RSS iconTwitter iconFacebook icon

The Trek BBS title image

The Trek BBS statistics

Threads: 147,677
Posts: 5,840,068
Members: 26,171
Currently online: 437
Newest member: SGCombs

TrekToday headlines

Perth Mint Voyager Coins
By: T'Bonz on Sep 1

Face Off To Feature Trek Makeup
By: T'Bonz on Sep 1

Pegg Omaze Video Features Outtakes
By: T'Bonz on Sep 1

Vulcan Ale – The Genesis Effect
By: T'Bonz on Aug 31

Shatner Writing Book About Friendship With Nimoy
By: T'Bonz on Aug 31

Nimoy Documentary ON COPD In Progress
By: T'Bonz on Aug 31

Three New Star Trek Beyond Set Shots
By: T'Bonz on Aug 31

Retro Review: Elogium
By: Michelle Erica Green on Aug 28

Trek Swype Keyboard
By: T'Bonz on Aug 28

Meaney In Talks For McGuinness Role
By: T'Bonz on Aug 27


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 > Welcome to the Trek BBS! > General Trek Discussion

General Trek Discussion Trek TV and cinema subjects not related to any specific series or movie.

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old December 12 2013, 09:29 PM   #271
Nob Akimoto
Captain
 
Location: The People's Republic of Austin
View Nob Akimoto's Twitter Profile
Re: Is the USS Vengeance more powerful than the Enterprise E?

The type seen in "Rascals" was a reuse of the VFX from "Yesterday's Enterprise" which was a hugely upscaled BOP of about 600-700m. Even if we take the dialogue referring to them as "B'Rels" at face value, they're much larger from a scaling perspective than the tiny 12-man versions we saw in TMP. And we've seen Klingons produce some impressive modern ships anyway like the Negh'var. And since the huuuuge BOPs in "The Defector" were considered to be scary frontline ships that made Tomalok run away despite having a pair of enormous Warbirds with him, I think it's probably a safer assumption that the Klingon ship's internals have been substantially upgraded in the interim along with the gigantism, rather than the other powers stagnating relatively speaking.

I'm not sure really if we should stick things from "Countdown" in here, but in that, at least, the Enterprise-E was holding her own pretty well against Narada, so I think the question becomes if Vengeance is actually powerful enough to fight toe to toe with Narada.
Nob Akimoto is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 13 2013, 02:54 AM   #272
Avro Arrow
Commodore
 
Avro Arrow's Avatar
 
Location: Secret Arctic Base
Re: Is the USS Vengeance more powerful than the Enterprise E?

King Daniel Into Darkness wrote: View Post
The Klingon D-7/K'tinga class is the same in "Unexpected" as it is in Deep Space Nine (and although that was apparently a last-minute substitute in ENT, the alternate Klingon ship model looked virtually identical to the D-7 too).
It had similar lines, but I certainly wouldn't call it "virtually identical", any more than I would say the original pre-refit 1701 looked "virtually identical" to the refit 1701, even though they had similar lines as well.

I was so hopeful that CBS would have decided to replace the K'tinga with the D4 in that ep when ENT season 1 was released on blu-ray. I should have known better.
Avro Arrow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 14 2013, 12:25 PM   #273
King Daniel Into Darkness
Admiral
 
King Daniel Into Darkness's Avatar
 
Location: England
Re: Is the USS Vengeance more powerful than the Enterprise E?

