• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

movie XI questions(Potential Spoilers)

I quite liked the Kelvin bridge. It seemed very practical - perhaps even oversimply so compared to the Enterprise bridge.

Indeed. I liked the businesslike submarine-ish vibe it had. Reminded me of the dramatically-cooler-than-real life submarine bridges from Hunt For Red October.

Spot on. I think they were definitely going for a modern (21st century) visual and it showed most clearly in the Kelvin interiors and in the Enterprise engine room.

(As an aside, I find myself agreeing with you more and more lately. :p)

I don't recall hearing a speed faster than warp four. Indeed, Spock ordered a speed of warp three to rendezvous with the fleet in the Laurentian System. To wit, it should likely go faster but we do not know, and we do not know for absolute certain that they were even using the TOS scale...

There were several of the always-generic "Maximum Warp"s thrown about when the ship was meant to go fast, however.

Indeed... plenty of wiggle-room there.

I think the problem is that they DID know, but everyone had a different intent from one another. The exterior looks workable at a scale close to the TOS/TMP ship, considering the windows and the hatches, but then there's the construction scenes and the shuttlebay and that darned shipboard brewery.

So, somebody did think it out and make instructions, but the problem is that everyone wanted to think it out and do it their own way. And now we have a gigantic ship with docking bay-sized windows. Or Starfleet reverse-engineered a TARDIS.

Ditto, again. :)
 
..then there's the construction scenes and the shuttlebay and that darned shipboard brewery.

I wouldn't sweat the trailer, because it need not be part of the Star Trek universe as such. And the construction work going on in the movie itself is far less conclusive in terms of scale.

As for the brewery, surely it would fit inside the TOS ship's engineering hull just fine? That's an entire hull dedicated to engineering, after all. The only problems would come from also having a gigantic shuttlebay that takes up half the hull - but OTOH the brewery set/location was never made to look bigger in the movie than the shuttlebay.

Timo Saloniemi
 
Even if the Galactica is misscaled, it does not necessarily follow that the Enterprise value of 725.35 meters is incorrect.
Perhaps the offical dimensions are not public for some reason?
 
I think the problem is that they DID know, but everyone had a different intent from one another. The exterior looks workable at a scale close to the TOS/TMP ship, considering the windows and the hatches, but then there's the construction scenes and the shuttlebay and that darned shipboard brewery.

Think about this for a minute. The TMP Enterprise had that enormous cargo bay that was large enough for shuttlecraft to fly around inside of it dragging big trains of containers behind them; based on the cutaway designs, this takes up about half the engineering hull with some room above and below it for engineering decks and parts. Forward of this, there's the engineering gear with five or six decks of vertical intermix and a whole bunch of other crap, like a small office building packed in behind the navigational deflector.

Now in the NuEnterprise, we don't see anything that could give an indication of scale between the interior and exterior, but if you assume that someone scraped out the TMP hull completely, ALL of that engineering gear from ST-XI could easily fit inside that cargo bay and the gutted space of the engineering compartment, especially if you assume that--for some reason we're not privy to--Starfleet intended the shuttlebay, cargo bay and engineering compartment to be really just the same space with little division between them, and there might even be some functional overlap between them.

Think of it as a kind of industrial optimization. Why have engineering parts stored in the cargo bay when you could have open space in the actual engine room to store pallets of spare parts and engineering cargo? take an example from the TOS engineering set: take down the chainlink fence that separates the engine bay and then add a catwalk down the middle, and what do you have? It would probably look pretty big if you didn't know exactly where you were, and we (the audience) do not. In that sense it bears a pretty strong resemblance to, say, the engine rooms of modern ships, which have the same cluttered industrial look and look pretty freaking huge to landlubbers who don't know their way around.


Furthermore, there's a certain logic to this that I particularly enjoy. There's clearly some modularity going on here: the Saucer section contains ALL of the habitable volume of the ship, or at least, any place where the crew would WANT to be when they didn't have work to do. The engineering compartment, it's just a big factory/warehouse/hangar bay so utilitarian it doesn't waste precious room on things like walls, blinking LEDs, chairs, hell even the turboshafts are just big columns standing in the middle of the deck with doors on the bottom (not unlike the shafts in the TMP cargo bay). My only complaint is the obvious hazard of what happens if someone should breach the hull of the engineering compartment, but clearly there's a certain amount of failsafe hardware built in for that kind of emergency.

So, somebody did think it out and make instructions, but the problem is that everyone wanted to think it out and do it their own way. And now we have a gigantic ship with docking bay-sized windows. Or Starfleet reverse-engineered a TARDIS.

