• 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!

My god, the new Enterprise must be HUGE

OMG !

We have FAR too much time on our hands.....

Keep figureing this stuff out folk, 11 months is a LONG time waiting for news ;)

- W -
* Smirks *
 
Vektor said:
In the top-down view at the saucer’s edge, you see a man step across a hull seam that looks to be about a foot wide. If you apply that dimension to the hull seam visible in the bow shot, the saucer works out to be about 70’ thick.

On the other hand, there is also a work light clearly visible in the top-down view. Again judging by the human figures in that shot, I would put the width of the light at about 18”. Going back to the bow shot and using the work lights as a baseline, the thickness of the saucer works out to be closer to 50’.

And one more method for determining the scale: Near the end of the bow shot, there is a man clearly visible atop the bridge module near the left edge. He is bent over at first, then straightens up, turns and walks to the right. He is standing beneath a work light that looks to be identical to all the others. If we assume that man is 6’ tall, that makes the work light 8.2’ tall, which just happens to be exactly 2.5m. That sounds like the kind of nice, round number a 3D modeler would use when constructing a work light prop. If we then assume that the work lights near the leading edge of the saucer are also 8.2’ or 2.5m tall, that puts the thickness of the saucer back to about 70’ or 21.3m.

Looking at my own 3D model of the TOS Enterprise, which is based off the Sinclair plans, I find that the original saucer was about 5.6m thick. This would make the new ship about 3.8 times the size of the old one, assuming the proportion of the saucer’s thickness to the rest of the ship is unchanged, which it may well not be. That makes the new ship’s overall length something in the neighborhood of 3,500 feet.

Even if we take the minimum saucer thickness of 50’, the new ship would still be 2.7 times bigger than the old one, or about 2,500 feet long.

Of course, it’s entirely possible that the ship’s scale was exaggerated for the purposes of the teaser, so I don’t know how much we can take any of these numbers for gospel, but it certainly does appear that we’re dealing with a much bigger ship here.
Click to expand...

Thanks for the assist, Vektor...nice to see my admittedly "back of envelope" quickie calcs wound up within .3m or your scaling...:)

For you (or anyone else interested), here's what I'm seeing on deck layout:

suggesteddecks-1.jpg
 
Franklin said:


I mean 3000' long? Over three times the length of the original? Come on. Defies common sense. Would we then expect that in Abrams's universe, Enterprise-D is 6000' long?
Click to expand...

Having a ship that big helps answer something that I always questioned about the "official scale" versions anyways: where the hell is all the "consumables" storage (among other things). Oxygen, food, and water for 400 for 5 years (even allowing for recycling where possible). RCS thruster fuel, shuttlecraft fuel, spare parts (pre replicator, remember). On top of that, the BIG one: deuterium/anti-deuterium for the warp core. That dinky ass cargo bay in TMP was laughably small to meet that kind of demand, even more so the way the storage was laid out.
 
Upping the scale will also remove the saucer undercut from being such a huge pain in the ass.
 
Franklin said:
As for the size of the ship, YES, the saucer IS thicker. The TOS saucer was about 20 to 22 feet thick at the rim. This is definitely thicker than that. By my estimate, probably twice as thick. But it's wrong to extrapolate a scale from that and say the rest of the ship must be much larger than TOS Entperprise.
Click to expand...

I openly stated that my measurements other than saucer thickness at rim were predicated on the ship maintaing her original proportions. You want to speculate about changing those, go ahead. That's another topic entirely.
 
I don’t think we can rely too much on the visible structures inside the hull to determine deck heights, number of decks and so forth. Although I’m sure the CG guys who modeled this are sticklers for detail, it’s unlikely that every strut, pipe and bulkhead visible through those gaps in the hull is “accurate” in terms of the ship’s internal structure.

I tried yet another method of determining how thick the saucer is, though I don’t have any way of posting the images I used right at this moment so I’ll just have to explain it. I took the top-down shot of the two workers on the edge of the saucer section and superimposed it on the so-called “money shot,” using the gap between the hull plates as the common element. With the overlay properly scaled and rotated to match, I estimated the width of the bent-over worker’s shoulders at 24” (my own shoulder width) and extrapolated that to a saucer thickness of 60’. Interestingly, that’s exactly half way between the two previous estimates I came up with.

Final answer. :)
 
darkwing_duck1 said:
Franklin said:


I mean 3000' long? Over three times the length of the original? Come on. Defies common sense. Would we then expect that in Abrams's universe, Enterprise-D is 6000' long?
Click to expand...

Having a ship that big helps answer something that I always questioned about the "official scale" versions anyways: where the hell is all the "consumables" storage (among other things). Oxygen, food, and water for 400 for 5 years (even allowing for recycling where possible). RCS thruster fuel, shuttlecraft fuel, spare parts (pre replicator, remember). On top of that, the BIG one: deuterium/anti-deuterium for the warp core. That dinky ass cargo bay in TMP was laughably small to meet that kind of demand, even more so the way the storage was laid out.
Click to expand...

Superdense matter. That explains the disparity between the stated 180,000 ton mass and Scotty's quote of the ship having nearly a million tons. A hell of a lot of raw matter in a very small space.
 
Shaw said:
Well, when I inset part of the teaser with people in it with the part you are looking at, and scaled them (based on shared physical properties of the ship)... I'm not getting the ship to be all that big.

http://www.shawcomputing.net/racerx/trek_stuff/xi_scale.jpg

Unless these guys have shoulders that are almost 2 meters across. :eek:
Click to expand...

