RSS iconTwitter iconFacebook icon

The Trek BBS title image

The Trek BBS statistics

Threads: 140,242
Posts: 5,438,841
Members: 24,958
Currently online: 471
Newest member: greatmovies

TrekToday headlines

Cumberbatch In Wax
By: T'Bonz on Oct 24

Trek Screenwriter Washington D.C. Appearance
By: T'Bonz on Oct 23

Two Official Starships Collection Ships
By: T'Bonz on Oct 22

Pine In New Skit
By: T'Bonz on Oct 21

Stewart In Holiday Film
By: T'Bonz on Oct 21

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


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 August 7 2013, 03:44 AM   #856
BillJ
Admiral
 
BillJ's Avatar
 
Location: Covington, Ky.
View BillJ's Twitter Profile
Re: Starship Size Argument™ thread

I guess it comes down to this for me: should I decide that the original Enterprise isn't the size that Matt Jefferies says it is because some of the interiors don't exactly match up and the bridge turbolift on the exterior doesn't match where it's at on the interior?

I understand some folks get passionate about this stuff but I don't.
__________________
"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 online now   Reply With Quote
Old August 7 2013, 03:45 AM   #857
BillJ
Admiral
 
BillJ's Avatar
 
Location: Covington, Ky.
View BillJ's Twitter Profile
Re: Starship Size Argument™ thread

As far as the Star Destroyer goes: whose to say it's properly scaled? We have no evidence and nothing familiar in film to compare it against.
__________________
"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 online now   Reply With Quote
Old August 7 2013, 03:50 AM   #858
James
Guest
 
Re: Starship Size Argument™ thread

BillJ wrote: View Post
As far as the Star Destroyer goes: whose to say it's properly scaled? We have no evidence and nothing familiar in film to compare it against.

Like I said they are supposedly the same size but the window on the Vengeance is much larger compared to the ISD so Khan would be 50 feet tall compared to the crew on the ISD. Basically this also proves the Vengeance isn't 1500 meters because if it were that window would be very very small in that scene instead of right below the semi dome crescent shape visible on the highly accurate QMX model. We plainly see the window is a smaller than the crescent but not by a huge amount. The Vengeance is the length of the Sovereign class, it's clearly modeled after the Sovereign class as well.

BillJ wrote: View Post
I understand some folks get passionate about this stuff but I don't.
I used to be passionate about stuff like this but I'm not anymore, however when I see things that don't correspond to the officially stated size I started wondering. A lot.
  Reply With Quote
Old August 7 2013, 03:51 AM   #859
chardman
Vice Admiral
 
chardman's Avatar
 
Location: The home of GenCon
View chardman's Twitter Profile
Re: Starship Size Argument™ thread

JarodRussell wrote: View Post
Those will look as dated as the CRT displays in 2001...
There's not a single CRT display in the whole movie. Some screens were back projected flat screens, and then only in the background. Virtually all foreground displays were matte shots.
__________________
If Ronald Reagan hadn't cut Mental Health funding to the bone, most of today's GOP & Tea Party candidates wouldn't be walking around loose.
chardman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 7 2013, 03:54 AM   #860
BillJ
Admiral
 
BillJ's Avatar
 
Location: Covington, Ky.
View BillJ's Twitter Profile
Re: Starship Size Argument™ thread

James wrote: View Post

Like I said they are supposedly the same size but the window on the Vengeance is much larger compared to the ISD so Khan would be 50 feet tall compared to the crew on the ISD. Basically this also proves the Vengeance isn't 1500 meters because if it were that window would be very very small in that scene instead of right below the semi dome crescent shape visible on the highly accurate QMX model. We plainly see the window is a smaller than the crescent but not by a huge amount. The Vengeance is the length of the Sovereign class, it's clearly modeled after the Sovereign class as well.
You're more than welcome to think its whatever size you want it to be. I see no real evidence to question the creative team behind it anymore than I would question Matt Jefferies.
__________________
"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 online now   Reply With Quote
Old August 7 2013, 04:01 AM   #861
James
Guest
 
