I'm joking in the sense that I'm not really "outraged", but, yeah, in a big budget movie like that, to take something that people see every day and slap it on a console because they think it looks futuristic, is pretty outrageous and just downright lazy. One of the most egregious gaffes IMO is Spock using the boot jets to zoom up 78 decks (numbered up instead of down to add insult to injury). At that point the producers are just flippin' you the bird.
Starship Size Argument™ thread
- Thread starter WarpFactorZ
- Start date
- Status
I'm joking in the sense that I'm not really "outraged", but, yeah, in a big budget movie like that, to take something that people see every day and slap it on a console because they think it looks futuristic, is pretty outrageous and just downright lazy. One of the most egregious gaffes IMO is Spock using the boot jets to zoom up 78 decks (numbered up instead of down to add insult to injury). At that point the producers are just flippin' you the bird.
WarpFactorZ, can you please apply your image analysis methods to this...
http://images1.wikia.nocookie.net/_.../1/1e/USS_Enterprise_approaches_Spacedock.jpg
... and tell us how big it is according to your reckoning?
http://images1.wikia.nocookie.net/_.../1/1e/USS_Enterprise_approaches_Spacedock.jpg
... and tell us how big it is according to your reckoning?
I don't think that the people involved with the reboot are working with the same considerations as those who worked on classic Trek. The people who were involved with the latter attempted to make the world as believable as possible, while working within the limitations set by a continuity in flux and the demands of a production schedule. These were people who wrote technical manuals and blueprints that explained how this technology supposedly worked. I think if we asked the people involved now how something works, with one possible exception - Eaves, they couldn't tell you how it works. They are working for the "Cool Factor". Big ships are cool. That gun or cannon or whatever it is that the Vengeance fires is cool. The Enterprise is big, the Vengeance is bigger, and that spacedock is massively big. What more do you need to understand?
So King, why is it you only post pics of tiny rooms on the old Enterprise, but never these pictures:
Floor-to-ceiling window, as big as nu-bridge viewscreen (STV):
http://images4.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20110930203935/memoryalpha/en/images/d/d5/McCoy_and_Sybok.jpg
Cargo hold:
http://images2.wikia.nocookie.net/_.../8/8b/Constitution_class_refit_landingbay.jpg
Recreation deck:
http://gbparts.danawheels.net/graphics/asap/tmpid.jpg
Floor-to-ceiling window, as big as nu-bridge viewscreen (STV):
http://images4.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20110930203935/memoryalpha/en/images/d/d5/McCoy_and_Sybok.jpg
Cargo hold:
http://images2.wikia.nocookie.net/_.../8/8b/Constitution_class_refit_landingbay.jpg
Recreation deck:
http://gbparts.danawheels.net/graphics/asap/tmpid.jpg
So please point to that window on the model.
Says the one who nitpicked Undiscovered Country to death for the digital clocks.
From William Shatner's 78-deck Enterprise. The ending seems to support it being a viewscreen rather than a window, since we get a distant view of the misty blue planet dead ahead, while the Enterprise and Bird of Prey are seen orbiting much closer to it. No external windows on the model match.
I replied to that on the second page. Here it is again:
I'll add to that, this picture of the Enterprise-A's shuttlebay which is the same size as the one in TOS-R:King Daniel said:
Doesn't take into account the curved underside of the hull and is too tall to fit into the saucer rim of the 305-meter refit Enterprise - something very apparent during the Director's Edition version of the Wing Walk scene.WarpFactorZ said:
The key difference is that that Enterprise is supposed to be 305 meters long, so fans fudge it all to fit. The new one is intended to be 725m long and those doing the FX or building sets have absolutely NO intention of designing making it fit in a 300m Enterprise. In addition, in today's era of CG we have more size-establishing shots than ever before. Where there was a disconnect between outside and in, now it's seamless. Instead of flat white windows on models we now have CG ships with modelled rooms inside the windows, complete with people and furnature (see: the nuEnterprise neck window/pod launcher shots I posted earlier). A zoom-in on the bridge window, seemlessly merging the Enterprise CG with the set and the word of the current designers is worth a lot more than what the designers of a different Enterprise scaled their ship at in 1966 or 1979. As Nero said, "That was another life."
