Except at 600m the interiors and deck spacing would be even more wrong than at 300m. 400m would be fine.
Discovery Size Argument™ thread
- Thread starter F. King Daniel
- Start date
I don't see how. Not every deck has a window as it is, so at the larger scale it would be every other deck or every third deck.
Of course, that's sort of a moot point since they probably aren't going to use an unaltered TOS model for the Constitution at any time in the future.
Of course, while dialog never gives us an actual clue as to the Enterprise' size, we DO have Scotty mention the ship as weighing a "million gross tons." That implies a ship almost as large as the Enterprise-C, with a volume of between 2.5 and 3 million cubic meters. If you then project the Excelsior class to 600 meters, you wind up with a progression where every Enterprise of every generation is actually close to the same size even at vastly different levels of technology.
A good triad of pages that feature links to several others, thanks!
However, TOS originals are predictably rare:
- Woden Type Old Style Ore Freighter (a copy of Kahn's ship)
- Aurora Type (the space hippies' ship and a reuse of the Tholian model)
Some more contributions from TAS:
- Cargo Drone (used as a grain ship)
- Huron Type (large cargo ship, possibly more voluminous than the Enterprise!)
- USS Bonaventure
And finally TAS-R
- Antares Type (from Charlie-X)
- Woden Type Old Style Ore Freighter (a copy of the Antares type and both based on the TAS cargo drone)
- Aurora Type (Space Hippies' ship, basically a space camper van)
- Class J ship (Mudd's vessel)
- Medusan Ship
There's just not enough information in the series to say whether the Enterprise was among the largest ships in the Federation or not. Most advanced; maybe. Manned by the best trained crew; very likely. But biggest?
Yes, conveniently exactly every other deck is missing all windows. (Just like JJprise.) Very likely...
Antares, Deadalus, Woden, Aurora, Class J, Denevan, Medusan, SS AStral Queen, Kobayashi Maru, Constellation, Miranda, Oberth,Soyuz, Merchantman, Whorfin, T'Pau, Vulcan Warp shuttle are all the TOS or TOS-moves era Federation ships we have seen (that are listed here). All of them are either confirmed or very much indicated to be smaller than the Connies.
Your'r willfully obtuse, again. In EACH ERA, the Enterprise OF EACH ERA is always the most powerfull, biggest ship. The Connie in the TOS era, the D and E in the TNG era.
The only ship bigger then the Ent-A was the Excelsior - and the Ent-A was pretty fast decomissioned after the Excelsior entered service, with a new "Excelsior Enterprise" following later.
Again:
EVERY. SINGLE. TIME. The Enterprise was on-screen, it was the biggest and most powerful starfleet/Federation ship around.
It's your time to finally offer at least some proof for your ludicrous claims.
And the Enterprise-A. Every 4th deck has no windows.
Considering how often the Enterprise was called to "show the flag" AND her mission profile (it was THE battleship in every conflict), the status of the Enterprise as the top tier in the fleet is pretty much out of question.
If you include the series bible/behind the scene-sources (as well as dialogue from other shows) it is definitely proven.
If you include the TOS movies - it is also proven.
Even DIS hints at this: The crew size of the DIS is only a mere 135, and in Star Trek (previously) crew size has scaled with size (on the "standard" Starfleet vessels).
Now, obvious disclaimers:
It is entirely likely that cargo ships are bigger. Maybe that some other ships have more fire-power. Or outclass the Ent in another, very specific, very spezialised characteristics.
But the only times we ever saw a more powerfull ship than the Ent, it was the Excelsior, which was also bigger, and subsequently became the "new" Enterprise/most baddest powerfull ship in the fleet around.
I don't see how. Not every deck has a window as it is, so at the larger scale it would be every other deck or every third deck.
Of course, that's sort of a moot point since they probably aren't going to use an unaltered TOS model for the Constitution at any time in the future.
Of course, while dialog never gives us an actual clue as to the Enterprise' size, we DO have Scotty mention the ship as weighing a "million gross tons." That implies a ship almost as large as the Enterprise-C, with a volume of between 2.5 and 3 million cubic meters. If you then project the Excelsior class to 600 meters, you wind up with a progression where every Enterprise of every generation is actually close to the same size even at vastly different levels of technology.
