Is there an official class for the Kelvin yet?

[Timo]

Oh, and, you were wrong about the windows representing the radius of the dome.

Uh, if you read back, the argument was that the three windows would represent the radius of the dark groove atop the superstructure, that is, half the diameter of a putative bridge situated beneath the dark groove, which would make that putative bridge match the set. That condition is met by the picture: 1.5 turquoise bars is not quite it, but 1.8 bars would already be. (Note that the picture is at an angle, sending the centerline of the center window farther to the right than might appear.)

You know this is going to get ignored, don't you?

That really is unfair. I have not "ignored" any onscreen evidence so far, apart from the width of the ante-shuttlebay/engineering plant location; I have only thrown out the offscreen suggestion that the ship ought to be of some given length. It is you who has been systematically ignoring the scaling cues in the design of the ship's superstructure...

However, the way the set was built would leave two options. A bridge set in front, with no spaces to the left and right of the windows and thus with flat sensor panels there - or then a bridge set in the middle, with a regularly shaped space going around it and allowing for rooms behind all the windows and windowlike features on the slanted wall of the dome. In the latter case, the depth of the forward window shafts would be the same as the distance to the door in that well-lit bridge shot. (A door which, incidentally, would nicely match the tall doorlike rectangle outboard of the aft black "window" in the exterior shot! )

Timo Saloniemi

 

[ST-One]

Oh, and, you were wrong about the windows representing the radius of the dome.

Uh, if you read back, the argument was that the three windows would represent the radius of the dark groove atop the superstructure, that is, half the diameter of a putative bridge situated beneath the dark groove, which would make that putative bridge match the set. That condition is met by the picture: 1.5 turquoise bars is not quite it, but 1.8 bars would already be. (Note that the picture is at an angle, sending the centerline of the center window farther to the right than might appear.)

Oh, god...
What dark groove?

You know this is going to get ignored, don't you?

That really is unfair. I have not "ignored" any onscreen evidence so far, apart from the width of the ante-shuttlebay/engineering plant location; I have only thrown out the offscreen suggestion that the ship ought to be of some given length. It is you who has been systematically ignoring the scaling cues in the design of the ship's superstructure...

See?
The windows in the front of the dome are the biggest clue for the size and the location of the bridge.
And you keep ignoring it.

However, the way the set was built would leave two options.

No, it does not!

A bridge set in front, with no spaces to the left and right of the windows and thus with flat sensor panels there - or then a bridge set in the middle, with a regularly shaped space going around it and allowing for rooms behind all the windows and windowlike features on the slanted wall of the dome. In the latter case, the depth of the forward window shafts would be the same as the distance to the door in that well-lit bridge shot.

Utter nonsense!
We all, except you, of course, can all see that the windows are 'only' a few inches deep and not a few metres.
You really aren't making any sense here.

(A door which, incidentally, would nicely match the tall doorlike rectangle outboard of the aft black "window" in the exterior shot! )

No, it doesn't.
That rectangle is quite large - much taller than that corridor is high.
Besides, that wall we see at the end of that corridor isn't - can't be - the outside wall of the bridge dome.

 

[Crazy Eddie]

It has to be kept in mind as well that the only angles we had through the windows were from a relatively recessed perspective, on the deck of the bridge looking slightly up. The lack of the "ledge" in front of the windows is better explained by the angles than by the windows themselves.

 

[ST-One]

It has to be kept in mind as well that the only angles we had through the windows were from a relatively recessed perspective, on the deck of the bridge looking slightly up. The lack of the "ledge" in front of the windows is better explained by the angles than by the windows themselves.

Yes, the inset isn't all that deep anyway. You'd probably have to go right in front of the windows to see that 'ledge'.

 

[F. King Daniel]

Having rewatched the scene, I don't think the panels either side of the three bridge windows are closed/shuttered windows. Robau leaves the bridge by the 4 o'clock door and walks anticlockwise around to the elevator which would be right behind where one of those panels is.

 

[ST-One]

Having rewatched the scene, I don't think the panels either side of the three bridge windows are closed/shuttered windows. Robau leaves the bridge by the 4 o'clock door and walks anticlockwise around to the elevator which would be right behind where one of those panels is.

They are indeed just surface-details.
If there are rooms next to the bridge, windows in that place wouldn't make any sense; they would be crammed into a very tight corner of such a room.

And, as you said, that Robau walks to a lift that sits somewhere to the side of the bridge is even more evidence (as if more were actually needed ) of a bridge that is significantly smaller than the dome it sits in.

 

[Timo]

Oh, god... What dark groove?

