And you can tell it's dimensions & length of the saucer section crash landed on the Planet how?
What are you using to reference it's dimensions?
Spoilers Star Trek: Strange New Worlds 3x08 - "Four-And-A-Half Vulcans"
- Thread starter Commander Richard
- Start date
What are you using to reference it's dimensions?
What was stated on screen.
All the reference guides stating 289 meters for the Constitution class were in-universe pamphlets designed to mislead the Klingons, Romulans, etc. so they would underprepare and thus be surprised when they see the Enterprise is actually much larger in person. So all those reference guides you read with the 289 m specs are canon from that perspective if you want. Of course Beto ruined it all with his documentary. There, problem solved.
I came back to see if everyone was done talking about Connie.
Una explains this in her log right after the opening credits. Being Vulcan isn't what made them assholes, it was the fact the serum was made from Spock's perceptions of other Vulcans.
Instant Spock: Just add Humans.
So how old is Doug? Because per Memory Alpha
a Vulcan of age 65 had the appearance of a 20th century Human in their late 20s
(this was actually a problem with Sybok in ST5 who should look a lot younger than Spock if he really was raised as brothers with him per dialogue, meaning he'd probably be circa 64 if he were born 7 years earlier than Spock)
This means that when Doug was born to a Vulcan family fascinated by humans, this may well have happened circa Enterprise and we got no indication in that show that any such types of Vulcans even existed.
Then again, this is the same franchise where 31 year old Zefram Cochrane looks 50 something...
a Vulcan of age 65 had the appearance of a 20th century Human in their late 20s
(this was actually a problem with Sybok in ST5 who should look a lot younger than Spock if he really was raised as brothers with him per dialogue, meaning he'd probably be circa 64 if he were born 7 years earlier than Spock)
This means that when Doug was born to a Vulcan family fascinated by humans, this may well have happened circa Enterprise and we got no indication in that show that any such types of Vulcans even existed.
Then again, this is the same franchise where 31 year old Zefram Cochrane looks 50 something...
This shipI have no problem with the SNW Connie being 442 meters long.
It's only when you try to Retro-Actively apply that figure to the TOS Connie is when I start having issues with that.
True. It's also a fact that for 50+ years, the TOS Connie was generally accepted to be a different set of dimensions as well.
But don't let that fact affect new canon data.
But that figure applies to the SNW Connie.
That ship isn't identical in looks or dimensions to the TOS Connie
We all know what the TOS Connie looks like:
L×W = 947' × 417' = 288.646 m × 127.102 m
We all know that it's not the same ship, production even knows that.
But you're telling me it's the same ship, ergo the same length.
But I don't blindly apply it to every iteration of the vessel.
Different eras, different designs.
SNW/Discovery Production knew exactly what they were doing when they made the SNW Connie.
MA Constition Class Size:
They intentionally scaled up the size of the Connie by 53% in all dimensions.
It stands to reason that production didn't have any intention of applying the New Dimensional Figures to the old TOS design when they debuted the new numbers.
Their intention wasn't for a blank "One-Size Fits All" #.
But if you are that rigid about following Star Trek Canon Rules to the Explicit Letter, then there's not much I can do; because you're following the letter of the rules, not the intent from the production staff.
While the rules would back you up, I don't think they were ever intended to be applied this way.
Since this automatically causes conflict / division amongst a subset of the Trek Fandom.
That's why I stand on the position that I do.
Yes I know, I'm a fellow Trekkie, just like you.
I know what the ST Canonicity rules are, but it doesn't make sense given we know how the ship was designed and how it was meant to be applied.
You want to blindly apply it to the past productions and call it good.
I have a hard time buying this given numerous external factors.
It's not about my belief, most fans that care about Ship Sizes have known about the size of the TOS Connie long before I was born or even a Trekkie.
It's 50+ years of established information, and you're telling everybody that they should throw it out and be replaced with the new values.
Even though the SNW Connie isn't identical to the TOS Connie, but you treat it as the same ship and justify it via "Visual Reboot".
Despite the numerous In-Universe Time-Line Conflicts between TOS events & newer productions that have created numerous TimeLine / Continuity issues that don't make sense or match up.
The simple logical solution/conclusion would be that DISCO / SNW takes place in a slightly different Time-Line or Continuity than TOS.
So everythings a bit different due to numerous Time-Travel Shenanigans that have occured.
So different Ship Sizes, different features, that's fine then.
Timey Wimey Wibley Wobbly.
But you keep on insisting that it's "The Prime Time-Line", despite "Prime being arbitrary & relative to the Time-Line you were natively born into".
And that's where we're conflicting at.
They're not. (rolls eyes)
The modern corollary to me would be
a) the rebuilding of the standard USN battleships after 1941 to include better armour, actual torpedo blisters, CIC, improved conning tower, radar and much improved secondary and AA armament. They looked very different while still the same length.
b) Essex class carriers were modernized to include an angled flight deck, a light and mirror visual system for landing back aboard, faster aircraft elevators able to handle the weight of the new aircraft and a hurricane bow to deal with weather better. They were -also- the same length after recommissioning while able to operate all carrier aircraft with a few exceptions like the F-4 and F-14.
Neither 'comedy' bits were funny, along with so many of the intended ones. To me, at least. (And I suspect a number of others here.)
I bolded what I thought was just ludicrous. The franchise has had some half-assed explanations before, but this was just plain stupid.
Last edited:
At least you can visually tell the difference between Re-Fits.This ship
They're not. (rolls eyes)
The modern corollary to me would be
a) the rebuilding of the standard USN battleships after 1941 to include better armour, actual torpedo blisters, CIC, improved conning tower, radar and much improved secondary and AA armament. They looked very different while still the same length.
b) Essex class carriers were modernized to include an angled flight deck, a light and mirror visual system for landing back aboard, faster aircraft elevators able to handle the weight of the new aircraft and a hurricane bow to deal with weather better. They were -also- the same length after recommissioning while able to operate all carrier aircraft with a few exceptions like the F-4 and F-14.
And they were more or less the same lengths.
It was made by non-corporeal energy beings. Crazier things have been created in Trek by corporeal beings.
"Consequences"? Really?
Rebecca Romijn is great when it comes to suddenly out of character moments like that.
Who is "they"?
I (assuming I have been hired to do so) will display what ever dimensions the current IP holder want's displayed. Because that would be part of my job. .
Well. If I have licensed the Connie to make toys, again I would list the dimensions the IP holder wants. It's not my call to decide.
Any worthwhile article or documentary would strive to tell the entire story of the Star Trek, so it would mention all measurements used through out the history of the franchise. A reference book licensed through the IP holder should list the current dimensions approved by the IP holder if trying to be an in universe "document". If it's a book about the production history it can include all the dimensions used. Include the real life dimensions of the models used.
If its a not licensed book, do what ever you like.
Six quid for a single slice of pizza what highway robbery is this
Thankfully the Picard show was so terrible that Kirk > Picard is now the canonical answer.
Still doesn't absolve it from being a stupid explanation.
Thankfully the Picard show was so terrible that Kirk > Picard is now the canonical answer.
Kirk vs. Picard?
The correct answer is: Sisko.
Similar threads
- Poll
- Poll
- Poll
- Poll