Nob Akimoto wrote: View Post
The type seen in "Rascals" was a reuse of the VFX from "Yesterday's Enterprise" which was a hugely upscaled BOP of about 600-700m.
Was it? In that case, my bad.
Even if we take the dialogue referring to them as "B'Rels" at face value, they're much larger from a scaling perspective than the tiny 12-man versions we saw in TMP. And we've seen Klingons produce some impressive modern ships anyway like the Negh'var. And since the huuuuge BOPs in "The Defector" were considered to be scary frontline ships that made Tomalok run away despite having a pair of enormous Warbirds with him, I think it's probably a safer assumption that the Klingon ship's internals have been substantially upgraded in the interim along with the gigantism, rather than the other powers stagnating relatively speaking.
Yet when we see the bridge of the "new flagship" Neg'Var, it's rusty and ancient-looking like the rest of the Klingon fleet! I wonder if "new" actually meant newly found and retrofitted from some ancient long-lost Hur'Q/Karsid starbase?
I'm not sure really if we should stick things from "Countdown" in here, but in that, at least, the Enterprise-E was holding her own pretty well against Narada, so I think the question becomes if Vengeance is actually powerful enough to fight toe to toe with Narada.
If we include the comics, perhaps Vengeance uses Narada's Borg technology, or a 23rd century knock-off of it? The entire drilling platform did end up in San Francisco bay, and they'd have sensor readings of Narada going back 25 years. Remember the Defiant, Voyager and Delta Flyer, all of which were designed or later retrofitted with Borg-inspired systems which gave them big tactical advantages.

Avro Arrow wrote: View Post
King Daniel Into Darkness wrote: View Post
The Klingon D-7/K'tinga class is the same in "Unexpected" as it is in Deep Space Nine (and although that was apparently a last-minute substitute in ENT, the alternate Klingon ship model looked virtually identical to the D-7 too).
It had similar lines, but I certainly wouldn't call it "virtually identical", any more than I would say the original pre-refit 1701 looked "virtually identical" to the refit 1701, even though they had similar lines as well.

It looks contemporary to me, like a minor variant, but not a ship from an entire century (or two, in the case of TNG) before. The Raptor class we see more closely resembles the TNG Vor'cha class, and D-5 has very similar nacelles to that TNG ship. It's as if a decision was made to NOT backward engineer more primitive Klingon designs but instead create contemporary ones.
It would have been awesome to see a recognizable Klingon ship but with a shiny silver brand new bridge.
I was so hopeful that CBS would have decided to replace the K'tinga with the D4 in that ep when ENT season 1 was released on blu-ray. I should have known better.
I don't think that was ever going to happen, since the producers of the show didn't like the D-4 model and it was the art department (who answer to the producers) and not them who expressed regret over the reuse of the classic Klingon ship.
__________________
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 December 15 2013, 02:05 AM   #274
Avro Arrow
Commodore
 
Avro Arrow's Avatar
 
Location: Secret Arctic Base
Re: Is the USS Vengeance more powerful than the Enterprise E?

King Daniel Into Darkness wrote: View Post
Avro Arrow wrote: View Post
It had similar lines, but I certainly wouldn't call it "virtually identical", any more than I would say the original pre-refit 1701 looked "virtually identical" to the refit 1701, even though they had similar lines as well.
It looks contemporary to me, like a minor variant, but not a ship from an entire century (or two, in the case of TNG) before. The Raptor class we see more closely resembles the TNG Vor'cha class, and D-5 has very similar nacelles to that TNG ship. It's as if a decision was made to NOT backward engineer more primitive Klingon designs but instead create contemporary ones.
Nice pics! But I don't know, the differences still strike me personally as more significant than just "minor variant". "Minor variant" to me would be like the differences between the TOS D7 and the Gr'oth in Trials and Tribble-ations. YMMV, of course, but to me the D4 does look less advanced.

I was so hopeful that CBS would have decided to replace the K'tinga with the D4 in that ep when ENT season 1 was released on blu-ray. I should have known better.
I don't think that was ever going to happen, since the producers of the show didn't like the D-4 model and it was the art department (who answer to the producers) and not them who expressed regret over the reuse of the classic Klingon ship.
How much involvement do the show's producers have with the home video releases? And wasn't their "dislike" something minor along the lines of "not enough windows"? I had just hoped someone would have thought that using the K'tinga had been an unfortunate compromise at the time, and since there was a perfectly good retro design available, let's just replace it for the few scenes in that one episode. But you're probably right that that was never going to happen, since it might have cost them a bit of $$$!

