RSS iconTwitter iconFacebook icon

The Trek BBS title image

The Trek BBS statistics

Threads: 140,102
Posts: 5,432,535
Members: 24,931
Currently online: 490
Newest member: emogs

TrekToday headlines

The Red Shirt Diaries #8
By: T'Bonz on Oct 20

IDW Publishing January Comics
By: T'Bonz on Oct 20

Retro Review: Chrysalis
By: Michelle on Oct 18

The Next Generation Season Seven Blu-ray Details
By: T'Bonz on Oct 17

CBS Launches Streaming Service
By: T'Bonz on Oct 17

Yelchin In New Indie Thriller
By: T'Bonz on Oct 17

Saldana In The Book of Life
By: T'Bonz on Oct 17

Cracked’s New Sci-Fi Satire
By: T'Bonz on Oct 16

Beltran Introduces Shakespeare To Theater Group
By: T'Bonz on Oct 16

Burton To Be Honored at Facets Boo! Bash
By: T'Bonz on Oct 16


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 July 22 2013, 02:55 AM   #676
Set Harth
Rear Admiral
 
Set Harth's Avatar
 
Location: Police State
Re: Starship Size Argument™ thread

Belz... wrote: View Post
At some point you have to give up your preconceptions, analyse why you want so much to cling to then, and accept reality.
Because that kind of thing happens all the time on the Internet.
__________________
Thank you very much for your concern, sir, but he does not need your religion, he has science and socialism and birthdays.
Set Harth is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 22 2013, 06:02 PM   #677
Cyke101
Rear Admiral
 
Cyke101's Avatar
 
Re: Starship Size Argument™ thread

Chemahkuu wrote: View Post
The ship is actually a giant living metal changeling that changes size on a whim or when it thinks the crew aren't looking.
And of course, that's an homage to the Defiant from DS9.

(I'm a sucker for prime universe shout outs)
__________________
“You do not use science in order to prove yourself right, you use science in order to become right.”
Cyke101 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 22 2013, 08:24 PM   #678
Killerprise
Lieutenant Junior Grade
 
Re: Starship Size Argument™ thread

Crazy Eddie wrote: View Post
WarpFactorZ wrote: View Post
BillJ wrote: View Post
Scotty comments the airlock on the Vengeance is four meters.
No, Scotty says the airlock is about four SQUARE METRES in area.
And he's probably wrong. Apart from being visibly larger than that anyway (as you can see when the security guy gets blown out of it) a 7 foot hatch is small enough that Khan and Kirk would have to be practically holding hands to fit through it. Although they are side by side, they are not QUITE close enough to touch each other; one or both of them should be dead.

FWIW, the novelization renders the line as "four meters" and not "four square meters." So Scotty's probably just exaggerating to make a point (he tends to do that, you know).

Probably wrong? We are talking about Montgomery Scott one of the most efficient engineers in Starfleet, he's not remotely wrong and neither is the evidence that proves the ship isn't 2500 ft/ 725 meters but I'm sure you will make up ANY excuse to say all of the evidence is wrong. The atrium shaft is missing the computer core. The hatches are the same size as the refit Enterprise's are as well. I'm going to link this because it's pertinent and it will piss crazy eddy off because he doesn't like it when someone has a differing opinion.


http://www.ex-astris-scientia.org/ar...mment.htm#size











P.S. I came here to have fun and do some debating not get harassed so kindly back off and refrain from responding to every one of my posts like a stalker. I still can't believe I've attracted a stalker that fast.
__________________
Real Star Trek fans question everything, fake Trek fans blindly accept everything.
Killerprise is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 22 2013, 08:40 PM   #679
SeerSGB
Admiral
 
SeerSGB's Avatar
 
Location: Out There...That Away
View SeerSGB's Twitter Profile
Re: Starship Size Argument™ thread

The production team calls it at 700(+) meters, and that's what the official size stands at till they change their mind.
__________________
- SeerSGB -
"I've made many mistakes, and it's about time that I did something about that." The Doctor (Deep Breath)
| Blog | Homepage |
SeerSGB is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 22 2013, 08:44 PM   #680
Mage
Commodore
 
Mage's Avatar
 
Re: Starship Size Argument™ thread

Killerprise wrote: View Post
P.S. I came here to have fun and do some debating not get harassed so kindly back off and refrain from responding to every one of my posts like a stalker. I still can't believe I've attracted a stalker that fast.