Well, the new Enterprise seems to be quite a bit larger than the original, based on the size and location of the "viewer window" on the bridge. Incase you missed it, the window on the exterior model is in almost exactly the same place as the "sensors" in the TMP Enterprise, and the same size to boot; since this is essentially a floor-to-cieling window on the bridge set, this gives you a sense of what the deck height actually is, as does the fact that the Enterprise' bridge is apparently accessible by corridor as well as by turbolift.
 
Have trailers and ads for Trek movies every been considered canonical in themselves?

I don't think so, but some might include bits that don't make it into the final movie, and the status of deleted scenes within the canon is subject to debate.
 
Best images to get a sense of scale are here.

Interestingly, the saucer windows appear to be floor-to-ceiling affairs not unlike the bridge window, so the ship probably has a couple of ten-forward-like sets on board. At this scale the ship seems to be roughly the size of the Ambassador class, which is interesting considering how much it reminds me of the original Ambassador concept by Andy Probert. This isn't a ship designed for a five year mission (that would be the Kelvin), it's more along-range explorer, a 23rd century equivalent of the Galaxy class.
 
Hmm... But aren't the saucer rims of the STXI ship and the ST:TMP ship identical? That is, don't they feature the exact same patterns of two rows of windows and five art deco lines? Moreover, doesn't the neck-area wallpaper show the exact same dimensions for the docking ports?

Based on those, we're really seeing a ship identical to the TMP one in size, save for a saucer of somewhat greater diameter. Or then the STXI ship is larger than the TMP one but somehow manages to look identically sized anyway - which is much more difficult to swallow IMHO.

The one thing that seems incompatible with the hypothesis of a TMP-sized STXI ship is the shuttle hangar. The other sets would appear to fit inside a TMP-sized ship just fine. (Especially the bridge set - and in fact the idea of having the bridge down by one deck from the expected, as in STXI, would also nicely serve TMP, resulting in a more logical ship in that movie.)

Timo Saloniemi
 
Maybe Deck A would have occupied Decks 1 and 2 on the TOS Enterprise?
Are deleted scenes placed on the VHS/DVD/Blu-ray edition canonical?
 
Hmm... But aren't the saucer rims of the STXI ship and the ST:TMP ship identical?
Cosmetically, yes. The window shape, however, is slightly different, as is the placement thereof. More importantly, the windows on the rim seem to b the same size as the bridge window, which we now to be quite large. Which means each deco line probably encompasses one entire deck.

Moreover, doesn't the neck-area wallpaper show the exact same dimensions for the docking ports?
Assuming those ARE docking ports; Kirk's escape pod launched from one of those ports. On the other hand, even if they are, with all the changes in the ship design there's no clear indication that the docking ports would still be man-sized; they might, instead, be intended for moving cargo in and out of the ship as well as crew.

The one thing that seems incompatible with the hypothesis of a TMP-sized STXI ship is the shuttle hangar.
That and the bridge window, which first of all is only in the front of the room where two additional windows to the sides are indicated on the model but absent from the set. THe size of the bridge set and the windows also suggests the bridge does NOT dominate the entire deck, which requires a ship at least Ambassador sized. This is almost certainly intentional.
 
Hmm... But aren't the saucer rims of the STXI ship and the ST:TMP ship identical? That is, don't they feature the exact same patterns of two rows of windows and five art deco lines? Moreover, doesn't the neck-area wallpaper show the exact same dimensions for the docking ports?
Not really, no... not "identical." More appropriately, there's some "mimicry" going on there.

The window patterns are replicated between the TMP and '09 ships. But the overall size of the windows (and the shape of each individual window) are significantly different. Furthermore, the distance between the top and bottom rows of windows, and the distance between these individual rows and the top or bottom surface of the saucer are dramatically different. Re: the size of the windows... we see in through windows multiple times in the flick, and looking at the model as a whole, the window sizes seem to be quite consistent. TMP windows would have been maybe 2' in diameter (other folks can certainly give a more accurate number, but I'm pretty sure that's close!) while the '09 windows are four or five feet tall, probably closer to 5'.

The best fit, based upon what we see, is that the saucer edge is five decks thick, with the first, third, and fifth decks in the saucer not having windows, and the second and fourth having them. Proportionally, the upper and lower "bumps" extending beyond the disk itself seem to be roughly the same depth as the disk itself... which makes the saucer between 15 and 17 decks thick, though significantly thinner "in-scale" than the TMP ship would be. The overall proportional volume of the saucer is greater for the '09 ship, because of the thicker disk, even with it being proportionally shorter, though.

