It's official. The Enterprise is built in...(spoilers)

[Skywalker]

It does seem like a rather pointless change, but whatever. It's not where the ship was built that matters.

 

[mythme]

I'm wondering if this Enterprise will have a dedication plaque on the bridge as per Trek tradition. It would be lovely to see a pic of it. There are always a few tidbits to be mulled over.

 

[Franklin]

As an Iowa native I can't be more proud.

That goes for me, too.

And after what Spike TV and Shatner did to them with Invasion Iowa, the folks of Riverside deserve this.

 

[SalvorHardin]

A question for those living in the US and are familiar with the San Francisco area.

I have no idea how big the SF area is or how the morphology of the ground is. If there are mountains or hills around...

Is there a place in the SF area where a starship construction could happen as we see it in the trailer ?

 

[DontFeedPhil]

Aww man, Now they are really stretching reality with this...Iowa can barely produce corn that isnt innerbread. Yuck, yuck. So how are they gonna produce a Starship. Unless its cousin is from the area and it was an accident cause they didnt know they were related?

 

[roliver]

Could be that the Starfleet San Francisco Yards has various facilities around the world they operate - Such as NASA has facilities around the country. I could see it being way too congested trying to build multiple ships simultaneously in one location.

Well, yes, they could clearly have different facilities, but you'd think such facilities would have logical names. Starfleet Riverside Yards would make sense.

But, it's of no real issue to me. It's a reboot or a wacky time travel story (or both). Nothing has to match known canon.

 

[EJD1984]

Could be that the Starfleet San Francisco Yards has various facilities around the world they operate - Such as NASA has facilities around the country. I could see it being way too congested trying to build multiple ships simultaneously in one location.

But, it's of no real issue to me. It's a reboot or a wacky time travel story (or both). Nothing has to match known canon.

True. I was just looking at a possible explanation for the writers thinking.

 

[ancient]

If Abrams has any respect for Trek, he will do the following:

Have the ship built in pieces in SF first, then dismantled and shipped to Iowa for assembly and warp testing, then disassembled again and shiped into space in 10,000 cardboard boxes. Then reassembled again in orbit in the TMP open dock by 500 robots using sonic welders.

Because bending over backwards to meet noncanonical fan demands IS THE HEART OF TREK.

RAH RAH USE THE FORCE!

Now that that's out of the way...

 

[smegger56]

How about this.

Titanic was built in Southampton, but registered in Liverpool. Hence, why on the rear of the ship, it has Liverpool on it under Titanic.

That could be the case with the Enterprise. Built in Iwoa but registered up in the San Fransico ship yards.

Or, it's built in Iwoa and Christened/Lanced from the ship yard Docks.

This is just a possibility.

In the end, lets just wait and see the film to see what they have in store. The film looks superb.

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

How about this.

Titanic was built in Southampton, but registered in Liverpool. Hence, why on the rear of the ship, it has Liverpool on it under Titanic.

Makes a world of sense.

 

[ancient]

How about this.

Titanic was built in Southampton, but registered in Liverpool. Hence, why on the rear of the ship, it has Liverpool on it under Titanic.

Makes a world of sense.

And yet, it has the smelly smell of a concept which DOES NOT BELONG. Are we going to stand here and let them lie to us? The Enterprise was built in earthquake territory, dammit!

I mean, so what if California has actually fallen off of North America by the 23rd century? they could build the ship on giant springs! Add that to my list of demands. The Enterprise must be built on giant springs!

IT IS A LIE. A SMELLY LIE.

 

[Butters]

How about this.

Titanic was built in Southampton, but registered in Liverpool. Hence, why on the rear of the ship, it has Liverpool on it under Titanic.

That could be the case with the Enterprise. Built in Iwoa but registered up in the San Fransico ship yards.

Or, it's built in Iwoa and Christened/Lanced from the ship yard Docks.

This is just a possibility.

In the end, lets just wait and see the film to see what they have in store. The film looks superb.

Titanic was built in Belfast and sailed from Southampton. But I agree with your point.

 

[Shawnster]

That seems a totally unnecessary change to me. I don't mind it being built on the ground, since the original ship's plaque said San Francisco, Calif. Which means it was built in Califoria, and not orbital docks named after the city.

But why bother moving it? In the future an Iowa to SF trip would take about 5 seconds, it's not like there's a big distance barrier like today.

The 5 seconds trip between locations almost could be an argument for the Iowa construction site. Or even a 30 minute travel time.

