RSS iconTwitter iconFacebook icon

The Trek BBS title image

The Trek BBS statistics

Threads: 138,964
Posts: 5,392,025
Members: 24,720
Currently online: 589
Newest member: Amywholoveswine

TrekToday headlines

Forbes Cast In Powers
By: T'Bonz on Aug 22

Dorn To Voice Firefly Character
By: T'Bonz on Aug 22

No ALS Ice Bucket For Saldana
By: T'Bonz on Aug 22

Free Star Trek Trexels Game
By: T'Bonz on Aug 22

New Trek-themed Bobble Heads
By: T'Bonz on Aug 21

IDW Publishing November Trek Comic
By: T'Bonz on Aug 20

Pegg/Wright Trilogy In The Works
By: T'Bonz on Aug 20

Star Trek: The Compendium Rebate Details
By: T'Bonz on Aug 20

Gold Key Archives Volume 2
By: T'Bonz on Aug 19

Takei Documentary Wins Award
By: T'Bonz on Aug 19


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 September 21 2013, 04:56 AM   #31
Shilliam Watner
Commander
 
Location: In linear time
Re: What The Hell? What Is Up With The Side Hull Torpedo Bays?

bullethead wrote: View Post
Kruezerman wrote: View Post
I liked it. It's a big ship so she can fit extra tubes on the side. I've never liked the idea that entire sections of a ship were simply empty, waiting for a mission so that they can be used. It seemed like such a waste. With those side torpedo tubes, now she can defend herself 360 degrees!

They did a good job in giving the Enterprise crew actual jobs and purpose, instead of just a bunch of people wandering lovely hallways.
Plus it's a bit risky to line both sides of that section with weapons that could chain-detonate and destroy the ship if the enemy gets a lucky hit on the tubes before the torps launch.
I agree. Remember the Vengeance did score a big hit on the side of the Enterprise in front of the nacelle pylon and people along with R2-D2 were sucked out into space. That was where the torpedoes were in their launchers and they didn't detonate. The writers just didn't think this thing through.
Shilliam Watner is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 21 2013, 05:24 AM   #32
Hartzilla2007
Vice Admiral
 
Hartzilla2007's Avatar
 
Location: Star Trekkin Across the universe.
Re: What The Hell? What Is Up With The Side Hull Torpedo Bays?

Shilliam Watner wrote: View Post
That was where the torpedoes were in their launchers and they didn't detonate. The writers just didn't think this thing through.
Or there was some form of saftey system to keep that from happening.
Hartzilla2007 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old September 21 2013, 05:32 AM   #33
Sigokat
Commander
 
Sigokat's Avatar
 
Location: Fort Bragg, NC but from Chicago (currently deployed)
Re: What The Hell? What Is Up With The Side Hull Torpedo Bays?

Chemahkuu wrote: View Post
Sigokat wrote: View Post
Huh, guess I will have to watch it again. When I did watch it it was on my tablet and was a bootleg copy (sorry was trying to wait till I got home but I don't get home from this deployment till Jan/Feb 14 and I just couldn't wait any longer! )

I was under the impression that when Scotty "resigned" and was drinking in what looked like a bar when Kirk called him that he was no longer on the Enterprise and was at a Space Station or even back on Earth. Guess I was wrong. So he was still on the Enterprise? So does it have like a Ten Forward or something?
Kirk calls him from "the plaza", a vertical shaft down through the saucer section of the Enterprise.

Scotty is indeed in a nightclub in the San Francisco harbour district.
Thanks!
__________________
Just my Two Lincolns
Sigokat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 21 2013, 05:41 AM   #34
SeerSGB
Admiral
 
SeerSGB's Avatar
 
Location: Tennessee
Re: What The Hell? What Is Up With The Side Hull Torpedo Bays?

bullethead wrote: View Post
Kruezerman wrote: View Post
I liked it. It's a big ship so she can fit extra tubes on the side. I've never liked the idea that entire sections of a ship were simply empty, waiting for a mission so that they can be used. It seemed like such a waste. With those side torpedo tubes, now she can defend herself 360 degrees!

They did a good job in giving the Enterprise crew actual jobs and purpose, instead of just a bunch of people wandering lovely hallways.
My only problem with the side tubes is that they're stuck in the engineering section, which is already cram packed with machinery and presumably storage. Plus it's a bit risky to line both sides of that section with weapons that could chain-detonate and destroy the ship if the enemy gets a lucky hit on the tubes before the torps launch. (Yeah, I know the Vengeance manages to somehow not get reduced to atoms, but that's the power of plot for you).
No worse than the vertical intermix shaft (depending on which diagram you use) of the refit from TMP through TSFS passing right through the center of the torpedo launcher and topped off with a nice glowing dome.