Re: Starship Size Argument™ thread

BillJ wrote: View Post
James wrote: View Post

Like I said they are supposedly the same size but the window on the Vengeance is much larger compared to the ISD so Khan would be 50 feet tall compared to the crew on the ISD. Basically this also proves the Vengeance isn't 1500 meters because if it were that window would be very very small in that scene instead of right below the semi dome crescent shape visible on the highly accurate QMX model. We plainly see the window is a smaller than the crescent but not by a huge amount. The Vengeance is the length of the Sovereign class, it's clearly modeled after the Sovereign class as well.
You're more than welcome to think its whatever size you want it to be. I see no real evidence to question the creative team behind it anymore than I would question Matt Jefferies.

I did this just for spite, it can't hurt right.

  Reply With Quote
Old August 7 2013, 04:35 AM   #862
trevanian
Rear Admiral
 
Re: Starship Size Argument™ thread

chardman wrote: View Post
JarodRussell wrote: View Post
Those will look as dated as the CRT displays in 2001...
There's not a single CRT display in the whole movie. Some screens were back projected flat screens, and then only in the background. Virtually all foreground displays were matte shots.
You're right that there are no CRTs in 2001 (2010 is another painful matter entirely), but nearly all the displays in 2001 ARE rearprojected, not matted.
trevanian is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 7 2013, 07:14 AM   #863
Crazy Eddie
Rear Admiral
 
Crazy Eddie's Avatar
 
Location: I'm in your ___, ___ing your ___
Re: Starship Size Argument™ thread

James wrote: View Post
Like I said they are supposedly the same size but the window on the Vengeance is much larger compared to the ISD so Khan would be 50 feet tall compared to the crew on the ISD.
You're eyeballing that, but you're not showing any analysis. HOW MUCH larger is the Vengenace's bridge window and what are those numbers based on?

"It seems too big to me" isn't a data point. Show us some numbers and then tell us the window is too big.
__________________
The Complete Illustrated Guide to Starfleet - Online Now!
Crazy Eddie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 7 2013, 07:29 AM   #864
Crazy Eddie
Rear Admiral
 
Crazy Eddie's Avatar
 
Location: I'm in your ___, ___ing your ___
Re: Starship Size Argument™ thread

James wrote: View Post
Bill I'll ask you directly this question, you know how the Vengeance is "officially" about 1500 meters? I'll add the second part when you respond.
Actually, AFAIK we've only estimated Vengeance's length based on its size relative to the Enterprise; it appears to be just about twice as long, which would put it at 1400 meters long.

Incidentally, 1400 meters is about normal range for a sci-fi warship these days; SDF-1 was 1250 while Battle 7 came in at 1500.The battle cruiser UNSC Pillar of Autumn was 1170 meters (although none of the single-player levels in Halo-CE would actually fit inside it) and its counterpart the Truth and Reconcilliation is about 1700 meters long. The (reboot) Galactica comes in at 1440 meters while the larger Pegasus measures just over 2000 meters. What's also telling is that every one of those ships have "little brother" counterparts that are depicted as something less than full-sized battleships; most of those are in the 500 to 800 meter range. Forward Unto Dawn is the smallest, measuring 450 meters in length, while Battlestar Valkyrie gets about 850 meters from stem to stern.

All in all, Vengenace is a pretty normal-looking starship where contemporary science fiction is concerned. There may be a possible scaling issue with some features being too large and others being too small; that, too, is actually pretty normal.
__________________
The Complete Illustrated Guide to Starfleet - Online Now!
Crazy Eddie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 7 2013, 08:57 AM   #865
F. King Daniel
Admiral
 
F. King Daniel's Avatar
 
Location: King Daniel Into Darkness
Re: Starship Size Argument™ thread

James wrote: View Post
This has to do with the size of the ship. Ok I'll be more specific, you know how the Star Destroyer is the same size right? Well if they are both the same size why is the Vengeance's bridge window big on the hull while the ISD's bridge window is tiny on the hull. Here are a couple of pictures for reference. I highlight the bridge area in green on the QMX model.

