Size Of The New Enterprise (large images)
- Thread starter Strat
- Start date
- Status
Now lets look at the nacelles...(from the same teaser trailer) These nacelles look HUUUGE compared to the figures on it. I took the same scale figures from the earlier diagrams and placed them on the nacelles in roughly the same areas...
Once again it seems to match with the visual evidence...
Once again it seems to match with the visual evidence...
Now on the shuttle bay...(And this is where a lot of size controversy has started) When I look at the screencaps from the movie, it looks like the Shuttlebay is MASSIVE. Which I believe it is. But I wanted to see if its possible that you could fit the shuttles in the shuttle bay and if there was a possibility that the cavernous view we got of the shuttle bay was in some way produced because of tricks with perspective. I could be way off on this, but I still find it interesting...I scaled the shuttles to be 30 feet long. I read in one of the articles from the ILM guys that said the shuttles were 30 feet long. (as pointed out, none of these are concrete, its just a study I did and one little mistake in scale can throw everything off, so just take it for entertainment value and please do not accuse me of pushing for one size, like they did on another forum) 
Please ignore the figures that I accidentally
placed in this picture..
Now here is pure conjecture on how the shuttles could (possibly, although slightly unlikely) that they could fit into the bay. I drew several different possibilities for the roof represented by red lines...
more to come...
Please ignore the figures that I accidentally
placed in this picture..
Now here is pure conjecture on how the shuttles could (possibly, although slightly unlikely) that they could fit into the bay. I drew several different possibilities for the roof represented by red lines...
more to come...
Now lastly, here is a size comparison with two other well known Trek ships...The original Enterprise and the Enterprise E. The ship according to this study (based on screenshots) comes out to be 467 meters. Now, I admit, there could be discrepancies on scaling that could throw things off and I used a little creativity in the shuttle bays, but I do find it pretty interesting. Now please look at these pictures with an open mind and don't attack me telling me, "ITS 762 meters! You are wrong!" Because honestly, I don't care. If it is that big, great, it doesn't matter to me. I think its a beautiful ship no matter how you look at it. But I think it is possible that given the evidence we have, we might have all seen it to be much bigger than it really is. Although, I do admit, having many different sources saying its around the same size means a lot. But I'm not one to take people's word over evidence. Anyways, I did another study with 610 meters and 725 meters as well, If you guys like this one, Ill share those as well
darkwing_duck1
Vice Admiral
Because we have only the blogger's word as to provenance. The 762m figure is from a site we KNOW to be Paramount sponsored/related.
725m would still be within that 6%+/- ballpark everybody seems to be settling in though. I could live with it, but I prefer the larger figure to give us every extra bit of space to fit that frakking shuttlebay.
YMMV.
darkwing_duck1
Vice Admiral
Would anyone care to provide the size of the Kelvin while we're at it?
That might be a just a little dangerous.
I have a feeling that if we get an official size of the Kelvin, then start comparing reference points & assumptions to the NuE you may wind up with a significantly smaller Enterprise than the purported 762m.
Then this tread would start all over again (or explode).
I tried a comparison similar to that a while back in the thread, and came up with 303m(995ft) for the Kelvin, but the relation seemed to force an educated guesstimate that the NuE was even smaller, down to 422m(1385ft).
Then, as expected, the BBS "powers that be" slammed me for even making the attempt.
Though I'm still holding my (tenuous) ground that the 457m(ish) I came up with would be a workable measurement.
That would only give us a 9m tall shuttlebay and THAT is absolutely NOT compatible with the shuttlebay shown in the film..
"If the bay don't fit"...to borrow a phrase...
darkwing_duck1
Vice Admiral
Now on the shuttle bay...(And this is where a lot of size controversy has started) When I look at the screencaps from the movie, it looks like the Shuttlebay is MASSIVE. Which I believe it is. But I wanted to see if its possible that you could fit the shuttles in the shuttle bay and if there was a possibility that the cavernous view we got of the shuttle bay was in some way produced because of tricks with perspective. I could be way off on this, but I still find it interesting...I scaled the shuttles to be 30 feet long. I read in one of the articles from the ILM guys that said the shuttles were 30 feet long. (as pointed out, none of these are concrete, its just a study I did and one little mistake in scale can throw everything off, so just take it for entertainment value and please do not accuse me of pushing for one size, like they did on another forum)
You're scaling off of the wrong shuttle in that cap. The shuttle you've got in the cap is the one that looks like a primitive Type 5 TNG shuttle. You can tell by the rounded foresection and the windows.
We're scaling off of the big "transport" shuttle.
The shuttle you're using is on the right/to the back of the one we're using.
To settle the issue of the shuttle height I have this cap:
Note that you can see the landing gear under the shuttle which gives us a "ground line". I moved that line to the left/closer a bit to account for the gear being so far under the shuttle (to minimize distortion).
Next note the doorway with a humanoid figure IN the actual doorway. Using the standard 1.8m height for humanoids, that makes the door ~2m.
Copying the doorway image and aligning the bottom with the ground line and stacking, 2m is ~ the "midline" (where the two slopes meet) on the side of the shuttle. (The use of the term "midline" is relative, since the upper slope is shorter than the bottom.)
From the "midline" to the "top" is an additional 1.3-1.4m. I chose 1.3m, to be conservative, but also because that would, when stacking the resulting shuttle heights give me within centimeters of the shuttlebay height (15.875m)I calculated for a 762m ship.
So the shuttles scale out at ~3.3m ground to top.
