How big was the Enterprise?

[blssdwlf]

A lot of the original material either is outright lost, recorded over, and i believe at one point there was a fire that destroyed some of the archives, but a good portion of the original tapes for Dr Who are lost outside of time travel shennanagins.

Plus they did that documentery/dramatization about early Who production. Always good to have classic era Who effects on hand given how often time travel is involved. Never know when recreating old shots will be nessicary.


Bingo. Example. EC Henry's take on the klingon ship from friday's child.

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

Look at how good that looks.

Also. While he generally does Refit/Lost Era? Check out Resurrected Starships.

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

And amazingly kept close to the original shape in TOS.

The compositing of that shot is really REALLY weird, like they took the two models and pasted one over the other, but didn't account for angling. This is a case of move the camera so you can get a better idea of relative distance between the two. Is the Antares right next to the enterprise's star drive? Are they a dozen kilometers out and it's just a really weird camera effect combined with the lack of air in space making it look like they're hugging?

The plus side to having the TOS-R Antares passing in front of the Enterprise is that it gives a max size for the Antares. The distance between the two ships gives us a min-max range for her size. I do wonder if the TOS-R production leveraged their 3D application so they knew the actual sizes and positioning or if they composited the two ships without checking their 3D application.

I have my own thoughts on the Antares-Type but that is fan speculation at absolute best with only conjecture as backing plus my own preferences in multi-role designs.

Well we know how TOS-R played it but we can conjecture what the Antares looked liked in TOS since other ships that were shown in TOS were replaced with different designs in TOS-R. Seems like plenty of room for imagining the TOS version.

Except those times when she's not:

Captain's Log, star date 1535.8. UESPA headquarters notified of the mysterious loss of science probe vessel Antares.​

D'oh! I forgot about that line. Good catch! Interesting, so TOS-R merely added a block in front of the TAS ship as a crew/bridge compartment... (Or in reverse, the crew/bridge compartment was removed.) I can sort of get behind that. I guess I can kinda see this as a science/transport vessel although maybe there should have been a larger crew compartment added for TOS-R, IMHO.

Thank you.



OK. In spite of my overal annoyance at the 'here I will post the script and bold face everything so your neanderthal brain can see' feel of that post? I got a laugh out of Kirk hanging a lamp shade over how often the Enterrpise has had to answer distress calls.

I quote and bold the relevant dialogue as it is easier and quicker for me to read the source of the information. No offense intended.

 

[Will_Carter]

No offense intended.

I've also been punchy for awhile so ... trying ot get better at not swinging for faces. So not really your fault.

so TOS-R merely added a block in front of the TAS ship as a crew/bridge compartment... (Or in reverse, the crew/bridge compartment was removed.) I can sort of get behind that. I guess I can kinda see this as a science/transport vessel although maybe there should have been a larger crew compartment added for TOS-R, IMHO.

It did feel kinda tacked on. Like 'Here we'll remove the forward sensor dish thinggie and just stick a rectangle deck thing here and call it good.' On the other hand, that is actually pretty in keeping with the utilitarian idea behind a transport hauler. 'Here just... the bare bones it doesn't have to look good just Do It.'

My biggest issue with the Antares type is the verticality making it potentially awquard to dock where most federation ships are more long than tall.

 

[fireproof78]

On the TOS side of things we have never seen the Antares in the original version. In the CGI Remastered version we do see the Antares and it appears considerably smaller and not very practical, IMHO.

Hmmm...didn't know we didn't see the Antares. Mandela effect from my VHS days.

I like the design from TOS-R, though I might be alone in this thread for thinking so.

 

[Roundabout]

"How big was the Enterprise?"

Believe it or not, the Enterprise was only 33 inches long. I mean, in-universe, it was 33 inches, at least for a brief period of time in the episode "Requiem for Methuselah".

Remember when Flint shrank the Enterprise. That's what I'm referring to.

This is probably not the answer you're looking for, but it is a fun fact that the Enterprise was, at one point in time, 33 inches.

Btw, from what I have read, the current whereabouts of that 33 inch model Enterprise is unknown.