There are two atop the truncated cone: one just beyond the glowing dome, and one that sits about as far away from the glowing dome as the outer walls of the bridge set sit from the fancy ceiling fixture. (Assuming that the ceiling fixture diameter is a rough match of the glowing dome diameter, of course; this doesn't apply if the bridge is small and forward-mounted. But it does apply, rather suggestively, if we choose out of all the arbitrary scales the one where the outer glowing dome and the inner fixture match.)

The dark groove would be a nice way to mark the extent of the bridge on the exterior, while leaving an outer corridor as built into the set. Minor scaling issues would emerge, just as with the TOS ship (sunken or rotated bridge?), or the ST4, 5 and 6 versions (where do the turbolifts fit here, when even rotating doesn't help?), or the E-E (Picard's Ready Room should protrude to space) - but the original design intent would be satisfied nevertheless.

See? The windows in the front of the dome are the biggest clue for the size and the location of the bridge. And you keep ignoring it.

Only because I can. After all, not even the triplet of shots you provided a few replies back precludes the concept of deep window shafts: all we can see is the inner ledge and then bits of the outer saucer, without seeing e.g. the top of the second tier of the superstructure - so the deep shafts could still be there, satisfying original design intent (in our minds).

It has to be kept in mind as well that the only angles we had through the windows were from a relatively recessed perspective, on the deck of the bridge looking slightly up. The lack of the "ledge" in front of the windows is better explained by the angles than by the windows themselves.

Exactly. But it allows for all sorts of interpretations for the windows - interpretations that not only solve the angle mismatch, but can also accommodate the symmetrically mounted bridge if we so prefer. It doesn't force us to take some other stance.

That rectangle is quite large - much taller than that corridor is high.

That shouldn't matter, since the inner door here is vertical and the outer rectangle must be a separate structure anyway, even if it is a door.

Not that I'd really think the exterior feature really is a door that would be opened, at least not on a regular basis. Hence the smiley. But that inner door (which Robau doesn't use) could still lead to a space that is functionally connected to that exterior feature specifically.

Besides, that wall we see at the end of that corridor isn't - can't be - the outside wall of the bridge dome.

It could still well be a vertical inner wall close to the kink of the bridge dome, the start of the 45 degree slope. Having a "large" bridge that fills the dome up till the dark groove doesn't preclude having fairly broad spaces outboard of that groove, such as a full-width, full-height perimeter corridor plus partial-height spaces outboard of that.

Timo Saloniemi

 

[ST-One]

...

Your premise is wrong.
So your arguments have no value.

The simplest solution is usually the right one.

You have to jump through some many hoops to fit the on-screen-'evidence' into your own ideas that it borders on the ridiculous.

 

[EJA]

I still find it incredible that there were starships much bigger than the Constitutions, Mirandas, and Excelsiors in the first half of the 23rd century. We know they got bigger in the 24th century, but a hundred years earlier?!

 

[F. King Daniel]

I still find it incredible that there were starships much bigger than the Constitutions, Mirandas, and Excelsiors in the first half of the 23rd century. We know they got bigger in the 24th century, but a hundred years earlier?!

This sort of thing happens in Star Trek all the time - we're supposed to believe bumpy-headed Klingons existed but went unseen during TOS (in fact, every TOS Klingon seen was supposedly from the same infected colony world!), that Remans existed all along but went unseen until "Nemesis", that Spock had a half-brother all along, that there was an ultra-famous Earth-saving starship Enterprise before Kirk's, but nobody mentioned it in any of the chronologically later series' and movies, etc.

Many of the technical Trek concepts, like warp cores, were retroactive inventions, too. You won't find a warp core mentioned in The Making of Star Trek (the warp nacelles were entirely self-contained), or seen on Franz Joseph's old USS Enterprise floorplans.

 

[Mr. Laser Beam]

in fact, every TOS Klingon seen was supposedly from the same infected colony world!

No, nothing like that. The infection spread throughout the entire Klingon Empire. They said as much onscreen. It was never intended to be confined to one planet for all time.

 

[Crazy Eddie]

I still find it incredible that there were starships much bigger than the Constitutions, Mirandas, and Excelsiors in the first half of the 23rd century. We know they got bigger in the 24th century, but a hundred years earlier?!

Why not? There were ships in the German navy bigger than the Type-VII U-boats, but you'd never know that from watching Das Boot.

Likewise, I'd be very surprised if the TOS Constitution was the largest--or even AMONG the largest--ships in Starfleet. Considering the number of Constitutions we ran into during the series, I'm tempted to wonder if the original Enterprise was actually a sort of main-line cannon fodder.

 

[gimpy117]

I don't know that the constitutions were "cannon fodder" but they were supposed to be the premier ship in the fleet. But we all know, size does not mean power. Look at missile cruisers today...smaller than a battleship, but with a punch that can beat any old BB to a pulp.

As to the Kelvin, isn't it about the size of a salidin?