I personally "mentally substitute" the D4 design anyway, since I find it unpalatable that the K'tinga exists in the 22nd century, but I know from previous posts that you don't share that view.
Avro Arrow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 4 2015, 10:00 AM   #275
Owen Wildish
Ensign
 
Location: Mevagissey, Cornwall, uk
View Owen Wildish's Twitter Profile
Re: Is the USS Vengeance more powerful than the Enterprise E?

Apparently Abrams himself said in ether in an interview or dvd commentary that he thought the reboot Enterprise was only slightly bigger than the original, it's the just designer or something that's exaggerated it's size too ridicules proportions, I hope one
day make a film where the reboot Enterprise and the Enterprise-E (or D) meet, just to show the correct size
Owen Wildish is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 4 2015, 10:06 AM   #276
King Daniel Into Darkness
Admiral
 
King Daniel Into Darkness's Avatar
 
Location: England
Re: Is the USS Vengeance more powerful than the Enterprise E?

From the mouths of ILM's designers and Abrams:

Here's a cutaway of the new Enterprise:
http://www.michaelwileyart.com/portf...isecutaway.htm
__________________
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 February 4 2015, 10:43 AM   #277
Lance
Commodore
 
Lance's Avatar
 
Location: The Enterprise's Restroom
Re: Is the USS Vengeance more powerful than the Enterprise E?

King Daniel Into Darkness wrote: View Post
Here's a cutaway of the new Enterprise:
http://www.michaelwileyart.com/portf...isecutaway.htm
Ooh, I'm loving that.
Lance is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 22 2015, 11:01 AM   #278
Chriso203
Cadet
 
Re: Is the USS Vengeance more powerful than the Enterprise E?

It is awesome to think such a question by myself and see later in the internet, that there are different forums where people discuss such things and with quite many knowledge, very interesting and a beautiful way to use the internet. I am from Germany, so excuse my not perfect English.

So, to the interesting question. First I want to take the topic "technology advantage".
I see the advantage of technology between 23rd and 24th century reduced in more esthetic developments. In TOS as also in the Movies XI and XII the weapon technology seems quite the same as it is in Picard's time. Shields, phasers and photon torpedos (except quantum), Warp speed maximum is 9 in TNG and in Star Trek II they after all reach at least 5. A big step is done between 23rd/24th (kirk/picard) and 22nd century (archer), where you see in comparison very primitive technology used, but I think it has more to do with the writers of Star Trek. While TNG was meant to continue the series with more modern dialoges and requisite equipment to the standard of the 90s (because much developement was done in real 1960s and 1990s television ) the series with Archer's Enterprise was meant to show more technological history of the series, where it comes from and how it developes with the time. The development between 19th century and 20th century for us was also very big, but just becauce industrial revolution started quite 160 years ago. The difference between 800 and 900 a.d. or 1500 and 1600 wouldn't be that big I suppose...Nevertheless it is still very difficult to compare the technology and weapon equipment in star trek. While TOS Enterprise is somewhere exposed to be about 200-300m long with primitive laser shots as weapons (has to do more with television special effects from 60s!!) the same Enterprise in XI is shown as hard battleship, when you look it's firepower to provide the missiles from Nero's ship and it is called to be now about 700m long (??).
The quantum torpedos from E only destroyed the Borg cube because of the help from other ships with other hundres of missles and because of concentrating the firepower to one weak point, NOT because quantum torpedos are quantum torpedos, (and because of the star trek writers ) at least my conclusion. And don't forget, the USS Vengeance is a war ship! Its first aim is to destroy other ships from the same century, not only to be able to fight, but to destroy! She had more developed technology, developed by Khan!! a cunning man who knew exactly about the technology and how to infiltrate and to destroy it (not only to fight it). Even in real life the military has much more technology than we have, maybe for some decades more advantaged technology in use to be superior in conflicts. Next point!