 

[Tomalak]

Isn't that the model that was recently rediscovered and returned to Rod Roddenberry?

I hope he's not lost it again.

 

[Roundabout]

Upon further reading, yes, it was "rediscovered" not that long ago.

It was authenticated as the 33 inch model from TOS. It is currently in Roddenberry's possession. Maybe he'll be a better guardian of the model.

 

[aridas sofia]

Two things I’d like to address- first, the matter of the size of quarters relative to the lives lived by the crew. The problem with imitating the look and feel of a cruise ship is the lives lived by these people are not those of passengers on a cruise ship. There has to be a certain discipline, fueled by a degree of self restraint and deprivation, to harden oneself to what is described as an extraordinarily hard task - a five year deep space mission into an unknown where the only thing known for certain is the presence of long periods of tedium punctuated by extreme danger. The way the quarters look, the way crew interact, the discipline and chain of command- these are not purely to make things look military. They are to make the mission seem real. This is the biggest problem with all Trek post-TOS. It all presumes these people lean into their softness rather than hardening themselves.

As for the cargo/ freighter/ science probe, the TAS design looks precisely like that multifunction description - modular. It’s a flat platform intersected by another flat platform that can presumably have standard and non-standard containers plugged in place along its many surfaces. When a crew is needed, a crew module can be added. If a science mission, a bigger crew module with lab space and excursion support. One might assume the intersecting surfaces are all engineering- for power generation, impulse and warp control. It is pure utility beyond even the discipline demanded in a starship. Real drudgery. And you can bet they’d have wanted those entertainment tapes if they weren’t so anxious to get the hell away from Charles Evans.

 

[fireproof78]

It all presumes these people lean into their softness rather than hardening themselves.

The question to be asked is do they need to harden themselves and still deprive themselves of comfort? Seems, unnecessary at some level, regardless of the nature of the mission, to deliberately deprive oneself of comforts on a difficult mission.

 

[BK613]

The question to be asked is do they need to harden themselves and still deprive themselves of comfort? Seems, unnecessary at some level, regardless of the nature of the mission, to deliberately deprive oneself of comforts on a difficult mission.

Exactly. All work and no play will make the crew a mutinous bunch.
Or to put it another way, maintaining high morale is always a command priority.

 

[fireproof78]

Exactly. All work and no play will make the crew a mutinous bunch.
Or to put it another way, maintaining high morale is always a command priority.

Well, and not only that, but the ships don't have the freedom of a wet navy. They don't get to drop anchor and let the crew jump in to the water, or even just walk above decks and feel the sun. There are going to be several disadvantages to traveling in space, and creating an extremely harsh environment that offers limited comforts is not going to foster the positive attitude among the crew.

 

[aridas sofia]

An athlete needs to train to do what he sets out to do. An explorer who wants to climb Mount Everest who doesn’t harden himself will die. Nobody is depriving themselves of anything. These people weren’t drafted- they joined and presumably there was a lot of competition to get in. They are doing precisely what they want to be doing, and what they want to be doing is damned hard.

The fact that is such an alien concept to contemporary Americans says volumes about the difficulty we have with distractibility and not always getting what we want, when we want, all the time.

 

[aridas sofia]

Well, and not only that, but the ships don't have the freedom of a wet navy. They don't get to drop anchor and let the crew jump in to the water, or even just walk above decks and feel the sun. There are going to be several disadvantages to traveling in space, and creating an extremely harsh environment that offers limited comforts is not going to foster the positive attitude among the crew.

Except of course, they have technology to allow them at least a simulation of jumping in the water or feeling the sun. The point is not that they don’t have fun or can’t have fun. The point is that they have chosen to do something that requires a devotion that average people don’t understand. Astronauts drank hard and drove hard and flew hard but also worked out hard and studied hard and on balance hardened themselves to the task at hand.

 

[fireproof78]

Except of course, they have technology to allow them at least a simulation of jumping in the water or feeling the sun. The point is not that they don’t have fun or can’t have fun. The point is that they have chosen to do something that requires a devotion that average people don’t understand. Astronauts drank hard and drove hard and flew hard but also worked out hard and studied hard and on balance hardened themselves to the task at hand.