If the guy was 6' 6" tall then yes it woud be 3 meters or so but average height for men is from 6' to 6' 2" two meters is 78" When I saw the movie Pine and Urban ducked when they entered the shuttle so the opening would be less then 2 meters.
Now on the shuttle bay...(And this is where a lot of size controversy has started) When I look at the screencaps from the movie, it looks like the Shuttlebay is MASSIVE. Which I believe it is. But I wanted to see if its possible that you could fit the shuttles in the shuttle bay and if there was a possibility that the cavernous view we got of the shuttle bay was in some way produced because of tricks with perspective. I could be way off on this, but I still find it interesting...I scaled the shuttles to be 30 feet long. I read in one of the articles from the ILM guys that said the shuttles were 30 feet long. (as pointed out, none of these are concrete, its just a study I did and one little mistake in scale can throw everything off, so just take it for entertainment value and please do not accuse me of pushing for one size, like they did on another forum)
You're scaling off of the wrong shuttle in that cap. The shuttle you've got in the cap is the one that looks like a primitive Type 5 TNG shuttle. You can tell by the rounded foresection and the windows.
We're scaling off of the big "transport" shuttle.
The shuttle you're using is on the right/to the back of the one we're using.
The shot I used is of Pike getting into the shuttle that was in the Enterprise's shuttlebay though. So I scaled a shuttle to fit the size of the shuttle that was in the Enterprise's bay.
Plus, it looks like the same shuttle to me, just look at the red lines underneath the windows... The shuttle you are referring to has one solid red line, the one in the screencap I used has the red slashes, just like the transport shuttle. I think it's the same shuttle. Plus on your scaling, the figure you used to scale the shuttle is inside of the shuttle, so most likely the open door is not 2 meters tall. If you look closely at your picture, there is actually what looks like to be a female figure bending over entering the doorway. The figure you used is behind her on the inside of the shuttle.
darkwing_duck1
Vice Admiral
To settle the issue of the shuttle height I have this cap:
Note that you can see the landing gear under the shuttle which gives us a "ground line". I moved that line to the left/closer a bit to account for the gear being so far under the shuttle (to minimize distortion).
Next note the doorway with a humanoid figure IN the actual doorway. Using the standard 1.8m height for humanoids, that makes the door ~2m.
Copying the doorway image and aligning the bottom with the ground line and stacking, 2m is ~ the "midline" (where the two slopes meet) on the side of the shuttle. (The use of the term "midline" is relative, since the upper slope is shorter than the bottom.)
From the "midline" to the "top" is an additional 1.3-1.4m. I chose 1.3m, to be conservative, but also because that would, when stacking the resulting shuttle heights give me within centimeters of the shuttlebay height (15.875m)I calculated for a 762m ship.
So the shuttles scale out at ~3.3m ground to top.
If the guy was 6' 6" tall then yes it woud be 3 meters or so but average height for men is from 6' to 6' 2" two meters is 78" When I saw the movie Pine and Urban ducked when they entered the shuttle so the opening would be less then 2 meters.
~2m is the standard N American door height. I don't see much ducking going on in that cap. I see fully erect figures on the pad in close proximity to the shuttle that are absolutely NOT ducking and they appear to be the same size as the figure in the doorway.
For the sake of arguement, let's reduce the door height to 1.8m (which would require a duck). If the door is 1.8m, and the shuttle is 1 figure 1 + 2/3 of a figure tall that's 1.8m +1.19m =2.99m which is close enough to 3m for our purposes.
darkwing_duck1
Vice Admiral
It's possible, but the big black windows don't look right for it to be the "transport" shuttle (at least not to me).
No, the figure is standing IN the doorway, which is why light is hitting it and making it visible.
Either way, even if you knock it down 10% to a 1.8m doorway, the final height figure still comes out close enough to 3m for calcuation purposes.
Highlighted area where figure is...
JUST WHEN I THOUGHT I WAS OUT...THEY PULL ME BACK IN!
New people jumping on the merry-go-round but it still moves in circles.
Is there a thread about the size of the Kelvin?
.
Is there a thread about the size of the Kelvin?
.
Dear god...this thing is still going. 
Something was bothering me about the Gizmodo Bad Robot Sketch comparison. It just dawned on me, and I've found evidence that seems to invalidate the numbers in the sketch. In my field, if one number is off/wrong, then everything else is considered suspect. 
The dimension for the original Galactica is totally wrong!
They state it's 615m, when it's actually 1,263-1,255m
The dimension for the original Galactica is totally wrong!
They state it's 615m, when it's actually 1,263-1,255m
In fact the NuGalactica was kept at a relative size in the redesign at 1438.64m
I had modeled a comparison of the TOS Enterprise in relation to the NuGalactica, and this is the size relation the Gizmodo sketch should have looked like. (not trying to stray too off topic)
Time to go back to square one and start over?
I had modeled a comparison of the TOS Enterprise in relation to the NuGalactica, and this is the size relation the Gizmodo sketch should have looked like. (not trying to stray too off topic)
Time to go back to square one and start over?
Something was bothering me about the Gizmodo Bad Robot Sketch comparison. It just dawned on me, and I've found evidence that seems to invalidate the numbers in the sketch. In my field, if one number is off/wrong, then everything else is considered suspect.
The dimension for the original Galactica is totally wrong!
They state it's 615m, when it's actually 1,263-1,255m
In fact the NuGalactica was kept at a relative size in the redesign at 1438.64m
I had modeled a comparison of the TOS Enterprise in relation to the NuGalactica, and this is the size relation the Gizmodo sketch should have looked like. (not trying to stray too off topic)
Time to go back to square one and start over?
- Status
Similar threads
