New Enterprise May Have Nacelles That...

[Amaris]

New Enterprise May Have Nacelles That...

Can be used as a flotation device in the event of a water landing.


J.

 

[Professor Moriarty]

^^^

 

[The Old Mixer]

Samuel T. Cogley said:
And these giant, jacked-up razor blades come out the sides of the saucer section, and the whole thing spins like a giant buzzsaw. These were the only weapons they had before the photon torpedo and phaser were invented. The Enterprise basically flies right up next to a Romulan ship and cuts the fuckin' thing in half. Solid.

So you were a design consultant on Nemesis?

Johnnyracefan said:
Reimagined Starship Enterprise

Fugly.

 

[Gepard]

Samuel T. Cogley said:
And these giant, jacked-up razor blades come out the sides of the saucer section, and the whole thing spins like a giant buzzsaw. These were the only weapons they had before the photon torpedo and phaser were invented. The Enterprise basically flies right up next to a Romulan ship and cuts the fuckin' thing in half. Solid.

How in the world did you find out? You weren't authorized to reveal this!

leadprophet said:
New Enterprise May Have Nacelles That Suffer From Priapism.

"Call your doctor if your ship experiences Balokism, an erection lasting longer than One Minute!"

 

[shipfisher]

Whatever its nacelles wind up doing in ST:XI, would the premise here be that NCC-1701 has been refit before we see it in "The Cage"? I've read conflicting reports about how true to existing canon the new treatment will remain, ranging from very close to BSG-style full reboot.

Seeing the design of the new bridge apparently gave Zach Quinto "chills". I can't say a faithfull rendition of the TOS set, or anything representing an immediate precursor to it, would likely do that.

 

[Chaos Descending]

shipfisher said:
Seeing the design of the new bridge apparently gave Zach Quinto "chills". I can't say a faithfull rendition of the TOS set, or anything representing an immediate precursor to it, would likely do that.

Errr... yeah they could. It's called nostalgia.

 

[Dale]

Chaos Descending said:

shipfisher said:
Seeing the design of the new bridge apparently gave Zach Quinto "chills". I can't say a faithfull rendition of the TOS set, or anything representing an immediate precursor to it, would likely do that.

Errr... yeah they could. It's called nostalgia.

Agreed. Stepping onto the bridge of the "D" at ST: The Experience in Las Vegas when it first opened made me giddy. It was this magical, mythical place I'd been watching for years and then there I was, standing there. It was surreal.

I'm sure stepping onto the TOS bridge would blow me away. I can't imagine that some unfamiliar bridge set would give someone chills, but to step into that familiar environment you've been seeing on TV all of your life, that would give a guy chills. I think Quinto's statement is good evidence that if the new bridge is not an exact recreation of the TOS set, it's damned faithful to it.

 

[Amaris]

Dale Hoppert said:

Chaos Descending said:

shipfisher said:
Seeing the design of the new bridge apparently gave Zach Quinto "chills". I can't say a faithfull rendition of the TOS set, or anything representing an immediate precursor to it, would likely do that.

Errr... yeah they could. It's called nostalgia.

Agreed. Stepping onto the bridge of the "D" at ST: The Experience in Las Vegas when it first opened made me giddy. It was this magical, mythical place I'd been watching for years and then there I was, standing there. It was surreal.

I'm sure stepping onto the TOS bridge would blow me away. I can't imagine that some unfamiliar bridge set would give someone chills, but to step into that familiar environment you've been seeing on TV all of your life, that would give a guy chills. I think Quinto's statement is good evidence that if the new bridge is not an exact recreation of the TOS set, it's damned faithful to it.

Agreed! Oh, all this does is make me want to go see "The Experience" very badly.


J.

 

[Nerys Myk]

J. Allen said:

Dale Hoppert said:

Chaos Descending said:

shipfisher said:
Seeing the design of the new bridge apparently gave Zach Quinto "chills". I can't say a faithfull rendition of the TOS set, or anything representing an immediate precursor to it, would likely do that.