They did in TOS? That's a point of contention I thought?

So, because it requires devotion they should deprive themselves even further? So, for 5 years they should have limited comforts in a completely hostile space with no option for comfort in their spaces? Sounds like an extreme, as extreme as the Galaxy class feeling more like a hotel.

 

[aridas sofia]

Exactly. All work and no play will make the crew a mutinous bunch.
Or to put it another way, maintaining high morale is always a command priority.

May I point out that is exactly opposite the rationale of the Royal Navy’s discipline during the age of sail, that inspired CS Forester and of course, Gene Roddenberry.

 

[Ray Hardgrit]

I get the importance of discipline and training and all that, but I can't see it making much difference how extravagant and comfortable their quarters are if they spend most of the time outside of them, doing their job. Except that people who are happy and well-rested tend to work better in the long run.

 

[aridas sofia]

They did in TOS? That's a point of contention I thought?

So, because it requires devotion they should deprive themselves even further? So, for 5 years they should have limited comforts in a completely hostile space with no option for comfort in their spaces? Sounds like an extreme, as extreme as the Galaxy class feeling more like a hotel.

In The Trouble With Tribbles, it was the Klingons who said Enterprise was the luxurious ship compared to theirs and that that made “Earthers” soft. I suppose it all depends on what you want to do. If you want to do difficult things, you spend the time to prepare yourself to do those things. And your surrounding environment supports that work and preparation.

 

[fireproof78]

In The Trouble With Tribbles, it was the Klingons who said Enterprise was the luxurious ship compared to theirs and that that made “Earthers” soft. I suppose it all depends on what you want to do. If you want to do difficult things, you spend the time to prepare yourself to do those things. And your surrounding environment supports that work and preparation.

I guess I look at an out of balance situation. Yes, they are doing difficult things so therefore we make it more difficult for them, and deprive them further strikes me as an excess of punishment for their work.

But, that's me. I don't think it should be comfortable, nor completely spartan. A balance should be struck. Nor do I think the Klingons should be a standard for humans.

 

[Tallguy]

Exactly. All work and no play will make the crew a mutinous bunch.
Or to put it another way, maintaining high morale is always a command priority.

But it's not THE priority. And certainly not in the respect of "I CANNOT survive a five year mission without a 1500 square foot living space and a private bathroom!" (I just picked that because it's bigger than my first house. I have no idea how big these rooms are. Does anyone know? I can't read the measurements on the set plans that are floating around.)

Modern Trek has decided that these kind of accommodations are possible and even (it would seem) easy. Sure, if you're taking away someone's nice cabin space just to "toughen them up" then you've probably got trouble heading your way.

But there have to be trade offs. So what is the ship and the mission not able to do because everyone on the bridge crew (so far everyone who is not a cadet, I think) has quarters that I would have been envious of through all of my 20's.

Even on the FJ plans nobody shares a room, right? Although not everyone has an office and lots of people share a bathroom.

 

[Will_Carter]

it was the Klingons who said Enterprise was the luxurious ship compared to theirs and that that made “Earthers” soft.

Cultural posturing, plus likely a hint of sour grapes at how much more the Federation spends on its crew compared to klingon ships perhaps?

We do not, as far as i know, have alpha cannon on what klingon ships of this era were like.

Though we do have beta cannon sources such as FASA and the like.

 

[Will_Carter]

Even on the FJ plans nobody shares a room, right? Although not everyone has an office and lots of people share a bathroom.

From my perspective there being indavidual bathrooms instead of communal facilities per deck would be kinda batty for a naval vessal. So this whole argument is of where oen draws the line.

Ent-D often showed rediculous quarters, but that was the fleet flagship and we only ever saw officers and dignitaries quarters rather than the midshipmen and the crewmen's quarters (or possibly the submarine esque bunk halls.)

We saw the flag officers quarters (sulu, scotty, spock, etc,) and those looked pretty spacious.

As for comfort? This is actually a case where i wouldl ook at Roddenbury's own naval experiances for cues.

I am NOT touching the 'appropriate comfort level' argument that is ongoing with a twenty meter pole.

Not worth it.