Conclusions taken from movie scenes:
Someone here said, that you can compare more realistically, when you see how the different ships attack same targets. Although many of the following examples of course depend also on the writers of star trek, I want take them as serious and compare them. The Enterprise in XI is shown as quite strong ship, while, as said above, it provides itself from Neros attacks (future technology), gives the crew time to escape and even rams Nero without getting destroyed before.
The same ship gets the hell bitten out by only 2 drive-bys from the Vengeance!! It has no power for anything after this attack!! It falls on the planet!!! So you can say Enterprise Kirk vs Enterprise Picard and Vengeance vs Enterprise Picard is a totally different thing! You see in VII that the Enterprise D is also quite voulnerable without shields after taking some shots from Bird of Prey's Disruptor. E seems to can take more shots in Nemesis and still keeps its fight ability. BUT!! inside Vengeance!! (not on the surface) 72 photon torpedos detonate and the ship is still manoeuvrable! And still after crashing on the planet it doesn't explode, while someone here wrote that Enterprise D's warpcore broke once a season hahaa!!

Specifications USS Vengeance vs Enterprise E:
These are the most significant facts that sould lead to the conclusion of the topic. The Vengeance is a battleship, created to destroy, not to fight, ships from its time, with use of more advantaged technology and specifications. It is called to be 1450m long? I don't know if it is true, but if yes, it could easily RAM the Enterprise D/E and kill it in that way. Remember, twice the length is NOT twice the size!! A white shark at 1,50m weighs about 65kg, at 4m maybe 600kg and at 7m over 2tons!! Twice length, more width and more hight leads to more massive material to hold the chassis (car vs truck, truck is not only longer, but therefore much more massive to hold the chassis). Maybe this is also the reason why the Vengeance has a hole in the hull, so the second section doesn't get involved when the first penetrates a ship.
A big size normally sinks the manoeuvrability, but as you see in the chase at warp speed, the Vengeance closures in very precise steps to attack the old Enterprise. Also when flying around to do the "drive-by" it seems to move very fast and be very manoeuvrable.
The most significant fact for me is, that the Enterprise D/E is built for a crew of many houndred people, and it is a research vessel, of course with huge defense equipment because of the dangers in star trek universe, but still a research vessal. Most space inside this 700m ship is used for rooms, beds, scientific rooms, bars etc. while the Vengeance (1450m) can be flight by just one person and has a crew of 11 (?). So the 1450m are used for many Energy knots, for attack, defense and manoeuver and navigation purposes. I guess you can hit the Vengeance at many points and it would be still at full operation, because she was MEANT to be it, while the Enterprise (all of them) have weak points and work very central. A USS Missouri from 1942 (?, of 44?) would still kill any other ship face to face, and is still one of the fastest (34kn, the newest carriers do something about 37kn). And her hull is still almost unpenetrateable, physic remains the same (I talk face to face without planes and nuclear missiles).

I would give my money for Vengeance. It is still a military secret and you didn't even see much of her, maybe she has more weapons or abilities that weren't shown.
Chriso203 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 22 2015, 07:54 PM   #279
137th Gebirg
Rear Admiral
 
137th Gebirg's Avatar
 
Location: Who is John Galt?
Re: Is the USS Vengeance more powerful than the Enterprise E?

Lance wrote: View Post
King Daniel Into Darkness wrote: View Post
Here's a cutaway of the new Enterprise:
http://www.michaelwileyart.com/portf...isecutaway.htm
Ooh, I'm loving that.
Really like how it looks, too, but the primary hull seems quite devoid of any meaningful detailing. Aside from the bridge, all the lower decks appear to be quite barren and lacking in any visual clues to indicate what's located down there. The secondary hull, on the other hand, definitely captures that functionality quite effectively. It's almost like whoever made this diagram started off down in the secondary hull and kind of ran out of steam as they worked their way up.
__________________
I may appear unoccupied to you, but at the molecular level, I'm really quite busy.
137th Gebirg 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 10:51 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
FireFox 2+ or Internet Explorer 7+ highly recommended.