Starship Size Argument™ thread

Discussion in 'Star Trek Movies: Kelvin Universe' started by WarpFactorZ, May 1, 2013.

  1. King Daniel Beyond

    King Daniel Beyond Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Nov 5, 2008
    Location:
    England
    ^The airlock they entered was the same height as the secondary hull windows a few floors below.
    It was actually the throne room from Coming to America redressed. The shuttlebay on the refitted Enterprise, scaled at 305m as per all the manuals, should be about 16 meters wide.

    Now, tell me how they'd fit two rown of 12m shuttles in there horizontally with all the room to spare that we see if the new Enterprise was that same size.
    They are the same size on orthographic views.
    [​IMG]
    Same size, see?
     
  2. publiusr

    publiusr Rear Admiral Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2010
    I just don't understand why anyone wants the Enterprise to be 947 feet long. Maybe just call a smaller ship that. I like the TAS ship with the huge shuttlebay.

    I think the Enterprise shuttlebay should be big enough to house a Space 1999 Eagle and Millenium Falcon side by side both at once, if I had my 'druthers...
     
  3. Kemaiku

    Kemaiku Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Dec 23, 2004
    Location:
    Ulster
    She's *the* iconic Trek starship, she can be however the hell big she wants to be.
     
  4. BillJ

    BillJ Fleet Admiral Admiral

    As long as she's never fat! :guffaw:
     
  5. Kemaiku

    Kemaiku Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Dec 23, 2004
    Location:
    Ulster
    Of course not ;)
     
  6. BillJ

    BillJ Fleet Admiral Admiral

    There isn't one and never has been.

    But... (the dreaded 'but')

    When you have enough firepower to level the entire habitable surface of a planet, I can easily see such a ship being classified as a 'warship'.

    Though I have no issue with the Vengeance being Starfleet's first dedicated 'warship'.
     
  7. anotherdemon

    anotherdemon Lieutenant Red Shirt

    Joined:
    May 9, 2013
    A shuttle hitting a planet at warp would be enough to mess up a planet....
     
  8. BillJ

    BillJ Fleet Admiral Admiral

    Care to cite an episode where that happens?
     
  9. anotherdemon

    anotherdemon Lieutenant Red Shirt

    Joined:
    May 9, 2013
    Care to cite an episode where a Federation vessel takes out the surface of a planet? :P

    Just as Federation ships carry enough firepower to scorch the surface of a planet (stated in dialogue), a shuttle hitting a planet at many times the speed of light is going to mess up a planet if it hit. Simple physics there.

    Just the fact that we're dealing with ships that move faster than light speed will necessitate standard weaponry (even defensive) much higher than what we today deem as military only.
     
  10. BillJ

    BillJ Fleet Admiral Admiral

    A starship is built with the firepower to obliterate a planet. A shuttle isn't, it may be possible to do some damage but that's not its intended purpose. In "A Taste of Armageddon", they aren't going to ram the Enterprise into the planet at warp. They're going to use phasers and photon torpedoes to achieve their goal...

    A Constitution-class starship is sent when Outposts along the Neutral Zone go quiet. A Constitution-class starship is sent to engage Klingons in the opening salvo of a war. We watch them go toe-to-toe with starships from other Empires, that's their job in a time of war.

    Technically, they aren't 'warships' their 'multi-purpose explorers'. Which is why describing the Vengeance as Starfleet's first 'warship' isn't a problem. But it doesn't mean Starfleet had been pacifists up to that point or were pacifists in the Prime timeline.

    And with they can bring an awful lot of force with a single ship.
     
  11. Admiral Buzzkill

    Admiral Buzzkill Fleet Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2001
    Someone pointed out elsewhere that the problem with the remark about devastating a planet is that the Enterprise couldn't do fuck about an asteroid that was gonna hit Miramanee's world, even with months of lead time. Looks like a canon inconsistency, there.
     
  12. BillJ

    BillJ Fleet Admiral Admiral

    In Star Trek?!? You lie!!! :scream:
     
  13. trevanian

    trevanian Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2004
    Remember TMP had the 'wormhole effect?' PARADISE had The Frieberger Effect (as in, who gives a shit, bring on a chick in a short skirt and have Shatner kick somebody.)
     
  14. trevanian

    trevanian Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2004
    I haven't scrutinized any of this but you could get the impression of screwed up perspective depending on the taking lens -- wider ones distort foreground, longe ones compress whole view.
     
  15. CorporalCaptain

    CorporalCaptain Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2011
    Location:
    Gene's office
    I'm not sure why people are assuming that an object at warp speed has a lot of kinetic energy.

    For one thing, all formulas that we presently have for that in relativity, the ones applicable for objects approaching the speed of light from below, don't apply/give imaginary values for objects traveling faster than the speed of light. It's not like we have any actual evidence-based physics to base such an assertion on.

    For another, there's even some sort of argument that the rest mass of a warp-powered craft might artificially appear to be vanishing small, you know like the rest mass of a photon is IRL. A real photon has kinetic energy, but how much depends on its wavelength, not its speed.
     
  16. Admiral Buzzkill

    Admiral Buzzkill Fleet Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2001
    Don't bring science into this, CorporalCaptain. We're talking about Star Trek.
     
  17. BillJ

    BillJ Fleet Admiral Admiral

    As far as The Paradise Syndrome goes, it seems Spock completely forgets the Enterprise has photon torpedoes and that they can build explosives with anti-matter like in Obsession. Perhaps Spock had the goal of diverting the asteroid instead of shattering it? :shrug:
     
  18. Admiral Buzzkill

    Admiral Buzzkill Fleet Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2001
    Actually, I think the writers may have been more interested in basic science than a lot of the show's writers. For example, they took some care to explain why the asteroid's momentum represented a problem for the ship.

    Other than that one statement I don't think we've heard anything to suggest or seen anything in five decades of Trek to demonstrate that starships have that kind of firepower. What would that have meant for the single Borg cube headed for Earth in "The Best Of Both Worlds?"
     
  19. BillJ

    BillJ Fleet Admiral Admiral

    Simply means they have more firepower! :p
     
  20. Admiral Buzzkill

    Admiral Buzzkill Fleet Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2001
    Nah - a cube is tiny compared to a planet and though it's self-healing the Enterprise demonstrated in "Q Who" that it could be damaged. It's not that big. Faced with even the fleet of Kirk's time - twelve ships that could each destroy the surface of a planet - it wouldn't last long enough to automatically repair itself. The only way it survives is if it's from Krypton and gains invulnerability from Earth's Sun.

    I can't believe I'm having a nerd moment here. I must go to bed.