When you make silly comments about not accepting something that the designers of the ship have stated as fact, you're gonna get harassed like this I guess. It makes you look a bit in denial.
__________________
Niner. Lurker. Browncoat.
Mage is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 22 2013, 08:56 PM   #681
Killerprise
Lieutenant Junior Grade
 
Re: Starship Size Argument™ thread

Mage wrote: View Post
Killerprise wrote: View Post
P.S. I came here to have fun and do some debating not get harassed so kindly back off and refrain from responding to every one of my posts like a stalker. I still can't believe I've attracted a stalker that fast.

When you make silly comments about not accepting something that the designers of the ship have stated as fact, you're gonna get harassed like this I guess. It makes you look a bit in denial.

How exactly does measuring the hatches and everything else to estimate the ship's actual size qualify as being in denial? I'm not in denial I just want it on paper how the ship is that big, some blueprints would be nice. Is it also to be in denial when you're told some information yet visual evidence proves otherwise?
__________________
Real Star Trek fans question everything, fake Trek fans blindly accept everything.
Killerprise is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 22 2013, 08:57 PM   #682
Belz...
Fleet Captain
 
Belz...'s Avatar
 
Location: In a finely-crafted cosmos... of my own making.
Re: Starship Size Argument™ thread

Killerprise wrote: View Post
Probably wrong?
Yes, character guesswork < hard evidence.

It doesn't matter how big you want the Enterprise to be, sir.
__________________
And that's my opinion.
Belz... is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 22 2013, 09:04 PM   #683
F. King Daniel
Admiral
 
F. King Daniel's Avatar
 
Location: King Daniel Into Darkness
Re: Starship Size Argument™ thread

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?


And what about the lobby from Into Darkness, located directly behind the bridge? This is a quick picture made using the set plans for the movie, and an Enterprise at 725m. It goes without saying that they could NEVER fit in a smaller ship.
__________________
Star Trek Imponderables, fun mashups of Trek's biggest continuity errors! Ep1, Ep2 and Ep3
F. King Daniel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 22 2013, 09:17 PM   #684
Killerprise
Lieutenant Junior Grade
 
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?


And what about the lobby from Into Darkness, located directly behind the bridge? This is a quick picture made using the set plans for the movie, and an Enterprise at 725m. It goes without saying that they could NEVER fit in a smaller ship.

I like how your bridge diagram is too small compared to the bridge dome. The bridge itself fills up the whole area behind the window. The hallway behind the bridge goes toward the back of the ship, not off to the side like your picture suggests. Make I have the diagram image, I can elaborate that way?
__________________
Real Star Trek fans question everything, fake Trek fans blindly accept everything.
Killerprise is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 22 2013, 09:26 PM   #685
F. King Daniel
Admiral
 
F. King Daniel's Avatar
 
Location: King Daniel Into Darkness
Re: Starship Size Argument™ thread

http://www.trekbbs.com/showthread.php?t=211333&page=46

Remember, the lobby has to fit in behind the bridge, as seen here. The bridge itself is not under the dome on this Enterprise, and it certainly does not fill the structure:

The two sets fit perfectly at 2380'/725m, as I've shown.
__________________
Star Trek Imponderables, fun mashups of Trek's biggest continuity errors! Ep1, Ep2 and Ep3
F. King Daniel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 22 2013, 09:36 PM   #686
SeerSGB
Admiral
 
SeerSGB's Avatar
 
Location: Out There...That Away
View SeerSGB's Twitter Profile
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?
~image snipped~
Besides, Bernd is still just a fan having (I would hope) fun with conjecturing up answers to stuff. End of the day, if the production says 700(+)m, then that's what it is. No matter how much measuring and scaling the fans do, it is what it is.

Besides, as you've said, the sets fit a larger ship. You'd never be able to stuff an engineering the scale of the one of the (nu)1701 onto the (prime)1701.
__________________
- SeerSGB -
"I've made many mistakes, and it's about time that I did something about that." The Doctor (Deep Breath)
| Blog | Homepage |
SeerSGB is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 22 2013, 09:41 PM   #687
Killerprise
Lieutenant Junior Grade
 
Re: Starship Size Argument™ thread

King Daniel Into Darkness wrote: View Post
http://www.trekbbs.com/showthread.php?t=211333&page=46

Remember, the lobby has to fit in behind the bridge, as seen here. The bridge itself is not under the dome on this Enterprise, and it certainly does not fill the structure:

The two sets fit perfectly at 2380'/725m, as I've shown.

