RSS iconTwitter iconFacebook icon

The Trek BBS title image

The Trek BBS statistics

Threads: 140,848
Posts: 5,474,243
Members: 25,041
Currently online: 476
Newest member: mariax

TrekToday headlines

Retro Review: Covenant
By: Michelle on Nov 22

Two Official Starships Collection Previews
By: T'Bonz on Nov 21

Saldana: Women Issues In Hollywood
By: T'Bonz on Nov 21

Shatner Book Kickstarter
By: T'Bonz on Nov 20

Trek Original Series Slippers
By: T'Bonz on Nov 19

Hemsworth Is Sexiest Man Alive
By: T'Bonz on Nov 19

Trek Business Card Cases
By: T'Bonz on Nov 17

February IDW Publishing Trek Comics
By: T'Bonz on Nov 17

Retro Review: The Siege of AR-558
By: Michelle on Nov 15

Trevco Full Bleed Uniform T-Shirts
By: T'Bonz on Nov 14


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.


Go Back   The Trek BBS > Star Trek Movies > Star Trek Movies XI+

Star Trek Movies XI+ Discuss J.J. Abrams' rebooted Star Trek here.

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old May 16 2013, 08:53 PM   #256
BillJ
Admiral
 
BillJ's Avatar
 
Location: Covington, Ky.
View BillJ's Twitter Profile
Re: Starship Size Argument™ thread

WarpFactorZ wrote: View Post
King Daniel wrote: View Post
USS Vengeance scale. To quote Mr. Scott: Holy shit!
Seriously? Does this really make perfect sense to you?
As large as the ships were in this movie, they still managed to make space feel big.
__________________
"If I hadn't tried, the cost would have been my soul." - Admiral James T. Kirk, Star Trek III: The Search for Spock
BillJ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 16 2013, 09:00 PM   #257
WarpFactorZ
Captain
 
Re: Starship Size Argument™ thread

Beagleman wrote: View Post
The one after the ship was nearly blown to smitherines in the movie.
How'd we get a picture?

Actually, it looks like something from this book you youngsters should check out:

http://en.memory-alpha.org/wiki/Mr._...the_Enterprise

The impulse engine designs are clearly there as concept art for the TMP Enterprise.
WarpFactorZ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 16 2013, 09:03 PM   #258
SalvorHardin
Rear Admiral
 
SalvorHardin's Avatar
 
Location: Star's End
View SalvorHardin's Twitter Profile
Re: Starship Size Argument™ thread

WarpFactorZ wrote: View Post
Beagleman wrote: View Post
The one after the ship was nearly blown to smitherines in the movie.
How'd we get a picture?

Screencap from the following featurette
__________________

SalvorHardin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 16 2013, 09:09 PM   #259
WarpFactorZ
Captain
 
Re: Starship Size Argument™ thread

King Daniel wrote: View Post
Here are some more:

I never said the hanger bay was 18m across. I said it was at least 26m from my measurements (at the bay doors -- it gets wider as you go in). Why do you keep pushing an incorrect figure? And furthermore, only the biggest shuttles are 12m long. The rest are shorter.

This makes no sense. Why would the wall be visible in the adjacent window? It's clearly another room or hallway. Those rooms clearly fit in your lower insert, despite your attempt to eschew the size. There has to be room between the floors for infrastructure and the like (piping, J tubes, conduits, etc....). No way more than two decks could be there and include that.
WarpFactorZ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 16 2013, 09:10 PM   #260
Chemahkuu
Vice Admiral
 
Chemahkuu's Avatar
 
Location: United Kingdom
Send a message via Yahoo to Chemahkuu
Re: Starship Size Argument™ thread

It's bigger, let it go.
Chemahkuu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 16 2013, 09:25 PM   #261
WarpFactorZ
Captain
 
Re: Starship Size Argument™ thread

Chemahkuu wrote: View Post
It's bigger, let it go.
Yes, I agree. 350m-400m is bigger than 290m or 305m. It's just not some ridiculous figure like 750m.
WarpFactorZ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 16 2013, 09:29 PM   #262
BillJ
Admiral
 
BillJ's Avatar
 
Location: Covington, Ky.
View BillJ's Twitter Profile
Re: Starship Size Argument™ thread

WarpFactorZ wrote: View Post
Chemahkuu wrote: View Post
It's bigger, let it go.
Yes, I agree. 350m-400m is bigger than 290m or 305m. It's just not some ridiculous figure like 750m.
The Enterprise is fucking huge! You'll see it in the movie.
__________________
"If I hadn't tried, the cost would have been my soul." - Admiral James T. Kirk, Star Trek III: The Search for Spock
BillJ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 16 2013, 09:30 PM   #263
Chemahkuu
Vice Admiral
 
Chemahkuu's Avatar
 
Location: United Kingdom
Send a message via Yahoo to Chemahkuu
Re: Starship Size Argument™ thread

BillJ wrote: View Post
WarpFactorZ wrote: View Post
Chemahkuu wrote: View Post
It's bigger, let it go.
Yes, I agree. 350m-400m is bigger than 290m or 305m. It's just not some ridiculous figure like 750m.
The Enterprise is fucking huge! You'll see it in the movie.
725 actually but yes, she big.
Chemahkuu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 16 2013, 09:53 PM   #264
King Daniel Into Darkness
Admiral
 
King Daniel Into Darkness's Avatar
 
Location: King Daniel Into Darkness
Re: Starship Size Argument™ thread

WarpFactorZ wrote: View Post
King Daniel wrote: View Post
USS Vengeance scale. To quote Mr. Scott: Holy shit!
Seriously? Does this really make perfect sense to you?
Why shouldn't it? Why and how to they pick sizes and shapes for ships in Trek's world? The Enterprise is a goofy shape.