The reboot Enterprise's engineering systems seem a little more robust that we're used to see. More along the line of TOS and the TOS movies: The ship can get carved to pieces and the reactors don't go book like a Ford Pinto on a bad day.
__________________
- SeerSGB -
Good men don't need rules, The Doctor (A Good Man Goes To War)
SeerSGB is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 21 2013, 11:26 AM   #35
King Daniel Into Darkness
Admiral
 
King Daniel Into Darkness's Avatar
 
Location: England again
Re: What The Hell? What Is Up With The Side Hull Torpedo Bays?

Shilliam Watner wrote: View Post
bullethead wrote: View Post
Kruezerman wrote: View Post
I liked it. It's a big ship so she can fit extra tubes on the side. I've never liked the idea that entire sections of a ship were simply empty, waiting for a mission so that they can be used. It seemed like such a waste. With those side torpedo tubes, now she can defend herself 360 degrees!

They did a good job in giving the Enterprise crew actual jobs and purpose, instead of just a bunch of people wandering lovely hallways.
Plus it's a bit risky to line both sides of that section with weapons that could chain-detonate and destroy the ship if the enemy gets a lucky hit on the tubes before the torps launch.
I agree. Remember the Vengeance did score a big hit on the side of the Enterprise in front of the nacelle pylon and people along with R2-D2 were sucked out into space. That was where the torpedoes were in their launchers and they didn't detonate. The writers just didn't think this thing through.
They were hit in engineering, a few floors up from the weapons bay (in he middle of the hull). Also, and most importantly, the torpedoes were not armed at the time.
__________________
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 September 21 2013, 01:55 PM   #36
bullethead
Fleet Captain
 
bullethead's Avatar
 
Re: What The Hell? What Is Up With The Side Hull Torpedo Bays?

King Daniel Into Darkness wrote: View Post
Shilliam Watner wrote: View Post
bullethead wrote: View Post
Plus it's a bit risky to line both sides of that section with weapons that could chain-detonate and destroy the ship if the enemy gets a lucky hit on the tubes before the torps launch.
I agree. Remember the Vengeance did score a big hit on the side of the Enterprise in front of the nacelle pylon and people along with R2-D2 were sucked out into space. That was where the torpedoes were in their launchers and they didn't detonate. The writers just didn't think this thing through.
They were hit in engineering, a few floors up from the weapons bay (in he middle of the hull). Also, and most importantly, the torpedoes were not armed at the time.
That doesn't seem to matter, because the torpedoes chain-detonated just fine on the Vengeance when only one was actually armed and detonated. So it seems that you need a lot of heat to get those things to blow up, which means a single hit within a few feet of the tubes might set them off (which would be the kind of thing Admiral Marcus's weapons officer should've been focusing on, but didn't for reasons). The Enterprise got really, really lucky in that encounter.
__________________
A business man and engineer discuss how to launch a communications satellite in the 1960s:
Biz Dev Guy: Your communications satellite has to be the size, shape, and weight of a hydrogen bomb.
bullethead is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 21 2013, 02:12 PM   #37
Mycroft Maxwell
Lieutenant Commander
 
Mycroft Maxwell's Avatar
 
Location: Tennessee USA
Re: What The Hell? What Is Up With The Side Hull Torpedo Bays?

No worse than the vertical intermix shaft (depending on which diagram you use) of the refit from TMP through TSFS passing right through the center of the torpedo launcher and topped off with a nice glowing dome.
Actually, It passes between the photon bays, not the launcher's themselves. THe launchers are only a small forward section of the bay. But I was looking, where are all the 94 photon torpedoes on the Enterprise-A stored? (Yes I counted scotty's inventory on screen. There were 94 photon torpedoes listed on his display in STVI). I mean you got that big loader on Wrath of Khan, but where are the Torpedoes stored? Oh and Did anyone else notice that the torpedo bay on the Enterprise was not as tall as the set used in wrath of khan?

I am one of the people who likes to think of this JJprise as being relativly the same size of the original (People at ILM are dumb, give Bernd Schneider some credit, he really thinks these things through, and gives perfectly logical explanations, people just dont want to pay attention to what he says). The Windows and Hatches would all be way out of size for a 700 meter vessel. -so In conclusion, it all comes down to this. Starfleet vessels got Harry Potter Magic space expanders. Like the one that allows Voyager to hold 17 shuttles. (and allows the Delta flyer which is bigger than the shuttlebay doors, to fly out of VOyagers shuttle bay). Lets not forget in Nemesis Riker being on the Enterprise E's non existant deck 29, and almost falls down at least 15 more non existant decks in the Ent-E's own pit of doom.

