Will there be an explaination for how enterprise can go underwater?

[SalvorHardin]

Re: Will there be an explaination for how enterprise can go underwater

Clearly the Enterprise is delicate.

Or Scotty is just complaining and exaggerating as usual.
He has to maintain that miracle worker reputation after all.

 

[Arpy]

Re: Will there be an explaination for how enterprise can go underwater

My understanding was that ships like the Enterprise couldn't fly in atmosphere or handle surface gravity stresses, let alone water, because they were constructed in space, for space, and it was the shields that really protected them. But then we kept seeing ships merely rocked by multiple phaser and torpedo blasts that should have incinerated any naked metal hull. ST '09 also showed the Enterprise being built on the surface an presumably flying itself into space like the star destroyers in the SW prequels.

Oh you know what, I just remembered, wasn't the original Enterprise flying in atmosphere in TOS episode when they were back in Earth's past and saved that fighter pilot?

Ultimately, is there any reason these fake starships can't travel in atmosphere or even as someone suggested upthread, through sand even?

 

[Nerys Myk]

Re: Will there be an explaination for how enterprise can go underwater

My understanding was that ships like the Enterprise couldn't fly in atmosphere or handle surface gravity stresses, let alone water, because they were constructed in space, for space, and it was the shields that really protected them. But then we kept seeing ships merely rocked by multiple phaser and torpedo blasts that should have incinerated any naked metal hull. ST '09 also showed the Enterprise being built on the surface an presumably flying itself into space like the star destroyers in the SW prequels.

Oh you know what, I just remembered, wasn't the original Enterprise flying in atmosphere in TOS episode when they were back in Earth's past and saved that fighter pilot?

Ultimately, is there any reason these fake starships can't travel in atmosphere or even as someone suggested upthread, through sand even?

New to the thread, I take it?

 

[Search4]

Re: Will there be an explaination for how enterprise can go underwater

I won't believe it until i see the Pez dispenser outboards.

 

[Greg Cox]

Re: Will there be an explaination for how enterprise can go underwater

"Because it Looks Cool" is a shitty reason to put anything in a movie.

Except, of course, that movies are primarily a visual medium and scifi movies in particular have always presented striking, eye-catching visuals.

"Shall we have a giant gorilla climb to the top of the Empire State Building and swat biplanes from the air? It will look cool!"

"Don't be silly. Cool visuals have nothing to do with cinema! We want only sensible, prosaic images that won't run the risk of exciting the audience."

This is not to say that scifi movies are only about the visuals; the characters and story matter, too. But, all other things being equal, why not go for the eye-popping visual over a boring one?

Lord knows TOS knew the value of snazzy visuals. Remember the Tholian Web, or the psychedelic Medusan, or the cool way Losira manifested in "That Which Survives"? As far as the plot was concerned, did Losira need to turn into a vertical TV bar? Of course not. But it looked neat and was more visually interesting than just having her appear in a flash of energy.

Heck, did Orion slave girls need to be green? Not really. But green dancing girls look cooler than plain old human ones . . . .

 

[The Wormhole]

Re: Will there be an explaination for how enterprise can go underwater

Heck, did Orion slave girls need to be green? Not really. But green dancing girls look cooler than plain old human ones . . . .

A comparison is needed to confirm this theory.

You know, just trying to be thourough and all. Yeah, that's the real reason...

 

[Greg Cox]

Re: Will there be an explaination for how enterprise can go underwater

Heck, did Orion slave girls need to be green? Not really. But green dancing girls look cooler than plain old human ones . . . .

A comparison is needed to confirm this theory.

You know, just trying to be thourough and all. Yeah, that's the real reason...

Thankfully, this comparison is easily conducted. Just compare the non-chartreuse belly dancer in "Wolf in the Fold" to the Orion dancing girls in "The Cage" or "Whom Gods Destroy."

When was the last time you saw anybody dress up as what's-her-name from "Wolf in the Fold" at a scifi convention?

I rest my case!

 

[The Wormhole]

Re: Will there be an explaination for how enterprise can go underwater

But, I see more Slave Leias at conventions than Orion Slave Girls. Or is that more a Trek vs Wars thing? Or does that not count since Leia didn't dance? But then, Jabba's other slave girl, the one that did dance did have green skin. I think I'm catching on. Green skin makes girls good dancers.

