|
Re: What I Don't Like About the USS Kelvin
or am I just reading the situation wrong?
|
|
|
|
|
|
#13 |
|
Lieutenant Commander
Location: Vancouver Island, Canada
|
Re: What I Don't Like About the USS Kelvin
|
|
|
|
|
|
#14 | |||
|
Commodore
|
Re: What I Don't Like About the USS Kelvin
1. Matt Jeffries is dead. 2. Matt Jeffries did not design the Kelvin. 3. Matt Jeffries is dead. His entire post is basically grasping at straws because it doesn't conform to 1960's standards.
__________________
"So, the Enterprise is on its maiden voyage, has it? She is one well-endowed lady. I like to get my hands on her ample nacelles if you'll pardon the engineering parlance." Montgomery Scott Last edited by Messianni; June 16 2009 at 04:18 PM. Reason: late-night typo |
|||
|
|
|
|
#15 | |
|
Lieutenant Commander
|
Re: What I Don't Like About the USS Kelvin
Then the entire deal with no lifeboats can be explained that ideally you would separate.
__________________
0010 1011 OR ! 0010 1011 = -1
|
|
|
|
|
![]() |
| Bookmarks |
| Tags |
| kelvin, uss kelvin |
«
Previous Thread
|
Next Thread
»
| Thread Tools | |
|
|
All times are GMT +1. The time now is 08:59 PM.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2013, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
FireFox 2+ or Internet Explorer 7+ highly recommended.
Copyright ©2000 - 2013, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
FireFox 2+ or Internet Explorer 7+ highly recommended.


















or am I just reading the situation wrong?