I guess what I am trying to say here, Star Trek has always had issues with Infinite stuff fitting in Finite space.
Mycroft Maxwell is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 21 2013, 02:39 PM   #38
King Daniel Into Darkness
Admiral
 
King Daniel Into Darkness's Avatar
 
Location: England again
Re: What The Hell? What Is Up With The Side Hull Torpedo Bays?

^Read the Starship Size Argument thread trough, it includes refutations of everyhing in Bernd's article, including window rows, deck spacings and the airlock hatches. Basically, his argument boils down to "I think it should be the same size as the original" rather than what's in the two movies actually being that size.
__________________
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 September 21 2013, 03:37 PM   #39
bullethead
Fleet Captain
 
bullethead's Avatar
 
Re: What The Hell? What Is Up With The Side Hull Torpedo Bays?

King Daniel Into Darkness wrote: View Post
^Read the Starship Size Argument thread trough, it includes refutations of everyhing in Bernd's article, including window rows, deck spacings and the airlock hatches. Basically, his argument boils down to "I think it should be the same size as the original" rather than what's in the two movies actually being that size.
It's sad how many of his articles about AbramsTrek are marred by what he thinks should be, instead of just sticking to what's in the movies. He makes many valid points in his inconsistencies article, but then undermines himself by including stuff like "Spock shouldn't be angry" or something.
__________________
A business man and engineer discuss how to launch a communications satellite in the 1960s:
Biz Dev Guy: Your communications satellite has to be the size, shape, and weight of a hydrogen bomb.
bullethead is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 21 2013, 03:52 PM   #40
austen_pierce
Captain
 
austen_pierce's Avatar
 
Location: Virginia Beach, VA
Re: What The Hell? What Is Up With The Side Hull Torpedo Bays?

My reaction to the side torpedo bay doors opening.... "Arrrrrrrrrr.... we be at broadsides, cap'm!"
austen_pierce is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 21 2013, 04:07 PM   #41
King Daniel Into Darkness
Admiral
 
King Daniel Into Darkness's Avatar
 
Location: England again
Re: What The Hell? What Is Up With The Side Hull Torpedo Bays?

bullethead wrote: View Post
It's sad how many of his articles about AbramsTrek are marred by what he thinks should be, instead of just sticking to what's in the movies. He makes many valid points in his inconsistencies article, but then undermines himself by including stuff like "Spock shouldn't be angry" or something.
I just can't see how a guy who is supposedly an engineer can botch up perspective so badly as Bernd does in his article on the Enterprise. Claiming the shuttlebay changes sizes when all that is different is the proximity of the camera to the ship. It's almost like a deliberate disinformation campaign, based on one guy's outdated preconceptions about the Trekverse. ILM are most certainly not "dumb", they're a far greater authority on their CG creation than a nitpicker with a website.
__________________
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 September 21 2013, 04:09 PM   #42
Nerys Myk
Fleet Admiral
 
Nerys Myk's Avatar
 
Location: House of Kang, now with ridges
Re: What The Hell? What Is Up With The Side Hull Torpedo Bays?

I don't care for opinion sites that are disguised as information sites.
__________________
The boring one, the one with Khan, the one where Spock returns, the one with whales, the dumb one, the last one, the one with Kirk, the one with the Borg, the stupid one, the bad one, the new one, the other one with Khan.
Nerys Myk is online now   Reply With Quote
Old September 21 2013, 04:57 PM   #43
SeerSGB
Admiral
 
SeerSGB's Avatar
 
Location: Tennessee
Re: What The Hell? What Is Up With The Side Hull Torpedo Bays?

King Daniel Into Darkness wrote: View Post
bullethead wrote: View Post
It's sad how many of his articles about AbramsTrek are marred by what he thinks should be, instead of just sticking to what's in the movies. He makes many valid points in his inconsistencies article, but then undermines himself by including stuff like "Spock shouldn't be angry" or something.
I just can't see how a guy who is supposedly an engineer can botch up perspective so badly as Bernd does in his article on the Enterprise. Claiming the shuttlebay changes sizes when all that is different is the proximity of the camera to the ship. It's almost like a deliberate disinformation campaign, based on one guy's outdated preconceptions about the Trekverse. ILM are most certainly not "dumb", they're a far greater authority on their CG creation than a nitpicker with a website.
Bernd is as biased as they come. I don't think I've ever used the info on his site in a serious way. He can write a good article, but take it with a ton of salt and accept that he's just another fan laying out the conjecture.