Actually, the Enterprise was originally envisioned as being much larger than the paltry 947' it ended up as.
Good idea! There's a copy of the series bible in PDF form here and on PDF page 48 (the second p.15) there is the following passage:
Note that the 20 deck saucer is supported in at least 3 season one episodes; 2 have Kirk's cabin on Deck 12 (which would be the widest part of the saucer) and another has an Engineer identified as being in the "wrong" part of the ship on Deck 14
Now for some maths:
If a 947' long vessel can somehow cram 11 decks into it's depth (which is unlikely) then a 20 deck version would be 1721' (525 metres).
If a 947' long vessel has a more realistic 8 decks then a 20 deck version would be 2,368' (722 metres).
Maybe the creators of Discovery are simply going back to the original concepts?
Actually, the Enterprise was originally envisioned as being much larger than the paltry 947' it ended up as.
Good idea! There's a copy of the series bible in PDF form here and on PDF page 48 (the second p.15) there is the following passage:
Note that the 20 deck saucer is supported in at least 3 season one episodes; 2 have Kirk's cabin on Deck 12 (which would be the widest part of the saucer) and another has an Engineer identified as being in the "wrong" part of the ship on Deck 14
Now for some maths:
If a 947' long vessel can somehow cram 11 decks into it's depth (which is unlikely) then a 20 deck version would be 1721' (525 metres).
If a 947' long vessel has a more realistic 8 decks then a 20 deck version would be 2,368' (722 metres).
Maybe the creators of Discovery are simply going back to the original concepts?
Well. On p. 7 (PDF page 9) - when they are describing the Enterprise - it clearly says: "The saucer is eleven decks at the middle". Which fits nicely with the big dome on a two-deck-on-the-edges saucer.
IMO that clearly trumps some random FAQ-section at the end.
Your part also could be mistaken for "thickness" is in wide - which is clearly formulated ambigously. You could almost think they made the stuff up along the way and reached at a reasonable result....?
(Great link! Thank you
)
Wow that's a doozy of hilarious error...
1) Daedalus was from a century earlier than the Enterprise and its actual size was never given. It has never appeared on screen (we don't even know, canonically, what it looks like)
2) Antares' size was never given, nor was it ever compared to the Enterprise. It has never appeared on screen.
3) Class J's size was never given, nor was it ever compared to the Enterprise (it was only ever described as "old"). It has never appeared on screen.
4) The Denevan ship was described as a "small one man craft" and was not a Starfleet vessel. It has never appeared on screen.
5) SS Astral Queen was never compared to the Enterprise and has never appeared on screen.
6) Constellation is the same class and same size as the Enterprise
7) The Miranda class is 10% LARGER than the TOS Enterprise
8) The Merchantman is not a Starfleet vessel (we're not even sure it's a FEDERATION vessel)
9) The T'Pau is not a Starfleet vessel and was never directly compared to the Enterprise.
10) The Vulcan Warp Shuttle... is a shuttle
11) Whorfin is never compared to the TOS Enterprise and we don't actually know how large it is in the first place.
Summary: The vast majority of these ships are not Starfleet vessels and very few of them were ever confirmed or even implied to be larger or smaller than the TOS Enterprise.
And all you have to do is find a SINGLE line of dialog where anyone states that the Enterprise, Enterprise-A, or even Enterprise-B is the most powerful OR largest ship in any fleet it belongs to. Just ONE line of dialog, in 79 TV episodes and 6 major motion pictures.
Start here:
http://www.chakoteya.net/StarTrek/index.html
If this is indeed true EVERY. SINGLE. TIME. The series should be full of such references, yes? All you have to do is give me ONE.
Seven years later. Which again makes your statement factually incorrect; if the plan had been for the Enterprise to be the largest ship in the fleet (and there is even less evidence that this is true of the Excelsior) then the Enterprise-A would have been an Excelsior class starship, not another Connie.
Except for all those times it was exactly the SAME size as the other Federation ships around, right?
All you had to do was find ONE. SINGLE. EXAMPLE. to prove your ridiculous theory. You didn't manage to find even a single indication for it.
