RSS iconTwitter iconFacebook icon

The Trek BBS title image

The Trek BBS statistics

Threads: 140,170
Posts: 5,435,297
Members: 24,939
Currently online: 475
Newest member: katlynwomack

TrekToday headlines

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

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

Saldana In The Book of Life
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 December 20 2012, 07:36 PM   #31
M'Sharak
Definitely Herbert. Maybe.
 
M'Sharak's Avatar
 
Location: Terra Inlandia
Re: Starship Crashing Into Bay Scale Problem: The Saucer Is 1701-D Siz

King Daniel Into Darkness wrote: View Post
It seems to me as if it's skimming the top of the water while trying to pull up.
The angle of attack seems a bit too steep for a successful skim, but also not like an out-of-control catastrophic crash in progress. Looks to me like more an "attempted splashdown of crippled ship, with intent to avoid the buildings on shore while at the same time not ending up with ship in too many pieces".

Or something like that.
__________________
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 December 20 2012, 07:43 PM   #32
Worfmonger
Commander
 
Worfmonger's Avatar
 
Location: Close to the fringe...
Re: Starship Crashing Into Bay Scale Problem: The Saucer Is 1701-D Siz

Yeppers, looks to me like a crash-landing rather than a full-blown crash. Here's to hoping she manages to shave off enough inertia and not slam into the building she appears to be heading toward. o.0
__________________
I'm not even angry. I'm being so sincere right now.
Even though you broke my heart and killed me.
And tore me to pieces.
And threw every piece into a fire.
Worfmonger is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 20 2012, 07:51 PM   #33
Kruezerman
Fleet Captain
 
Kruezerman's Avatar
 
Location: Transexxual...Transylvania
Re: Starship Crashing Into Bay Scale Problem: The Saucer Is 1701-D Siz

The Wormhole wrote: View Post
Kruezerman wrote: View Post
If it was crashing though, with her shields down, why didn't she break up in the atmosphere?
The Enterprise D didn't when it crashed on Veridian III. Voyager didn't when it crashed on that ice planet.
Both were controlled (kinda) and the saucer's angle was very shallow in comparison.

I say this ship was piloted down if not for a crash landing then for a deliberate attack on San Fransisco.
__________________
Here's proof that I can write something without using the word f**k.
Kruezerman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 20 2012, 07:54 PM   #34
BillJ
Admiral
 
BillJ's Avatar
 
Location: Covington, Ky.
View BillJ's Twitter Profile
Re: Starship Crashing Into Bay Scale Problem: The Saucer Is 1701-D Siz

Kruezerman wrote: View Post
The Wormhole wrote: View Post
Kruezerman wrote: View Post
If it was crashing though, with her shields down, why didn't she break up in the atmosphere?
The Enterprise D didn't when it crashed on Veridian III. Voyager didn't when it crashed on that ice planet.
Both were controlled (kinda) and the saucer's angle was very shallow in comparison.

I say this ship was piloted down if not for a crash landing then for a deliberate attack on San Fransisco.
Why would it come to the surface for an attack? With phasers and photon torpedoes, it should be able to obliterate San Francisco easily from orbit.

And why would it be hitting the water if it was attacking the city?

We could be seeing the final moments of Admiral Marcus' ship...
__________________
"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 December 20 2012, 07:56 PM   #35
Kruezerman
Fleet Captain
 
Kruezerman's Avatar
 
Location: Transexxual...Transylvania
Re: Starship Crashing Into Bay Scale Problem: The Saucer Is 1701-D Siz

BillJ wrote: View Post
Kruezerman wrote: View Post
The Wormhole wrote: View Post

The Enterprise D didn't when it crashed on Veridian III. Voyager didn't when it crashed on that ice planet.
Both were controlled (kinda) and the saucer's angle was very shallow in comparison.

I say this ship was piloted down if not for a crash landing then for a deliberate attack on San Fransisco.
Why would it come to the surface for an attack? With phasers and photon torpedoes, it should be able to obliterate San Francisco easily from orbit.


Shock value to illicit an emotional response from the audience because of 9/11?