Yes it is under the dome, would you like me to upload the scene from the 2009 movie that shows the camera moving to outside of the bridge after the Enterprise arrives at vulcan? There is more than one atrium, you can see it in the star trek console game. The dome on the saucer's top is actually a sensor as is the dome on the bottom of the saucer. On the starboard side of the bridge there is an airlock leading to outer space.
__________________
Real Star Trek fans question everything, fake Trek fans blindly accept everything.
Killerprise is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 22 2013, 09:48 PM   #688
F. King Daniel
Admiral
 
F. King Daniel's Avatar
 
Location: King Daniel Into Darkness
Re: Starship Size Argument™ thread

Killerprise wrote: View Post
King Daniel Into Darkness wrote: View Post
http://www.trekbbs.com/showthread.php?t=211333&page=46

Remember, the lobby has to fit in behind the bridge, as seen here. The bridge itself is not under the dome on this Enterprise, and it certainly does not fill the structure:

The two sets fit perfectly at 2380'/725m, as I've shown.

Yes it is under the dome, would you like me to upload the scene from the 2009 movie that shows the camera moving to outside of the bridge after the Enterprise arrives at vulcan?
You might want to look at that scene a little closer yourself. There is a similar shot in Into Darkness, seen here and again at the end of the movie:

An oval room at the front of deck 2, directly in front of the lobby, which rests under the dome.
__________________
Star Trek Imponderables, fun mashups of Trek's biggest continuity errors! Ep1, Ep2 and Ep3
F. King Daniel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 22 2013, 09:53 PM   #689
M'Sharak
Definitely Herbert. Maybe.
 
M'Sharak's Avatar
 
Location: Terra Inlandia
Re: Starship Size Argument™ thread

Killerprise wrote: View Post
Crazy Eddie wrote: View Post
<snip>
<snip>

http://www.ex-astris-scientia.org/ar...mment.htm#size

P.S. I came here to have fun and do some debating not get harassed so kindly back off and refrain from responding to every one of my posts like a stalker. I still can't believe I've attracted a stalker that fast.
Crazy Eddie's not a stalker; he just likes to to argue. At length. About almost anything. With anyone. Likes it a lot.

If, however, you feel you have a genuine complaint about being stalked, or concerning any other rule violation or conduct issue, please make use of the 'Notify Moderator' button [ ] on the relevant post or message, rather than doing an in-thread call-out (which is considered poor form here, and may be actionable if taken to excess.)

Also, I'd recommend against citing that particular page at EAS as evidence of anything. Not if you expect your arguments to be taken seriously, at any rate, as Bernd's "Enterprise Size Controversy" amounts to little more than a lengthy etude in the key of "La la la, I don't WANT it to be that size!"
__________________
The trouble ain't that there is too many fools, but
that the lightning ain't distributed right.
— Mark Twain
M'Sharak is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 22 2013, 09:58 PM   #690
Killerprise
Lieutenant Junior Grade
 
Re: Starship Size Argument™ thread

King Daniel Into Darkness wrote: View Post
Killerprise wrote: View Post
King Daniel Into Darkness wrote: View Post
http://www.trekbbs.com/showthread.php?t=211333&page=46

Remember, the lobby has to fit in behind the bridge, as seen here. The bridge itself is not under the dome on this Enterprise, and it certainly does not fill the structure:

The two sets fit perfectly at 2380'/725m, as I've shown.

Yes it is under the dome, would you like me to upload the scene from the 2009 movie that shows the camera moving to outside of the bridge after the Enterprise arrives at vulcan?
You might want to look at that scene a little closer yourself. There is a similar shot in Into Darkness, seen here and again at the end of the movie:

An oval room at the front of deck 2, directly in front of the lobby, which rests under the dome.
Yeah this blue ring is directly under that dome. The atrium is somewhere else.

http://1-akamai.tapcdn.com/images/th...79-animate.jpg
__________________
Real Star Trek fans question everything, fake Trek fans blindly accept everything.

Last edited by M'Sharak; July 23 2013 at 01:01 AM. Reason: unauthorized hotlink
Killerprise 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 12:08 PM.

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