Pertaining to the Nuprise:
Memory alpha has the old Enterprise at 289 meters. But have we ever considered the fact that:

A: the original designer of the constitution died on the kelvin?
B: Kelvin got of scans of post TNG era tech
C: starfleet now knew about the Narada and knew it needed a badass ship to counter.

A,B, and C can explain why its larger. New designer may have decided bigger is better. Maybe the data from the Narada lead to new breakthroughs, or even starfleet knew it needed more firepower.

As to that Giant saucer wreck: Starfleet knew the vulcans were in deep trouble, why else would they call for help? So it makes sense to send ships capable of countless of refugees. Hence the Giant saucer.

 

[Dukhat]

I don't know that the constitutions were "cannon fodder" but they were supposed to be the premier ship in the fleet. But we all know, size does not mean power. Look at missile cruisers today...smaller than a battleship, but with a punch that can beat any old BB to a pulp.

Exactly. As of 2380, it seems that the Prometheus class starship is Starfleet's "premiere" ship, but it's smaller than the Galaxy or Sovereign classes.

As to the Kelvin, isn't it about the size of a salidin?

In the pre-production sketches it was, but for the movie it was scaled up far larger.

Pertaining to the Nuprise:
Memory alpha has the old Enterprise at 289 meters. But have we ever considered the fact that:

A: the original designer of the constitution died on the kelvin?

I think there was more than one guy designing the Constitution class. And anyway, only two people from the Kelvin died, Robau and George Kirk.

B: Kelvin got of scans of post TNG era tech

Orci and Kurtzman imply as much in interviews.

C: starfleet now knew about the Narada and knew it needed a badass ship to counter.

But after the Kelvin incident, Starfleet most likely had prior contact with the Romulans than in the original universe, and found out that they had nothing like the Narada. Kirk even says that the Narada was never seen or heard from again. And again you're equating size with power.

As to that Giant saucer wreck: Starfleet knew the vulcans were in deep trouble, why else would they call for help? So it makes sense to send ships capable of countless of refugees. Hence the Giant saucer.

The "giant" saucer was supposed to be from one of the ships from the station, not another ship that just happened to be there. It was scaled up only for this scene and really shouldn't be taken seriously as another ship even larger than the Enterprise.

Here's some food for thought for you: How do you know that the nuEnterprise is even a Constitution class ship? It's class name was never mentioned anywhere, and it's dedication plaque only says "starship-class." For all we know the Constitution class program still happened, only in this universe there wasn't one called "Enterprise."

 

[gimpy117]

I think there was more than one guy designing the Constitution class. And anyway, only two people from the Kelvin died, Robau and George Kirk.

Somebody said that the girl who screams, and gets sucked out into space, hitting the phaser turret is the person who was destined to be the head designer on the constitution class.

Here's some food for thought for you: How do you know that the nuEnterprise is even a Constitution class ship? It's class name was never mentioned anywhere, and it's dedication plaque only says "starship-class." For all we know the Constitution class program still happened, only in this universe there wasn't one called "Enterprise."

You may be right. It's very possible the Nuprise is a prototype that uses some of the new design features stolen from Narada

 

[kkozoriz1]

Somebody said that the girl who screams, and gets sucked out into space, hitting the phaser turret is the person who was destined to be the head designer on the constitution class.

She survived. Dukhat just said only two people died and he accounted for both of them.

 

[F. King Daniel]

Just a thought, for those who still insist the Kelvin is no bigger than the old Saladin-class destroyer/scout: Supposing the engineering hull on the Kelvin is the same size as on the TOS Enterprise (although it's actually much bigger and longer), the saucer would have to be twice the width of the TOS/TMP Enterprise's, at least. If the bridge is all that's in that dome(it clearly isn't - see pic posted earlier), the entire engineering hull would be no wider than the bridge set itself!

Compare front shots of the Kelvin and TOS/TMP Enterprises and see - the Kelvin is one huge ship. No doubt about it.

 

[Dukhat]

Somebody said that the girl who screams, and gets sucked out into space, hitting the phaser turret is the person who was destined to be the head designer on the constitution class.

She survived. Dukhat just said only two people died and he accounted for both of them.

I forgot about the person who got sucked out into space. And anyway, who was the "somebody" who said this? Just some schmuck on the internet? Or a valid source? And if it was a woman, then surely it wasn't Lawrence Marvick who was one of the designers of the original Enterprise?

 

[kkozoriz1]

The NuEnterprise is a different ship. Marvick may not have designed any of it.

 

[Dukhat]

That's not the point I was trying to make. Gimpy thought the original Connie designer might have died on the Kelvin, which was why the nuEnt looks so different. I was pointing out that that probably wasn't the case, not that I thought Marvick also designed the nuEnt.