How do you explain or justify the Nova (small), Intrepid (medium) and Sovereign (large) classes, all versions of the same basic shape?
WarpFactorZ wrote: View Post
King Daniel wrote: View Post
Here are some more:

I never said the hanger bay was 18m across. I said it was at least 26m from my measurements (at the bay doors -- it gets wider as you go in). Why do you keep pushing an incorrect figure? And furthermore, only the biggest shuttles are 12m long. The rest are shorter.
You repeatedly said 350m for the new Enterprise's overall length. I gave you a little more, 366m, the stated concept design size. Now you're telling me it's not enough to fit?
This makes no sense. Why would the wall be visible in the adjacent window? It's clearly another room or hallway.
Basic perspective, as taught in high school art. I even drew a comparison.
Those rooms clearly fit in your lower insert, despite your attempt to eschew the size. There has to be room between the floors for infrastructure and the like (piping, J tubes, conduits, etc....). No way more than two decks could be there and include that.
There would be room enough. As I said before, we see the deck heights in the corridor junction.
__________________
Star Trek Imponderables, fun mashups of Trek's biggest continuity errors! Ep1, Ep2 and Ep3
King Daniel Into Darkness is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 16 2013, 10:00 PM   #265
Irishman
Fleet Captain
 
Location: Charlotte, NC
Re: Starship Size Argument™ thread

BillJ wrote: View Post
Admiral Buzzkill wrote: View Post
Waiting for that TOS reference to Starfleet cruisers as warships...
There isn't one and never has been.

But... (the dreaded 'but')

When you have enough firepower to level the entire habitable surface of a planet, I can easily see such a ship being classified as a 'warship'.

Though I have no issue with the Vengeance being Starfleet's first dedicated 'warship'.
It WAS called a Dreadnaught in the film.
Irishman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 16 2013, 10:06 PM   #266
Candlelight
Admiral
 
Candlelight's Avatar
 
Location: Candlelight
Re: Starship Size Argument™ thread

The hatch Kirk and Harrison 'fly' into the Vengeance was on deck 13, which was in the centre of the engineering section.

Unless that ship has very limited decks (IE big spaces in between) then the Vengeance is the size of Voyager...
__________________
"I'd rather be judged by twelve than carried by six."
Candlelight is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 16 2013, 10:07 PM   #267
BillJ
Admiral
 
BillJ's Avatar
 
Location: Covington, Ky.
View BillJ's Twitter Profile
Re: Starship Size Argument™ thread

Irishman wrote: View Post
BillJ wrote: View Post
Admiral Buzzkill wrote: View Post
Waiting for that TOS reference to Starfleet cruisers as warships...
There isn't one and never has been.

But... (the dreaded 'but')

When you have enough firepower to level the entire habitable surface of a planet, I can easily see such a ship being classified as a 'warship'.

Though I have no issue with the Vengeance being Starfleet's first dedicated 'warship'.
It WAS called a Dreadnaught in the film.
Okay?
__________________
"If I hadn't tried, the cost would have been my soul." - Admiral James T. Kirk, Star Trek III: The Search for Spock
BillJ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 16 2013, 10:07 PM   #268
Chemahkuu
Vice Admiral
 
Chemahkuu's Avatar
 
Location: United Kingdom
Send a message via Yahoo to Chemahkuu
Re: Starship Size Argument™ thread

Candlelight wrote: View Post
The hatch Kirk and Harrison 'fly' into the Vengeance was on deck 13, which was in the centre of the engineering section.

Unless that ship has very limited decks (IE big spaces in between) then the Vengeance is the size of Voyager...
The decks do seem to be excessively tall.
Chemahkuu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 16 2013, 10:14 PM   #269
3chordboy
Commander
 
Location: West Yorkshire, GOC, UK
Re: Starship Size Argument™ thread

Chemahkuu wrote: View Post
Candlelight wrote: View Post
The hatch Kirk and Harrison 'fly' into the Vengeance was on deck 13, which was in the centre of the engineering section.

Unless that ship has very limited decks (IE big spaces in between) then the Vengeance is the size of Voyager...
The decks do seem to be excessively tall.
that deck is especially massive... i'm remembering Scotty running across it and still not seeing the top of it
3chordboy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 16 2013, 10:22 PM   #270
Chemahkuu
Vice Admiral
 
Chemahkuu's Avatar
 
Location: United Kingdom
Send a message via Yahoo to Chemahkuu
Re: Starship Size Argument™ thread

Yeah, the star drive seemed to be devoted to automation and machinary, we see them running through server farms where there should be crew stations, probably why the ship can operate on such a tiny crew.

So it looks like the decks down there are huge in order to carry...something. Weapons, troops, other unpleasant things to deploy against a planetary population.
Chemahkuu is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Tags
argument, size, starship

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump



All times are GMT +1. The time now is 06:35 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
FireFox 2+ or Internet Explorer 7+ highly recommended.