[hotlinked images removed]
You might want to take a look at the QMx Enterprise model before you start using their Vengeance as proof of anything. As cool as it is, it's not particularly accurate - there is no bridge window and there are windows on the secondary hull and hatches in the saucer which aren't on the CG model seen in the film.

Furthermore, it's from the scale on QMx model that we get the 4800ft size figure from!

My question is this: Why would they lie? What on Earth do they have to gain by pretending their starships are one size while really making them much smaller? How does this ridiculous conspiracy you're suggesting help them?

Oh, and here's a pic of the Vengeance's bridge window from the movie.
__________________
Star Trek Imponderables, fun mashups of Trek's biggest continuity errors! Ep1, Ep2 and Ep3

Last edited by M'Sharak; September 4 2013 at 01:04 AM.
F. King Daniel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 7 2013, 10:03 AM   #866
Gonzo
Lieutenant
 
Location: England
Re: Starship Size Argument™ thread

James wrote: View Post
BillJ wrote: View Post
James wrote: View Post

Like I said they are supposedly the same size but the window on the Vengeance is much larger compared to the ISD so Khan would be 50 feet tall compared to the crew on the ISD. Basically this also proves the Vengeance isn't 1500 meters because if it were that window would be very very small in that scene instead of right below the semi dome crescent shape visible on the highly accurate QMX model. We plainly see the window is a smaller than the crescent but not by a huge amount. The Vengeance is the length of the Sovereign class, it's clearly modeled after the Sovereign class as well.
You're more than welcome to think its whatever size you want it to be. I see no real evidence to question the creative team behind it anymore than I would question Matt Jefferies.

I did this just for spite, it can't hurt right.

This discussion over the size of the NuEnterprise has been going on for 4 years, there were many who doubted the new vessels size but after hearing the official size from the designers it was accepted even by those who weren't happy about it.

All the "evidence" you have posted has been done before and you have brought nothing new to the discussion whatsoever from what I can see, yet you carry on thinking we will all suddenly start agreeing with you for no other reason than because it is you saying it.

This discussion is not a competition, it is not something that can be won or lost, you wont succeed in changing anyone's mind on the matter as this was all dealt with years ago after the first film came out.

You have not posted a single piece of evidence that stands up to scrutiny nor have you responded fully when challenged by King Daniel and the rest, instead you have tried to change the subject or post stupid statements like:

"One thing is for sure, the new Enterprise is a poor design that's full of large open areas making it easy to breach the hull and wipe out large portions of the crew."

Which made me when I read it.

If your intention is to make me laugh you are most definitely doing it right, if it is to make a serious point for the forum to consider then you have failed.
Gonzo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 7 2013, 10:19 AM   #867
Belz...
Fleet Captain
 
Belz...'s Avatar
 
Location: In a finely-crafted cosmos... of my own making.
Re: Starship Size Argument™ thread

James wrote: View Post
I think I read on his site that he offered design ideas to them, I didn't see anything about him being hired by them.
1) What do you make of the Enterprise designers word that it's 700+ meters ?

2) What about the huge shuttlebay and "brewery" ? You can tell they won't fit into the older design.

3) What about the bridge and its window compared to the rest of the ship ? Again, it's a lot smaller compared to it.

Well if they are both the same size why is the Vengeance's bridge window big on the hull while the ISD's bridge window is tiny on the hull. Here are a couple of pictures for reference.
And you don't know exactly how large the bridge on the Vengeance is, because unlike the one on Enterprise we never got a good look at it. Your "mark" on the picture of a scale model of the ship is, again, a guesstimate by you.