As for the "docking port" on the neck... this was where they ejected the (pretty sizeable) "escape pod" nuSpock tried to kill nuKirk with. (Sorry, marooning a crewmember on a hostile planet is, as played up in the "Naboo underwater wildlife" sequence in THIS movie, obviously a pretty dangerous business.) Think you could have tossed that escape pod out of the hatch Kirk entered the Enterprise through in TMP or TWOK? Seems pretty unlikely to me.
Based on those, we're really seeing a ship identical to the TMP one in size, save for a saucer of somewhat greater diameter. Or then the STXI ship is larger than the TMP one but somehow manages to look identically sized anyway - which is much more difficult to swallow IMHO.
Well, that's because you're like most of us... you associate certain features on the TMP-era ship with what they were intended to be. But... and the bridge is just the most glaringly obvious example of this... that's not the way the folks doing this movie were thinking. They replicated SHAPES (generally), but not necessary functionality or purpose, and certainly not scale.
 
Because windows are in the same place doesn't mean they're the same size.

The long windows on the rim of the saucer are each broken up into four horizontal panes - this is visible in a couple of close-ups.
 
More thoughts...
Howe much mass does the Narada have? It looks big, but how much is inhabitable and equipment/hull by percentage?
 
Well, a lot of it seemed empty, probably for storing minerals. Surely those grabby-tentacle things are for locking on to giant chunks of planet/asteroid? I like to think of it as the Romulan Red Dwarf. :D
 
Well, a lot of it seemed empty, probably for storing minerals. Surely those grabby-tentacle things are for locking on to giant chunks of planet/asteroid? I like to think of it as the Romulan Red Dwarf. :D
Which of course draws the very important and meaningful question...

Which Romulan was the Cat?

Actually, we know what the intent of the Narada was, based upon the fact that the filmwriters produced the story for the prequel comic, which showed Narada looking much more "normal" initially. The Narada was upgraded with captured Borg technology... it essentially "grew" into the form you see in the film, in an almost organic way. The Narada, as-built, was much smaller and much less powerful.

There's probably some small element of the original Romulan Narada inside that big chunk... and that's most likely where most of the action takes place. The "tentacle-y" bits are Romu-Borg, however.
 
Actually, we know what the intent of the Narada was, based upon the fact that the filmwriters produced the story for the prequel comic, which showed Narada looking much more "normal" initially. The Narada was upgraded with captured Borg technology... it essentially "grew" into the form you see in the film, in an almost organic way. The Narada, as-built, was much smaller and much less powerful.

There's probably some small element of the original Romulan Narada inside that big chunk... and that's most likely where most of the action takes place. The "tentacle-y" bits are Romu-Borg, however.
Orci and Kurtzman have said that the comics aren't canon, so the whole Borg/Romulan fusion tech refit thing goes out the window. The Romulan Red Dwarf concept works a lot better in that context.
 
John Eaves might know as well johneaves.wordpress.com

EDIT - I just checked there myself and he didn't know the exact numbers but agreed on the 2500 to 3000 ft length as a ballpark. Maybe this should get posted elsewhere or throughout trekbbs as a semi-factoid?
If someone did a model of the ship without even a general idea of what goes inside it... without incorporating clear indications of scale... I'd be deeply shocked.

I'd like to introduce you to the Klingon Bird of Prey, the U.S.S. Defiant, Matt Jefferies' original U.S.S. Enterprise (chop the bridge in half and it works just as well at double the length!) and pretty much every spaceship that ever appeared on Babylon 5.

Funny, the Akira-class has the same size issue as well it would seem: http://www.ex-astris-scientia.org/articles/akira-size.htm
 
FWIW, I thought that I read that Orci first called it canon, and retracted it later.
From an interview in CGSociety, it claims that the new Enterprise is 2357 feet and the Narada is 5 miles long.
 
FWIW, I thought that I read that Orci first called it canon, and retracted it later.
I suspect that came about after Abrams took them to the woodshed for doing ANYTHING that he didn't have 100% control over.

The writers did this story to "flesh out" things that simply weren't part of the story told in the movie, but were part of the backstory they'd developed. And yes, they did call it canon at first. It was only very recently that (somewhat sheepishly) they changed their tune. Obviously, this wasn't their choice.

Whether it was Abrams or someone in PPC's legal offices, SOMEBODY spanked them over this. And since PPC has a positive financial interest in the comic being canon (small, but real... and not JUST by virtue of the comic sales... remember, it ties everything into TNG which is another property which Paramount... one division or the other... still makes lots of money from) without any evident downside.

The only possibilities I can see... inter-divisional squabbling between CBS and PPC ("You used OUR CHARACTERS, DAMN YOU!!!!!") or between Orci and Abrams ("You told a story that I didn't have full approval and veto power over, DAMN YOU!!!!"). Both would be remarkably petty and not very constructive.
 
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top