 

[Greg Cox]

Re: Will there be an explaination for how enterprise can go underwater

But, I see more Slave Leias at conventions than Orion Slave Girls. Or is that more a Trek vs Wars thing? Or does that not count since Leia didn't dance? But then, Jabba's other slave girl, the one that did dance did have green skin. I think I'm catching on. Green skin makes girls good dancers.

Just wait for SHE-HULK: THE MUSICAL.

 

[M'Sharak]

Re: Will there be an explaination for how enterprise can go underwater

Just wait for SHE-HULK: THE MUSICAL.

Looking forward to it. But first:


TrekMovie has just posted an article addressing the science of some of what was shown in the 9-minute IMAX preview. In a quote excerpted from that, Kayla checks in on underwater starships:

Underwater Enterprise

After Kirk and Bones take the plunge, so to speak, they use some convenient underwater propulsion boots (or something) to swim over to the submerged enterprise that awaits them on the ocean floor. The first question: could the Enterprise survive and operate underwater? Almost certainly yes. It was designed to work in some insane environments — from the vacuum of space to areas of extreme radiation to entering and exiting planetary atmospheres (including Saturn’s moon Titan as we saw in Star Trek 2009), not to mention travelling at warp speed. The high pressure underwater environment should be no problem for a vessel like the Enterprise.

The second question: would the salt water really have a bad effect on a starship, as Scotty claims it’s doing to the Enterprise? I’d wager that Scotty is just being a whiny engineer and that there’s really nothing to be worried about. Scotty says that big E has been underwater “since last night”, so, for less than one day. “Normal” metals like steel or other ferric alloys do corrode in salt water, it’s true, but it takes a lot longer than less-than-a-day to have any real effect. Moreover, the Enterprise is most likely made of tritanium, a super strong alloy. If tritanium is anything like our terrestrial titanium, it should be super-resistant to corrosion by salt water.

Verdict: Underwater Enterprise? Totally. Salt water corrosion? No way.

 

[The Wormhole]

Re: Will there be an explaination for how enterprise can go underwater

But really, what logical reason is there to take the ship underwater? Even if we jump to the conclusion the transporters aren't working for whatever reason, why not just send the away team down in a shuttle? If for some reason something needs to be done underwater, bring in those aquatic shuttles from TAS.

But also, what of propulsion underwater? I'm pretty sure it takes something very different to move underwater than in space.

 

[F. King Daniel]

Re: Will there be an explaination for how enterprise can go underwater

Perhaps simply to scan/catalogue/investigate Nibiru's sea life while Kirk and McCoy, and Spock, Uhura and Sulu carried out their missions? I imagine that while an aquashuttle could do the job, the Enterprise herself could scan the living shit out of every marine lifeform in that hemisphere at once.

 

[BillJ]

Re: Will there be an explaination for how enterprise can go underwater

Perhaps simply to scan/catalogue/investigate Nibiru's sea life while Kirk and McCoy, and Spock, Uhura and Sulu carried out their missions? I imagine that while an aquashuttle could do the job, the Enterprise herself could scan the living shit out of every marine lifeform in that hemisphere at once.

But don't you take a huge risk of a native or a group of natives seeing it when it's either splashing-down or taking back off?

 

[Greg Cox]

Re: Will there be an explaination for how enterprise can go underwater

The thing that's funny is that Trekkies have, for 46 years, been suspending disbelief in a massive, unconventionally designed starship traveling through the galaxy at faster-than-light warp speed, shooting phaser (better than laser!) beams and photon (eh??) torpedoes at klingon warriors, omnipotent beings, cyborgs, space amoebas, and Spock's Brain. They use a transporter to beam their energy patterns down to planets. They generate gravity with a graviton generator (and magic deck plates). They use nadions and cadions and baryons and chronitons (what??) and whatsitons and TRONitons to open/close subspace/wormhole/singularity/rift/void/eddy/fissure/scaryfrakkingholes in space, and the aliens all have 2 legs, 2 arms, and funny nose/forehead/neck ridges and weird ears. (I know, tholians... but they are an exception, not a rule lol).

We've seen ships fly so close to a star they should be burned to a crisp in a microsecond or crushed in the atmosphere of a gas giant. We've seen a starship land, we've seen it fly through fluidic space (waht??), and we've seen them go underwater. We've seen them use transwarp conduits and quantum singularities/slipstreams to travel hundreds of lightyears in minutes. We've even seen someone occupy every place in the universe at once before de-evolving and mating with the captain (ewww).