Prelude to a surface attack where the enemy troops are aboard the crashing cruiser?

Either works and there are probably many more.
__________________
Here's proof that I can write something without using the word f**k.
Kruezerman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 20 2012, 07:59 PM   #36
Cinema Geekly
Lieutenant Commander
 
Cinema Geekly's Avatar
 
View Cinema Geekly's Twitter Profile
Re: Starship Crashing Into Bay Scale Problem: The Saucer Is 1701-D Siz

Worfmonger wrote: View Post
Yeppers, looks to me like a crash-landing rather than a full-blown crash. Here's to hoping she manages to shave off enough inertia and not slam into the building she appears to be heading toward. o.0
As long as it's captained by Sully Sullenberger I'm cool with this.
Cinema Geekly is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 20 2012, 08:01 PM   #37
BillJ
Admiral
 
BillJ's Avatar
 
Location: Covington, Ky.
View BillJ's Twitter Profile
Re: Starship Crashing Into Bay Scale Problem: The Saucer Is 1701-D Siz

Kruezerman wrote: View Post
Prelude to a surface attack where the enemy troops are aboard the crashing cruiser?
Transporters?
__________________
"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 December 20 2012, 08:03 PM   #38
Kruezerman
Fleet Captain
 
Kruezerman's Avatar
 
Location: Transexxual...Transylvania
Re: Starship Crashing Into Bay Scale Problem: The Saucer Is 1701-D Siz

BillJ wrote: View Post
Kruezerman wrote: View Post
Prelude to a surface attack where the enemy troops are aboard the crashing cruiser?
Transporters?
Lightning strike by crashing the ship, thereby confusing your enemy, then have your troops storm the compound/base/whatever.

Think Trojan Horse in this scenario.
__________________
Here's proof that I can write something without using the word f**k.
Kruezerman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 20 2012, 08:13 PM   #39
Franklin
Rear Admiral
 
Location: In the bleachers
Re: Starship Crashing Into Bay Scale Problem: The Saucer Is 1701-D Siz

M'Sharak wrote: View Post
King Daniel Into Darkness wrote: View Post
It seems to me as if it's skimming the top of the water while trying to pull up.
The angle of attack seems a bit too steep for a successful skim, but also not like an out-of-control catastrophic crash in progress. Looks to me like more an "attempted splashdown of crippled ship, with intent to avoid the buildings on shore while at the same time not ending up with ship in too many pieces".

Or something like that.
Could be. But if the crew had enough control of the ship to attempt a "splashdown," then why steer to crash in the Bay when the expanse of the Pacific Ocean is a few miles away? For that reason, I'd say the crew is not in control of the ship, or had very little control, and it could've just as well plowed into downtown S.F.

The KEWEL factor would require that ship to start cartwheeling. At any rate, I don't see things ending well for it or its crew.

As far as it not burning up in the atmosphere goes, since we're seeing more and more atmospheric flight from starships in Trek, it could be it entered the atmosphere intact for some reason, then was brought down.
__________________
Whenever you find yourself on the side of the majority, it is time to pause and reflect. -- Mark Twain
Franklin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 20 2012, 08:16 PM   #40
BillJ
Admiral
 
BillJ's Avatar
 
Location: Covington, Ky.
View BillJ's Twitter Profile
Re: Starship Crashing Into Bay Scale Problem: The Saucer Is 1701-D Siz

Kruezerman wrote: View Post
BillJ wrote: View Post
Kruezerman wrote: View Post
Prelude to a surface attack where the enemy troops are aboard the crashing cruiser?
Transporters?
Lightning strike by crashing the ship, thereby confusing your enemy, then have your troops storm the compound/base/whatever.

Think Trojan Horse in this scenario.
Sorry. Don't buy it. It makes no sense to crash a starship into a body of water to launch a surface attack.

It likely is what it looks like it is. A ship damaged during battle that was no longer able to hold orbit. The only real questions are: Who does it belong to? What point in the movie does it come down?
__________________
"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 December 20 2012, 08:44 PM   #41
throwback
Captain
 
Re: Starship Crashing Into Bay Scale Problem: The Saucer Is 1701-D Siz

I like the original design of the Enterprise. She is a beautiful ship. The new Enterprise is fugly.