Errr... yeah they could. It's called nostalgia.

Agreed. Stepping onto the bridge of the "D" at ST: The Experience in Las Vegas when it first opened made me giddy. It was this magical, mythical place I'd been watching for years and then there I was, standing there. It was surreal.

I'm sure stepping onto the TOS bridge would blow me away. I can't imagine that some unfamiliar bridge set would give someone chills, but to step into that familiar environment you've been seeing on TV all of your life, that would give a guy chills. I think Quinto's statement is good evidence that if the new bridge is not an exact recreation of the TOS set, it's damned faithful to it.

Agreed! Oh, all this does is make me want to go see "The Experience" very badly.


J.

Have you ever been experienced?

 

[Cary L. Brown]

shipfisher said:
Whatever its nacelles wind up doing in ST:XI, would the premise here be that NCC-1701 has been refit before we see it in "The Cage"? I've read conflicting reports about how true to existing canon the new treatment will remain, ranging from very close to BSG-style full reboot.

Seeing the design of the new bridge apparently gave Zach Quinto "chills". I can't say a faithfull rendition of the TOS set, or anything representing an immediate precursor to it, would likely do that.

Actually, I can't imagine anything other than a conceptually-faithful rendition that would have any such effect.

This is a guy who's done movies before. And he's seeing it for what it is, too.

Quinto is very familiar with Trek, and moreso now than he was before (having been on a crash-course in Nimoy-ism recently). So if he stepped onto, say, the bridge of the Nostromo, or the C&C deck from Babylon 5... would he "get chills?" Not a chance.

This comment is SLIGHTLY vague but is pretty clear, too... he feels like he's "really there" now. This wasn't some "new bridge." It was THE BRIDGE. The one he knew already, but only as an iconic set of images... and suddenly he's there.

I'd get chills, too. Wouldn't you?

 

[Amaris]

Cary L. Brown said:

shipfisher said:
Whatever its nacelles wind up doing in ST:XI, would the premise here be that NCC-1701 has been refit before we see it in "The Cage"? I've read conflicting reports about how true to existing canon the new treatment will remain, ranging from very close to BSG-style full reboot.

Seeing the design of the new bridge apparently gave Zach Quinto "chills". I can't say a faithfull rendition of the TOS set, or anything representing an immediate precursor to it, would likely do that.

Actually, I can't imagine anything other than a conceptually-faithful rendition that would have any such effect.

This is a guy who's done movies before. And he's seeing it for what it is, too.

Quinto is very familiar with Trek, and moreso now than he was before (having been on a crash-course in Nimoy-ism recently). So if he stepped onto, say, the bridge of the Nostromo, or the C&C deck from Babylon 5... would he "get chills?" Not a chance.

This comment is SLIGHTLY vague but is pretty clear, too... he feels like he's "really there" now. This wasn't some "new bridge." It was THE BRIDGE. The one he knew already, but only as an iconic set of images... and suddenly he's there.

I'd get chills, too. Wouldn't you?

I know I would! And I see it as a serious vote of confidence in how this movie is going to be made.

J.

 

[shipfisher]

Point taken on the whole iconic nostalgia slant on Quinto's "chills". I suppose I was thinking more along the line of "warm fuzzies" being a probable response to a TOS bridge set, but I see the consensus here is otherwise, so fair enough.

I suppose a TOS faithful bridge, and thus a more canon faithful ST:XI, would infer a refit before "The Cage" to delete any prototype whirly-gig nacelles and such we might see to make the ship appear more dynamic for a modern (and hopefully much larger than traditional fan-base) audience.

 

[Therin of Andor]

Hey, I got chills seeing the really shabby Star Trek bridge set replica (and wax figures) at the now-defunct Movieland Wax Museum in 1984!