Ok, I don't think your inset tells us much personally (diff shot, camera angle, etc) BUT the other part of the pic (slightly different than the one I was using) gives us a new tool when bright enhanced for detail. A fully standing man on the upper "piping" or "service deck". Using HIM as the 2m stick (and allowing for some distortion from camera angle, etc, I recalculated the saucer to ~16m high (a ~20% reduction).

xi_scale.jpg


Cut back my 20m based numbers by 20% (I don't have the orig calcs in front of me right now). You still, as Vektor pointed out, get a larger ship than her original stated dimensions. :)
 
Mutenroshi said:
xi_scale.jpg
Click to expand...


Possibly. I see at least one man, the possible silhouette, and something that looks like a walking man. No lifesupport though. That's doubtful.

xi_scale_2_revision.jpg


I can't decide if I'm looking at the right side of a man welding looking to the SE, or his rear end.
 
Vektor said:
I don’t think we can rely too much on the visible structures inside the hull to determine deck heights, number of decks and so forth. Although I’m sure the CG guys who modeled this are sticklers for detail, it’s unlikely that every strut, pipe and bulkhead visible through those gaps in the hull is “accurate” in terms of the ship’s internal structure.

I tried yet another method of determining how thick the saucer is, though I don’t have any way of posting the images I used right at this moment so I’ll just have to explain it. I took the top-down shot of the two workers on the edge of the saucer section and superimposed it on the so-called “money shot,” using the gap between the hull plates as the common element. With the overlay properly scaled and rotated to match, I estimated the width of the bent-over worker’s shoulders at 24” (my own shoulder width) and extrapolated that to a saucer thickness of 60’. Interestingly, that’s exactly half way between the two previous estimates I came up with.

Final answer. :)
Click to expand...

Again within a meter of my revised estimate (based on the new pic) of 16m...I must be doing something right...:)
 
darkwing_duck1 said:
Ok, I don't think your inset tells us much personally (diff shot, camera angle, etc)...
Click to expand...
Keep in mind that when doing image studies, the best way to reference measurements is from multiple angles. Further, in a situation like this, forensic evidence like average height (1.77 meters for males) and average stride length (.415 of a male's height) and the fact that we have two continuous steps following the guy stepping over the deflector seam (which would have made for an irregular step), and the seam width itself (clearly visible in both shots) pretty much covers all my bases.

At best you are guessing that that is a man and hoping that he is both standing up straight and is 6' 7" tall.

But if you think you have a better grasp on this than other people (even those of us with some experience in this area of work), that is fine with me. It just looks like you want to see what you want to see.

I didn't assume any preconceived sizes before starting, and just worked the facts as we have them. But if you can show the errors in my logic, please feel free to point them out and how to fix them.
 
When you go back to the high-def video and 'rock' this portion back and forth
(grab the position slider on the video player and go forward a couple of seconds
and then back a couple of seconds), it seems clear to me that there are 'open
spaces' through the hull that you can see the prospective change in.

What I see doing this is an open space at the top with some machinery.

Then a deck with a large dark rectangle in the center and gray machinery on the
left. The top third of this deck is partially obscured with a dark horizontal space
with vertical ribs that could be between the decks and might be a 'Jefferies
crawlspace' or might just be in front of the black rectangle and gray machinery.

Then there is an open space where the top part shows red-brown, then a black
horizontal area, and then the gray portion at the bottom. This is one deck
and the different horizontal areas are internal components of this one deck.

Below that is a space mostly obscured by smoke, but the top part is gray with
the three white lights and the bottom is black with some horizontal gray
objects. As with the dark horizontal space two decks above the gray part
with the lights might just be in front of the darker part behind it.

Below that is an open space with more gray machinery. This is where the
'guy' with the welding tool is working on the right.

And at the bottom is a thin space with more gray machinery.

The heights of the decks with the gray part with the white lights and the
one below it with the gray machinery where the welder is working correspond
to the heights of the hull plating that is missing although the bottom one
is a little shorter since the open space wraps around the bottom of the
saucer.

This puts the height of the saucer at rim four decks thick with some space
above and below for machinery.

And as the one additional part of my suggestion is about the red/brown
color of the back of the middle deck. I think this is about the same
color as a rich, highly polished wood. I think this is the lounge/bar...
(??? Ten Forward ???)

MAC
 
I'm guessing we will never know how big it is unless they tell us. I doubt there will be anything in the film of a known size to which compare the Enterprise.

I'm not convinced that the little workmen we see in the trailer are true to scale.
 
I just rocked the video a few more times and I need to revise what I wrote.

I'm sure that what we see through the open hull plates is only _TWO_ decks
with a crawl space above and one below.

Its very clear if you look at this scene when it first starts and the camera
is pointing up slightly (before the black objects block the view for a few
frames) that the whole space below the gray horizontal shape with the three
white lights is one large open space with gray machinery.

It also looks like the black rectangle above the red/brown area is in the same
opening as the red/brown area, although forward of the red/brown area. This
is enhanced by the way that the gray portions on either side of the black
rectangle extend down to the gray areas on either side of the red/brown area.

Now I'm thinking that the black horizontal shape with the ribbing and the gray
shape with the three white lights are the two bulkheads between the decks; a
utility crawlspace above, the lounge/bar (the red/brown 'wood'), and a machinery
deck below. The fact that the black horizontal shape with the ribbing and the
gray horizontal shape with the three white lights are the same thickness only
makes this more likely.

This means that the 11 deck thick saucer from the original series is exactly
what we have here...

MAC
 
I would think that the purpose of showing the Enterprise being built, and in this detail, is to give a perspective of not only the sheer size of it, but the complexity of it, that we've not really been aware of, or only peripherally. At least, I haven't. Probably only the real world engineers have a feel for what an enormous project this will really be should we launch a similarly capable vessel in the future. The most complex vessels built would be a space shuttle, or a nuclear powered sub. This will, probably, dwarf either.

I'm sure we'll be suitably awed! :thumbsup: :cool:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top