I see a lot of room on either side of that bay. If you opened it up, you could park the shuttles as shown in ST09. Where do you get 4 decks? That's nonsense.
Yes, BUT there is no complete model of the ship in CGI. Otherwise, they'd have released it for rabid fan consumption (and lots of $$$ for them). The only thing modern CGI accomplishes is to be able to superimpose an interior shot with an exterior. But don't fool yourself into thinking these are done with any consistency in scale, other than to "look cool."
Again, from the second page.
That's a four-deck tall shuttle bay. And FAR bigger shuttles than in TOS, TMP or the classic movies.
Funny, it looks consistent to me. It's consistent in all the diagrams and pictures I've posted. But your idea of "inconsistent" appears to mean "bigger than the old Enterprise" and nothing else...
If they wanted to sell diagrams and manuals, they would without trouble. They've managed it with the flawed Trek ships of the past (Ten-Forward on the Enterprise-D, the TMP rec room, Voyager's shuttlebay, the Defiant, the half-sized Excelsior and most recently Trek's all-time most inconsistently-scaled ship, the Klingon Bird of Prey). Next you'll be telling me the ship design is why the Abramsverse novels were cancelled.
Last edited:
If the nu-Enterprise is supposed to be 2,397.75 feet long, has anyone run the measurements on the rest of the ship, such as total width and height, dimensions of the secondary hull and nacelles and primary hull, etc? Someone posted a handful of measurements in an earlier post, but I thought they were taking into consideration a measurement of the nu-Enterprise a little closer to the dimensions of the TMP-Enterprise.
trevanian
Rear Admiral
Don't know how relevant it is, but there was a scale drawing in CINEFANTASTIQUE that indicated spacedock was something like 2.9 miles high. Or maybe 2.1? Anybody have the issue in question, I think it is the one covering TWOK-TVH.
It looks like a 2x scale increase from the old Enterprise, with a lot of cover-your-ass rationale about why the structures are different from the ones before (e.g. hatches aren't for people, windows aren't for people, etc...).
But they haven't, and it's been 4 years. I call bullshit. You're wrong. Face it.
Three miles in height. (http://en.memory-alpha.org/wiki/Spacedock_(Earth))
15,840 meters in height.
4,828.03 meters in height.
Vengeance is approximately a mile in length.
15,840 meters in height.
4,828.03 meters in height.
Vengeance is approximately a mile in length.
In fact it's the argument that trumps all others.
One can totally hate it because one thinks they did a bad job. That's fair. If one rejects it and tries to substitute something else, however, one is deluded.
trevanian
Rear Admiral
For canon-based folk it shouldn't, since the makers aren't on-screen evidence.
So what? They made it bigger and showed it was bigger. They said it was bigger. It continues to be the bigger size in Into Darkness. Saying it's the old size is, as I said before, preaching that the Earth is 4000 years old while I've got these ancient fossils right here.
Tell that to Pocket Books. Ask them about those Abramsverse novels.
OK, I'll ask. By the way, where are the detailed schematics of the nu-Enterprise? Did Pocket Books publish them? Please provide a link if you have one.
I am aware of that. I want WarpFactorZ to apply his methods.
I get it. You're trying to trap me into making an estimate of the spacedock's size based on the width of the Enterprise (because it just fits through the doors), and then you'll show me a picture of the Enterprise-D going fitting precisely through the doors as well.
In Paramount's vaults until such time as they want to release them. As I've shown through the thread, the ship size is consistent. The hanger matches the bridge which matches the windows which matches the hatches and engineering fits into the 14-deck-deep secondary hull. They're not too big as you've kept claiming. I've even posted diagrams proving it! You haven't refuted any of them, you've just tried and tried to switch tactics, complain about something else. I think you've forgotten what you were originally trying to prove - that the new Enterprise is the same size as the old one. It's safe to say you've failed completely.
OK, I'll ask. By the way, where are the detailed schematics of the nu-Enterprise? Did Pocket Books publish them? Please provide a link if you have one.
- Status
Similar threads
