Why Is There Weathering On The Enterprise?

[Tralfaz]

Hi folks,

I admit my knowledge of all things Star Trek is pretty low, so I have a question that you will be able to answer for me. This has been driving me nuts since I started working on my CG TOS Enterprise.

The 11 foot model had really nice weathering added to it during the run of the series. I know that in space, it isn't really a true vacuum. The deflectors are there to sweep any particles out of the way while the Enterprise is zipping through space.

So, if the particles are being swept out of the way, then why is there weathering on the Enterprise that makes it look like it has been traveling through an atmosphere or dirty abrasive materials?

 

[plynch]

They don't operate in standard orbit around planets.

 

[urbandefault]

It probably didn't help having Apollo's fingerprints on the hull, all greasy from oiling himself up all day long.

 

[Gassy Man]

It doesn't make a whole lot of scientific sense unless the Enterprise is entering a planet's atmosphere. Chalk it up to the fiction that includes sound in outer space and a sense of up and down.

 

[MGagen]

It probably didn't help having Apollo's fingerprints on the hull, all greasy from oiling himself up all day long.

You beat me to it! That has always been my explanation for the "rust ring"...

M.

 

[GSchnitzer]

As Kirk says in "Court Martial:"

"Weather scan indicated an ion storm dead ahead. I sent Finney into the pod."

Evidently, they get weather.

Hi folks,

I admit my knowledge of all things Star Trek is pretty low, so I have a question that you will be able to answer for me. This has been driving me nuts since I started working on my CG TOS Enterprise.

The 11 foot model had really nice weathering added to it during the run of the series. I know that in space, it isn't really a true vacuum. The deflectors are there to sweep any particles out of the way while the Enterprise is zipping through space.

So, if the particles are being swept out of the way, then why is there weathering on the Enterprise that makes it look like it has been traveling through an atmosphere or dirty abrasive materials?

 

[Push The Button]

Entering the planet's atmosphere in The Naked Time must have left a few scorch marks, assuming Kirk didn't have Enterprise buffed and detailed afterward.

 

[Mr. Laser Beam]

As Kirk says in "Court Martial:"

"Weather scan indicated an ion storm dead ahead. I sent Finney into the pod."

Evidently, they get weather.

It must depend on the specific altitude involved.

Or, in other words...

(puts on sunglasses)

...Weathering Heights.

YEEEEEEEEAAAAAAAHHHHHH!!!!

 

[Ithekro]

Ion storms. Flying through comet tails. Nebula. All sorts of things a starship goes thought for the Federation.

 

[Melakon]

They've also encountered the occasional unexpected phenomena with gaseous cloud creatures, disruptions to space-time caused by Lazarus, a few trips to the galactic barrier at the edge of the galaxy, and a zone of darkness hiding a giant amoeba lifeform.

 

[Shaw]

So, if the particles are being swept out of the way, then why is there weathering on the Enterprise that makes it look like it has been traveling through an atmosphere or dirty abrasive materials?

In Tomorrow is Yesterday the Enterprise was deep within the Earth's atmosphere. It has to have been around or under 50,000 feet for an F-104 Starfighter to intercept it.

How much atmosphere are we talking about at that altitude? The Space Shuttle Columbia broke up at about 209,000 feet. And it wasn't like the Enterprise was purposefully piloted into the atmosphere in Tomorrow is Yesterday... the Enterprise automatically avoided hitting the planet, but it came pretty close.

I'm sure that accident alone added a ton of weathering to the exterior.

The first season of Trek has a ton of incidents that would have weathered the exterior of the ship, and the Enterprise was already more than 20 years old by that time. I'm sure April and Pike had adventures that left a few marks on the Enterprise too.

 

[ZapBrannigan]

Lots of good in-universe answers so far.

Needless to say, the show business reason was to add to the ship's sense of scale. Window/porthole size alone is not sufficient to make a model look big. Surface features have to be right to simulate a huge thing being seen from a distance, and there's something to do with the way the miniature is photographed, what lens and so on. And also there's something smooth and "unstoppable" about the way massive objects move, so the style of motion is critical.

What's odd is that the saucer's weathering, along with the grid lines, were so faint that I never saw them on TV. And I don't think they played much of a role in making the Enterprise (often) look so good in standard def.

The 1978 Galactica looked really good to me, while the Searcher on Buck Rogers was far less convincing, even though it wasn't supposed to seem anywhere near as big.

 

[Timo]

The first season of Trek has a ton of incidents that would have weathered the exterior of the ship, and the Enterprise was already more than 20 years old by that time. I'm sure April and Pike had adventures that left a few marks on the Enterprise too.

And it may well be that starships are built on the surfaces of planets, or dip down to planets for their commissioning ceremonies - if not all of them, then at least some. The adventures of the hero ships within atmospheres are enough to demonstrate that such things could be trivially achieved, so perhaps Starfleet likes to do them for some reason or another. The result: "marks of honor" on pristine ships, perhaps much coveted by the skippers.

Timo Saloniemi

 

[telerites]

Just guessing - Same reason they use sound in the vacuum of space (e.g., explosions, phasers, photons, etc.) because it looks or sounds good.

I really thought the way Firefly showed the silence of explosions in space was much more dramatic and I believe the only show I have seen that has done this.

 

[f14peter]

for the aesthetics of the show. A monochromatic surface wouldn't have much "pop" and the perception would probably make it look less like a real wessel and more like a prop or even a toy.

As fantastic and innovative as the SFX were for 2001: A Space Odyssey oh so long ago, looking back now the impression of the vessels is more plainly a SFX prop/miniature.

In-universe wise, the surface of the ship is exposed to a lot of unfiltered radiation of dozens (if not more) types ... from simple solar radiation which can fade and/or affect a surface under its exposure, to any type of radiation the writers want to make up. Along with the occasional biological agent chewing away at ships, ala' A Matter of Honor

 

[scotpens]

As fantastic and innovative as the SFX were for 2001: A Space Odyssey oh so long ago, looking back now the impression of the vessels is more plainly a SFX prop/miniature.

When 2001 premiered in 1968, its ultra-detailed space vehicle models looked amazingly realistic. Over the next 30 years or so, the "greeblied" look became standard for spaceships in sci-fi films, then it became a cliché.

 

[Tralfaz]

Hey, thanks for all the great answers everyone. Puts my mind at ease knowing there are reasons for the weathering.

 

[Green Shirt]

Entering the planet's atmosphere in The Naked Time must have left a few scorch marks, assuming Kirk didn't have Enterprise buffed and detailed afterward.

For real. Even Archer made a comment about a paint touchup on his ship. Unless he was joking, which didn't seem likely considering his lack of humor.

 

[Masao]

Starships are sweating, pooping, peeing monsters, just like babies and my old Honda Civic. I suspect a some stuff leaks out onto the hull.

 

[A beaker full of death]

I don't recall any weathering on the model, but I should think it would be to make it feel more realistic to an audience who was largely familiar with naval ships.