 

[Plum]

^^^

 

[cultcross]

shipfisher said:
I suppose a TOS faithful bridge, and thus a more canon faithful ST:XI, would infer a refit before "The Cage" to delete any prototype whirly-gig nacelles and such we might see to make the ship appear more dynamic for a modern (and hopefully much larger than traditional fan-base) audience.

Reasonably faithful it may be, but it will still be updated for a 21st century film. That much is pretty much a given. Unless they're intending to really play the nostalgia card.

 

[The Old Mixer]

All of this talk of being awed by walking onto the Enterprise bridge set reminds me of part of Wil Wheaton's review of 'Encounter at Farpoint':

Back on the Enterprise, we find Picard harrumphing on the bridge. He's well and truly pissed off when the turbolift doors open, revealing Wesley Crusher, who thinks it's just about the coolest thing in the world to be standing right there, inside the tubolift, looking out at the bridge. I know this, because I thought it was just about the coolest thing in the world to get into that turbolift, have the doors automatically close in front of me, and pretend, just for a moment, that it was real. When those doors opened and Wesley looks out at the bridge like he's Lindsay Lohan with a bag full of blow at an all you can binge and purge buffet, it wasn't acting. I really thought it was that cool. In all the years that I worked on Star Trek, even when I was a stupid teenager who wanted to be at the beach with my friends, instead of wearing a spacesuit and spouting technobabble, I always had an undeniable affection for the bridge.

When I walked down the bridge set, taking it all in for the first time, looking around like it's the coolest thing in the world, it required a little bit of acting on my part. Even though I loved that set, when we filmed that walk, everything that I would have been looking at was pulled out to make way for lights, crew, equipment, and the camera dolly. I wasn't helped by a very well-meaning director who, in an effort to extract maximim wonder from me kept hollering, "Picard controls the sky, man! HE! CONTROLS! THE! SKY!"

Yeah, I know he does, dude, but what I'm seeing right now is a grip scratching his ass, and I have to be honest with you: it's not all that impressive, and you're kind of distracting me.

 

[STARTREK11]

edit

 

[STARTREK11]

said:


I SAID:-

You comments about aircraft having folded wings makes no sense as all they had to do is do is park every ALTERNATE aircraft on a ramp such that the wings stack/slide over each
each adjacent plane's wings.Using this method you would get higher aircraft density,then with folding wings.
This must be military intelligence in action having planes with folding wings.Totally unnecessary.

CULTCROSS SAID:-

"The folding wings are a much more sensible solution than stacking them on a ramp over each other ( ) and I think you know that. It would only take the ship to move slightly on choppy seas and planes stacked wing over wing would be causing damage to each other. Plus the folding wings make manoeuvring on hanger deck lifts easier. They wouldn't have come up with the idea if fixed wing planes could do the same thing - they already had fixed wing planes".

...SAYS CULTCROSS ABOVE.


To which I Reply.








But in your previous post you said folding wings add weight and complexity,now you say it's better to have them.

The choppy seas argument is absurd as all the planes would be effected equally,just because they are a few feet of the deck on a ramp would not effect them any more.In any case they usually anchor them if that was the case.A carrier by necessity has to be a stable platform.

And the planes would not damage each other by scraping as adequate ramp height clearance would ensure that.



I expect confirmation any moment from my source about the plot point mentioned above.

Stay tuned.

 

[Franklin]

This is gotta be one of the weirdest threads in a while.

For what it's worth, whatever they do (did) to the Enterprise, I hope they at least didn't take a graceful thoroughbred and make it look like a bulky quarterhorse, or worse, a Clydesdale.

I beginning to hope the nacelles spin just to spite us all. And that when they do, they make a "whirrrrrrrrr-whirrrrrrr" sound like a rotor (yes, in space).

Edited to add:
This thread really needs the late Graham Chapman to step in and say, "All right! This is getting too silly!"

 

[STARTREK11]

They don't spin like propellers.They rotate to change the angle of thrust and change the direction of the ship rapidly and braking.