Mycroft Maxwell wrote: View Post
No worse than the vertical intermix shaft (depending on which diagram you use) of the refit from TMP through TSFS passing right through the center of the torpedo launcher and topped off with a nice glowing dome.
Actually, It passes between the photon bays, not the launcher's themselves. THe launchers are only a small forward section of the bay. But I was looking, where are all the 94 photon torpedoes on the Enterprise-A stored? (Yes I counted scotty's inventory on screen. There were 94 photon torpedoes listed on his display in STVI). I mean you got that big loader on Wrath of Khan, but where are the Torpedoes stored? Oh and Did anyone else notice that the torpedo bay on the Enterprise was not as tall as the set used in wrath of khan?

I am one of the people who likes to think of this JJprise as being relativly the same size of the original (People at ILM are dumb, give Bernd Schneider some credit, he really thinks these things through, and gives perfectly logical explanations, people just dont want to pay attention to what he says). The Windows and Hatches would all be way out of size for a 700 meter vessel. -so In conclusion, it all comes down to this. Starfleet vessels got Harry Potter Magic space expanders. Like the one that allows Voyager to hold 17 shuttles. (and allows the Delta flyer which is bigger than the shuttlebay doors, to fly out of VOyagers shuttle bay). Lets not forget in Nemesis Riker being on the Enterprise E's non existant deck 29, and almost falls down at least 15 more non existant decks in the Ent-E's own pit of doom.

I guess what I am trying to say here, Star Trek has always had issues with Infinite stuff fitting in Finite space.
Sorry, but the official number is 700(~) and that's the size of the ship. Plenty of on screen evidence to support that. Even if there wasn't: That's the official size.

Bernd has an axe to grind about Nu-Trek so hard, it's throwing sparks off the grinding wheel, and it's biasing his work.

Not to mention the fact that a fan (or fans) are somehow more authoritative than the people that designed the damn ship for the movie is just eye rolling.
__________________
- SeerSGB -
Good men don't need rules, The Doctor (A Good Man Goes To War)
SeerSGB is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 21 2013, 06:51 PM   #44
Mycroft Maxwell
Lieutenant Commander
 
Mycroft Maxwell's Avatar
 
Location: Tennessee USA
Re: What The Hell? What Is Up With The Side Hull Torpedo Bays?

Ryan Church designed it to be around the size of the original. Other than one shuttlebay scene, what on screen evidence you talking about? All other scenes suggest the thing is not that big. Especially when you look at the scene in St09 where it scrolls out from the bridge. It was some idiot that decided to upscale it to a ludicrous size. "Hey that brewery would not fit in that ship" "uhhh...uhhhhhh...we'll just say the ship is much bigger". If you look at the windows, and the ports the 700m is a size officialized by a severely blind person. I mean at 700 meters, the freakin bridge window would be 2 decks tall!!!. Did you even read the article on the size of the NuEnterprise? As for Bernd, he's critical of all stuff onscreen. Thats what he does, he analyses stuff. I find it interesting. Not to say I agree with all his observations and analysis, some things I strongly disagree, but I really appreciate his depth into things.

Also,I find his observations more reliable than "Official" sources. Afterall, there are some "Official" sources that say Voyager has Quantum torpedoes. Does it make it true? Of course not.
Mycroft Maxwell is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 21 2013, 07:15 PM   #45
King Daniel Into Darkness
Admiral
 
King Daniel Into Darkness's Avatar
 
Location: England again
Re: What The Hell? What Is Up With The Side Hull Torpedo Bays?

Mycroft Maxwell wrote: View Post
Ryan Church designed it to be around the size of the original. Other than one shuttlebay scene, what on screen evidence you talking about? All other scenes suggest the thing is not that big.
You didn't read the thread I linked you to, did you?
Especially when you look at the scene in St09 where it scrolls out from the bridge.
You might want to look at that scene again, the dome extends far further back than the bridge.
It was some idiot that decided to upscale it to a ludicrous size. "Hey that brewery would not fit in that ship" "uhhh...uhhhhhh...we'll just say the ship is much bigger".
Making the ship fit the interiors is the entire point. You think it's better it not fit?
If you look at the windows, and the ports the 700m is a size officialized by a severely blind person.
At 366 meters:

At 725 meters:


And here is a comparison of the airlocks:


Now, who's blind, exactly?
I mean at 700 meters, the freakin bridge window would be 2 decks tall!!!.
No it wouldn't. It would be 8ft tall, exactly as we see. The 8ft tall window would take up the entire height of the dome at 366m. It obviously does not.
Did you even read the article on the size of the NuEnterprise?
Yes, and I linked to proof that it was BS. More proof is above. Are you going to believe rethoric or evidence?
__________________
Star Trek Imponderables, fun mashups of Trek's biggest continuity errors! Ep1, Ep2 and Ep3
King Daniel Into Darkness is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

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 07:52 PM.

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