One would think they'd beam it up to keep as a museum piece, after all it was instrumental in saving their collective butt. Plus a beam up could probably clean it up as the same time. (if a transporter can filter out viruses, surely it can also remove dirt even more easily. )
Do Submarines make sense in the Trek universe?
- Thread starter Lexx Shrapnel
- Start date
One would think they'd beam it up to keep as a museum piece, after all it was instrumental in saving their collective butt. Plus a beam up could probably clean it up as the same time. (if a transporter can filter out viruses, surely it can also remove dirt even more easily. )
Yes.
[/thread]
[/thread]
One would wonder if the Klingons would be demanding their property back. Given the fragile political relationship between the two powers, having one their ships would hardly be tolerated.
Also, if the transporter can filter dirt, that would explain why no one ever showers in Trek
Exactly, you'd be killing two birds with one stone.
One would wonder if the Klingons would be demanding their property back. Given the fragile political relationship between the two powers, having one their ships would hardly be tolerated.
Also, if the transporter can filter dirt, that would explain why no one ever showers in Trek
Big ships have to stay in specific channels that are maintained by dredging the bay.
Exactly. And not just freighters: I was there in 1983 when the Enterprise ran aground. (The logistics ship I was serving on at the time was tied up at the old Oakland Naval Supply Depot and we had a front row seat.)
Big ships have to stay in specific channels that are maintained by dredging the bay.
Exactly. And not just freighters: I was there in 1983 when the Enterprise ran aground. (The logistics ship I was serving on at the time was tied up at the old Oakland Naval Supply Depot and we had a front row seat.)As I recall, big freighters running aground in San Fransisco bay is not uncommon.
Big ships have to stay in specific channels that are maintained by dredging the bay.
It's an ironic coincidence that a couple of decades later the other Enterprise also ran aground.
And yet, it doesn't look like it would. Appearances can be deceiving.
Not to be argumentative, but it does look like it would float, and also was built to float. I just don't think a BoP is designed to float, but I could be wrong.
^Something could be floating without being specifically built for that. A wooden table floats even though it wasn't designed to be a flotation device.
A spaceship will float mostly because it is meant to contain people with enough habitability for them not to be like sardines in a can.
Last edited:
I'll concede that things can float when they are not designed for it. But, I don't think the shape or weight distribution of the BoP indicate that it will float.
The only way to settle this would be to get an estimate of its overall density.
Indeed. Hence my reference to the Daystrom Institute fans site which gave some speculative figures that might help in that endeavor. I couldn't find a more official source right off the bat. Maybe you'll have better luck
Indeed. Hence my reference to the Daystrom Institute fans site which gave some speculative figures that might help in that endeavor. I couldn't find a more official source right off the bat. Maybe you'll have better luck
Well, unless you stop and think about this:
Ships are made of metal, they contains heavy machinery, they contain passengers and cargo yet they don't sink, they float very well, even in case of very bad weather.
Why do you think that is?
One tack, which is inherently flawed because it relies on screen evidence way too much I think, would be to use the footprints left in Golden Gate Park. Specifically, use their area and depth to estimate the weight the craft.
Just tossing that out for the adventurous. No way am I going down this rabbit hole any deeper (I hope!).
Just tossing that out for the adventurous. No way am I going down this rabbit hole any deeper (I hope!).
Indeed. Hence my reference to the Daystrom Institute fans site which gave some speculative figures that might help in that endeavor. I couldn't find a more official source right off the bat. Maybe you'll have better luck
Well, unless you stop and think about this:
Ships are made of metal, they contains heavy machinery, they contain passengers and cargo yet they don't sink, they float very well, even in case of very bad weather.
Why do you think that is?
The downward force of their gravity is equal to the fluid density of water, allowing it to float. The distribution of pressure as well as its density allow it to float.
A BoP's weight distribution over its shape do not seem conducive to floating.
Similar threads