According to background sources, the number of crew aboard the new ship is 11,000. (Star Trek Film Dossier) To put this into perspective, the number of individuals killed at the Battle of Wolf 359 was nearly 11,000. ("The Drumhead")

If other ships in this JJverse are equally large and heavily populated, then the ship crashing into the bay might have a crew of thousands.

I don't understand the need for such a large number of crew aboard starships, or the need to make the ships as large as they seem to be.
throwback is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 20 2012, 08:51 PM   #42
SalvorHardin
Rear Admiral
 
SalvorHardin's Avatar
 
Location: Star's End
View SalvorHardin's Twitter Profile
Re: Starship Crashing Into Bay Scale Problem: The Saucer Is 1701-D Siz

throwback wrote: View Post
According to background sources, the number of crew aboard the new ship is 11,000. (Star Trek Film Dossier)
Where was that exactly?

__________________

SalvorHardin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 20 2012, 08:53 PM   #43
Kruezerman
Fleet Captain
 
Kruezerman's Avatar
 
Location: Transexxual...Transylvania
Re: Starship Crashing Into Bay Scale Problem: The Saucer Is 1701-D Siz

throwback wrote: View Post
I like the original design of the Enterprise. She is a beautiful ship. The new Enterprise is fugly.

According to background sources, the number of crew aboard the new ship is 11,000. (Star Trek Film Dossier) To put this into perspective, the number of individuals killed at the Battle of Wolf 359 was nearly 11,000. ("The Drumhead")

If other ships in this JJverse are equally large and heavily populated, then the ship crashing into the bay might have a crew of thousands.

I don't understand the need for such a large number of crew aboard starships, or the need to make the ships as large as they seem to be.

"It also states the D and E decks – located in the saucer – are used as offices and quarters for a crew of 1100..."


Also the ship was skidding along the water itself, so it could very much have hit land and then disembarked her troops. But it's irrelevant since we have no idea what is happening in San Fransisco at that time anyway.
__________________
Here's proof that I can write something without using the word f**k.
Kruezerman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 20 2012, 09:31 PM   #44
F. King Daniel
Admiral
 
F. King Daniel's Avatar
 
Location: King Daniel Into Darkness
Re: Starship Crashing Into Bay Scale Problem: The Saucer Is 1701-D Siz

throwback wrote: View Post
I like the original design of the Enterprise. She is a beautiful ship. The new Enterprise is fugly.

According to background sources, the number of crew aboard the new ship is 11,000. (Star Trek Film Dossier) To put this into perspective, the number of individuals killed at the Battle of Wolf 359 was nearly 11,000. ("The Drumhead")
Actually it's only 1100, from the old "Experience the Enterprise" interactive tour site.
I don't understand the need for such a large number of crew aboard starships, or the need to make the ships as large as they seem to be.
Because for this film they could afford larger sets, shuttles, effects and used an enourmous beer brewery as the engineering section. So they made the ships bigger to fit it all.

The Next Generation Enterprise was meant to be much, much bigger than the one in the old movies - yet all the sets were all the same size as the old ones (because most were redressed Motion Picture sets) - what sense does that make?
__________________
Star Trek Imponderables, fun mashups of Trek's biggest continuity errors! Ep1, Ep2 and Ep3
F. King Daniel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 20 2012, 09:39 PM   #45
BillJ
Admiral
 
BillJ's Avatar
 
Location: Covington, Ky.
View BillJ's Twitter Profile
Re: Starship Crashing Into Bay Scale Problem: The Saucer Is 1701-D Siz

Why would they need to be bigger though? The whole idea behind Next Gen was that technology had advanced to a point where you didn't need as many people to actually run things.

While the bridge itself wasn't bigger, the deck one footprint was when you added in the observation lounge and the ready room. Hallways wouldn't really need to be any wider either. The ship had forty-two decks and a thousand people, that's only twenty-five people per deck on average with a third of those sleeping at a given time.
__________________
"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
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 09:00 AM.

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