I used to be passionate about stuff like this but I'm not anymore
This claim is contradicted by your behaviour in this thread.
__________________
And that's my opinion.
Belz... is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 7 2013, 08:35 PM   #868
M'Sharak
Definitely Herbert. Maybe.
 
M'Sharak's Avatar
 
Location: Terra Inlandia
Re: Starship Size Argument™ thread

James wrote: View Post

I did this just for spite, it can't hurt right.
Well, maybe a little.

James, you came into this thread asking if you'd get flamed for disagreeing with the 725-meter Enterpise length. You were assured that wasn't going to happen, and it hasn't.

You say you've provided evidence which proves your point(s), yet what little evidence you've actually posted does nothing to support your claims. Your arguments are so disorganized—skipping from one topic to another to another within a single paragraph—that trying to read them is frustrating, to put it mildly, and many of your statements don't even agree with each other. At the same time, you've dismissed or called wrong much more detailed, better-organized and substantial evidence offered by others, but you offer nothing more substantial in return. You "see what people were talking about when they mentioned hostility shown towards classic trek fans from new trek fans," when it's been demonstrated over and over again that the "old fans/new fans" thing holds no water - it's a complete fairy tale.

So what are you about here, James? You been dismissive, defensive, accusatory, not a little rude... and you've proven exhaustively that you've got little beyond "I refuse to accept" and "It doesn't look that way to me."

So here's an idea: why not take a deep breath, and just walk away? This has been getting you nowhere. Settle back and read for a bit. Or try out a different forum, for a change, and see what people are talking about there?
__________________
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 August 7 2013, 10:44 PM   #869
James
Guest
 
Re: Starship Size Argument™ thread

King Daniel Into Darkness wrote: View Post
James wrote: View Post
This has to do with the size of the ship. Ok I'll be more specific, you know how the Star Destroyer is the same size right? Well if they are both the same size why is the Vengeance's bridge window big on the hull while the ISD's bridge window is tiny on the hull. Here are a couple of pictures for reference. I highlight the bridge area in green on the QMX model.





You might want to take a look at the QMx Enterprise model before you start using their Vengeance as proof of anything. As cool as it is, it's not particularly accurate - there is no bridge window and there are windows on the secondary hull and hatches in the saucer which aren't on the CG model seen in the film.

Furthermore, it's from the scale on QMx model that we get the 4800ft size figure from!

My question is this: Why would they lie? What on Earth do they have to gain by pretending their starships are one size while really making them much smaller? How does this ridiculous conspiracy you're suggesting help them?

Oh, and here's a pic of the Vengeance's bridge window from the movie.

That's actually the domed crescent design reflecting sunlight. The window is just below that, as marked by my green line. The 4500 foot quote was from an issue of Cinefex and they aren't lying per se they are just being really sloppy about the technical data. I know what a 1500 meter ship looks like and this isn't one of them.
  Reply With Quote
Old August 8 2013, 12:09 AM   #870
F. King Daniel
Admiral
 
F. King Daniel's Avatar
 
Location: King Daniel Into Darkness
Re: Starship Size Argument™ thread

It looks to me like a tiny rectangle just below the dome, and a perfect fit for the close-up you posted. Take a look (and maybe crank up the brightness on your monitor, which'll make these details easier to differentiate):


The Vengeance bridge was a redress of the Enterprise's, giving us an idea of the size of the ship compared to that window.

It's also worth pointing out that the VFX in Star Wars and Star Trek Into Darkness were done by the same company, Industrial Light and Magic.

Also remember that the shape of a Star Destroyer and a Trek starship are as different as it gets. One is a giant triangular thing, one is a saucer/hull/nacelles thingie with far less internal volume.
__________________
Star Trek Imponderables, fun mashups of Trek's biggest continuity errors! Ep1, Ep2 and Ep3
F. King Daniel 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 06:13 AM.

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