*Could be that the Starfleet San Francisco Yards has various facilities around the world they operate - Such as NASA has facilities around the country. I could see it being way too congested trying to build multiple ships simultaneously in one location.

This theory would make sense if the NASA facilities across the nation/globe were all called NASA-Orlando. However, they're not. It's Johnson Space Center in Houston, Texas; Kennedy Space Center in Orlando (well Cocoa Beach) Florida; Goddard Space Flight Center in Greenbelt, Maryland; etc...

Logically, rationally, historically any Starfleet shipyard would likewise be named after the geographic location it was in. How else would you tell people where they were assigned or where the materials were to be delivered? "This goes to the Starfleet San Francisco Yards." "Uh, which one?"

 

[SalvorHardin]

"This goes to the Starfleet San Francisco Yards." "Uh, which one?"

"To the Starfleet San Francisco Yards, Riverside Iowa division."
So simple. I'm sure the materials will get there.

But anyway, I like the Titanic comparison mentioned above.

 

[The Mirrorball Man]

Logically, rationally, historically any Starfleet shipyard would likewise be named after the geographic location it was in. How else would you tell people where they were assigned or where the materials were to be delivered? "This goes to the Starfleet San Francisco Yards." "Uh, which one?"

There is a University of Benin in Cotonou, Benin. There's also a University of Benin in Nigeria and another one in Togo.

 

[smegger56]

How about this.

Titanic was built in Southampton, but registered in Liverpool. Hence, why on the rear of the ship, it has Liverpool on it under Titanic.

That could be the case with the Enterprise. Built in Iwoa but registered up in the San Fransico ship yards.

Or, it's built in Iwoa and Christened/Lanced from the ship yard Docks.

This is just a possibility.

In the end, lets just wait and see the film to see what they have in store. The film looks superb.

Titanic was built in Belfast and sailed from Southampton. But I agree with your point.

So it was. My bad. Oh well, as you said, you get my point

 

[section9]

Ahhhh....Iowaaaaayyyyy

.....land of the Plain People......and home of Constitution Class Starships....

The Humble Town of Riverside. Birthplace of the Federation's greatest Starship Captain....

Looks like the Town Fathers took out a Bond Issue to start on building the Riverside Shipyards. Now that's a Stardrive Section that conforms to Canon!

After they take a break, everyone apparently goes to Murphy's Bar and Grill to shower off from all that dilithium radiation and down a cold one. That's apparently the model bar for where Uhura put the kibosh on young Mr. Kirk's ambitions. When you click on the links, a Trek Delta comes up.

The business has a timeline that swears that it was in business up to 2310, shortly before little Jimmy Kirk was born.

What do you want to bet this town cashes in big time when the film comes out? T-shirts, mugs, the whole nine yards.

 

[Jon1701]

That seems a totally unnecessary change to me. I don't mind it being built on the ground, since the original ship's plaque said San Francisco, Calif. Which means it was built in Califoria, and not orbital docks named after the city.

But why bother moving it? In the future an Iowa to SF trip would take about 5 seconds, it's not like there's a big distance barrier like today.

One suspects it was a dramatic device dictated by the script.

I doubt Jimmy Kirk could have supercycled all the way to california to watch the Enterprise being built. By having it built in his backyard he can cycle out and view it on angst-ridden sunday afternoons.

As long as it makes sense in the context of the script, I'm fine with it. If it doesn't I won't be.

But i'll get over it.

 

[gastrof]

Did Orci happen to SAY what their internal reasoning is?

Not in the first part of this interview.
I think we won't see what the reasoning is until the movie opens in May...but who knows

This may even be a manipulation by Spock after the Kelvin is destroyed.

This may even explain why April isn't its first commander. I suggested in another thead that April may be out of the continuity because after the Kelvin was destroyed, everything changed. If the Enterprise didn't exist yet, its construction may have been delayed to allow for upgraded tech being included. (Explaining why it looks different too.)

Making sure that the ship was built right where Kirk could see it and be lured in by it could be a way of making up for the loss of his father's influence.

In the meantime, April may be driving a bus somewhere in San Francisco.

 

[Franklin]

Re: Ahhhh....Iowaaaaayyyyy

The Humble Town of Riverside. Birthplace of the Federation's greatest Starship Captain....

Um, 2228?

Murphy's Bar and Grill
The business has a timeline that swears that it was in business up to 2310, shortly before little Jimmy Kirk was born.

What do you want to bet this town cashes in big time when the film comes out? T-shirts, mugs, the whole nine yards.

Or offer a Cardassian Sunrise?