The proof of burden in this case is upon you. The guy who is laughably at odds with previous established canon.
Here's the intent of the show's creators.
So, at the very least, Discovery violates their intent.
Thank you for the pictures.Here's the original concept for the saucer rim of the Enterprise-D, made bu the ship's designer Andrew Probert
And here's how Mike Okuda reimagined it prior to season two:
The deck plans cheat
It's not an office building. Are you assuming there's a grid of thousands of Jefferies tubes running between the ceiling and floor of every deck? It's a 3 dimensional object.
As for ten forward, all that need match roughly are the window sizes. You don't need to enlarge the largest ship ever designed over a single room. That makes no sense. And if they modified the 2nd model, then there's really no problem here. We don't need to enlarge it...because they already did over two decades ago.
If the Enterprise has 20 decks in the saucer alone, I'd guess it has around 78 decks total.Actually, the Enterprise was originally envisioned as being much larger than the paltry 947' it ended up as.
Good idea! There's a copy of the series bible in PDF form here and on PDF page 48 (the second p.15) there is the following passage:
Note that the 20 deck saucer is supported in at least 3 season one episodes; 2 have Kirk's cabin on Deck 12 (which would be the widest part of the saucer) and another has an Engineer identified as being in the "wrong" part of the ship on Deck 14
Now for some maths:
If a 947' long vessel can somehow cram 11 decks into it's depth (which is unlikely) then a 20 deck version would be 1721' (525 metres).
If a 947' long vessel has a more realistic 8 decks then a 20 deck version would be 2,368' (722 metres).
Maybe the creators of Discovery are simply going back to the original concepts?
I did. When the original Enterprise was stolen and destroyed, they immediately comissioned a replacement: the Constitution class Enterprise-A. For the seven years this ship was in service, it was NOT the largest or most powerful ship in the fleet.
So your claim "the Enterprise is ALWAYS largest and most powerful" is incorrect.
You now need to demonstrate that this was true of the previous ship (E-Nil) at any point in its history or the one that succeeded it (E-B). Because we have one solid datapoint that shows it is NOT always the case, and that even the original Enterprise ceased to be the largest when Excelsior was built. We have, on the other hand, no data showing that it IS true.
The burden of proof is on the one who makes the claim. You're claiming the Enterprise is the largest and most powerful ship in the fleet "EVERY. SINGLE. TIME." and I just showed you there is at least one case where this is incorrect. So you need to find some evidence that supports this claim is true in the other cases.
More importantly: it is ALSO untrue in the case of the Enterprise-E, which is far smaller than the rest of the Galaxy class starships still in service at this time. So that is actually TWO cases where your claim is factually incorrect.
Last edited:
Remind me again: is this from The Making of Star Trek or the writer's bible? I remember the latter as being produced some time after cancellation and the former as actually being released by the producers themselves.
Actually, that's not some random FAQ at the end but the earlier, original series bible. It's just that it has been stuck onto the end of a later version of the series bible, with the two editions on the same PDF (that's why there's TWO page 15s)Well. On p. 7 (PDF page 9) - when they are describing the Enterprise - it clearly says: "The saucer is eleven decks at the middle". Which fits nicely with the big dome on a two-deck-on-the-edges saucer.
IMO that clearly trumps some random FAQ-section at the end.
Your part also could be mistaken for "thickness" is in wide - which is clearly formulated ambigously. You could almost think they made the stuff up along the way and reached at a reasonable result....?
(Great link! Thank you
So, originally the ship was scaled to have a saucer 20 stories thick at its widest spot (which despite the confusing wording clearly seems to indicate the height of the module). This was likely written before Matt Jefferies nailed the length down at 947' (however he got that figure) and obviously long before the flight deck miniature was built (which demands a length of at least 1,250')
The writers' bible, as reporduced in TMoST.
No, I mean is this particular paragraph FROM the writer's bible or some version of it? Because I can't find that passage anywhere in the paper version I have that gives its date as 1967 or the downloadable one with the same date. That passage seems to be from the author of TMoST in which case it is retrospective, not necessarily original intent.
Maybe he actually meant 'yards' instead of feet...?
Similar threads