Its only because this is "Abrams and his bastardized Trek" that people are coming down so hard and being so inflexible that any explanation (which should not really be needed if it serves story or adds to the uniqueness of Star Trek, particularly in light of the above) is automatically too outlandish, or somehow an affront to Gene Roddenberry, Star Trek, and the Q Continuum. I agree with Abrams 100%. Enjoy the reruns. I'm happy for Star Trek to keep going boldly.

and sling shot around the sun to create a time warp, or pulling away from a black hole to do the same thing. Traveling to parallel universes, etc. I think you nailed it! nuTrek doesn't get caught up spewing Trekno BS like modern trek which was a fallback to solving the story plot, it killed the drama in a lot of cases, it goes back to the original series that it is the story first.

I don't remember hearing many complaints when the Enterprise was struggling to get out of Earth's atmosphere because an F104 was trying to shoot it down with a nuclear missile. it was pretty freaking cool is what I remember when I first saw it. Chris

And don't forget the way transporter beams can split people into their good and evil selves, or else transport them to the Mirror Universe. Both also very cool, of course.

 

[F. King Daniel]

Re: Will there be an explaination for how enterprise can go underwater

Perhaps simply to scan/catalogue/investigate Nibiru's sea life while Kirk and McCoy, and Spock, Uhura and Sulu carried out their missions? I imagine that while an aquashuttle could do the job, the Enterprise herself could scan the living shit out of every marine lifeform in that hemisphere at once.

But don't you take a huge risk of a native or a group of natives seeing it when it's either splashing-down or taking back off?

I'm sure with their scanners they could tell if any natives were in eyeshot when they did either? They probably put down miles away under cover of night with the running lights off and the windows polarized.

 

[Jackson_Roykirk]

Re: Will there be an explaination for how enterprise can go underwater

The Delta Flyer could be modified to go very deep under water. In fact, Janeway said the Voyager herself could do the same, but the necessary modifications would take too long.

I know it's "only" VOY, but it is still canon: Starships CAN go underwater.

 

[Jackson_Roykirk]

Re: Will there be an explaination for how enterprise can go underwater

And don't forget the way transporter beams can split people into their good and evil selves, or else transport them to the Mirror Universe. Both also very cool, of course.

It's doesn't exactly split them into "good and evil", but rather into their "wussy side" and their "animalistic side". Remember, even the "wuss" Kirk could not function properly (being such a mamby-pamby). If it was simply a matter of being good and evil, then I think they could have done away with evil Kirk and just moved on...

...But yeah; very cool.

 

[Awesome Possum]

Re: Will there be an explaination for how enterprise can go underwater

Perhaps simply to scan/catalogue/investigate Nibiru's sea life while Kirk and McCoy, and Spock, Uhura and Sulu carried out their missions? I imagine that while an aquashuttle could do the job, the Enterprise herself could scan the living shit out of every marine lifeform in that hemisphere at once.

But don't you take a huge risk of a native or a group of natives seeing it when it's either splashing-down or taking back off?

Well, on Earth, the ocean is pretty big. There are major portions where no one would ever see a massive ship go into the water or leave. Given that the clip shows a primitive race, they could do it a mile out without issue.

 

[marksound]

Re: Will there be an explaination for how enterprise can go underwater

"Because it Looks Cool" is a shitty reason to put anything in a movie.

Except, of course, that movies are primarily a visual medium and scifi movies in particular have always presented striking, eye-catching visuals.

"Shall we have a giant gorilla climb to the top of the Empire State Building and swat biplanes from the air? It will look cool!"

"Don't be silly. Cool visuals have nothing to do with cinema! We want only sensible, prosaic images that won't run the risk of exciting the audience."

This is not to say that scifi movies are only about the visuals; the characters and story matter, too. But, all other things being equal, why not go for the eye-popping visual over a boring one?

Lord knows TOS knew the value of snazzy visuals. Remember the Tholian Web, or the psychedelic Medusan, or the cool way Losira manifested in "That Which Survives"? As far as the plot was concerned, did Losira need to turn into a vertical TV bar? Of course not. But it looked neat and was more visually interesting than just having her appear in a flash of energy.

Heck, did Orion slave girls need to be green? Not really. But green dancing girls look cooler than plain old human ones . . . .

Seriously? A logical argument?

Don't you know who you're talking to?

 

[shapeshifter]

Re: Will there be an explaination for how enterprise can go underwater

"Will there be an explanation for how enterprise can go underwater"

SCUBA gear.