They build their own boxes and can never get out.
No, you're not the only one who is scared by this trailer!
- Thread starter StoonGuy
- Start date
They build their own boxes and can never get out.
I do the exact same thing - the only difference is I don't go into conniptions when my ideas are not adopted by TPTB. I can keep my own ideas and enjoy what's on screen at the same time, though they be in direct contradiction to each other.
Imagine that...
With shields. You could alter the shape of the shields to make a starship, regardless of its physical shape, as aerodynamic as it needs to be.
You probably wouldn't want to FIGHT that way, but it would work for lift off.
Also, we know the TOS Enterprise was airworthy, because in one of the time travel episodes a jet aircraft got within visual distance.
Well, since they have mastered artificial gravity (see any episode where crew members are not floating around the Enterprise), they don't exactly need rockets to get it in orbit.
Simply too stupid to be Star Trek?
So what are you saying, that it would be okay if they beamed the ship into orbit?
I wish you would have broken up your rant into 5 or 6 different rants. I need to get my postings up to 50 so I can put up my avatar.
One great point you make is the shot of the ship being built on the Earth.
You bring up the point of how will they get it up into space. I say how will they keep the nacelles and main saucer in place. From an engineering standpoint the supports that would hold them in place once the support structure is taken away is much too small to support the weight. I hope it is explained away as a dream sequence, or a giant screen TV showing what is happening in space.
But I will forgive much since they brought back the short skirts.
The casting looks great. I think I will enjoy Quinto as Spock and John Cho as Sulu. And from the quick shot I saw of Zoe Saldana in her bra, I think I will love Uhura.
For once it looks as if I will be giving them full ticket price at a midnight showing, instead of the second day matinee.
One great point you make is the shot of the ship being built on the Earth.
You bring up the point of how will they get it up into space. I say how will they keep the nacelles and main saucer in place. From an engineering standpoint the supports that would hold them in place once the support structure is taken away is much too small to support the weight. I hope it is explained away as a dream sequence, or a giant screen TV showing what is happening in space.
But I will forgive much since they brought back the short skirts.
The casting looks great. I think I will enjoy Quinto as Spock and John Cho as Sulu. And from the quick shot I saw of Zoe Saldana in her bra, I think I will love Uhura.
For once it looks as if I will be giving them full ticket price at a midnight showing, instead of the second day matinee.
Just because they have artificial gravity, doesn't mean they have mastered artificial anti-gravity.
Yes it does--just orient an artificial gravitational source so it pulls in the opposite direction of Earth's gravity, and boom: instant anti-grav.
I seem to recall Spock making a point of their being too low in the atmosphere to maintain that orbit and it being imperative that they get a helluva lot higher.
Considering the Air Force sent an F-104, a high altitude interceptor, up to check out the big UFO, the Enterprise wasn't exactly doing a low level pass.
Considering the Air Force sent an F-104, a high altitude interceptor, up to check out the big UFO, the Enterprise wasn't exactly doing a low level pass.
don't know about you but trek to me is a combo of something new and something old. i, personally, am looking forward to this. i'm not condemning the makers for trying to make this up to date and diff than other treks. in fact i applaud their wanting to change stagnation. if trek for you is nothing more than a set of commandments that one must follow or they're not really trek and are going to hell, then this is not the movie for you. then again one can argue that trek isn't for you since it's supposed to be about imagination and thinking outside the box. the box here being the trek box. if you don't want to give anything a chance that's outside of your trek box, then i guess that's your taste. you can't say though trek is just about rules and following those sets of rules.
anyway, it's just a movie, not a religion (to most of us anyway), so i'll give it a chance and have fun with it. if it's not good to me, ah well.
anyway, it's just a movie, not a religion (to most of us anyway), so i'll give it a chance and have fun with it. if it's not good to me, ah well.
I haven't read this whole thread, as I don't need a migraine, but in regards to a starship surviving in earth's atmosphere, I cite this:
"Tomorrow is Yesterday", TOS
J.
You do realize that this wasn't exactly a planned maneuver within the standard operating parameters, right?
But it wasn't exactly destroyed either, was it?
Recall Voyager? How many times did it make planetfall?
RAMA
Please do us all a favor.
If you think a post is too long to read, please don't fucking reply to it. Don't waste everyone's time with a pointless post that only demonstrates how you have so much free time on your hands that you apparently respond to threads you can't be bothered actually reading. It really only makes you look like a moron.
Sincerely,
The Internet
A
Amaris
Guest
With all due respect, it's probably not wise for someone who is still the rank of an ensign to start throwing insults around. It's best to ignore them. Flaming will get you a warning here, and too much too soon could get you kicked off, and I'd rather not see new members get kicked off if they're here as legitimate contributors. Just some friendly advice.
J.
Hmmm, just how exactly would a starship make it in to orbit? Maybe with those two kick ass engines sticking out the back. Do they not manipulate space-time?
I've been lurking here for the best part of a decade and the built on earth issue is possibly the silliest misconception I've come across. (not counting bumpy klingons ofcourse)
The space-only Enterprise is an artificial limitation to make the ship and show feel somehow more realistic but it doesn't work. Using our modern techniques and technologies, we would have to build something like that in orbit, but if we'd already broken the light-barrier, invented matter transportation, manipulated gravitional fields, anti-matter conversion and storage, energy weapons and shields, universal transators, eradicated poverty and established a thriving interstellar community that spans 150 odd worlds; getting a starship of the ground seems so unbelievably trivial its barely worth debating.
Why hold on to such a foolish idea that was never even confirmed on screen?
I've been lurking here for the best part of a decade and the built on earth issue is possibly the silliest misconception I've come across. (not counting bumpy klingons ofcourse)
The space-only Enterprise is an artificial limitation to make the ship and show feel somehow more realistic but it doesn't work. Using our modern techniques and technologies, we would have to build something like that in orbit, but if we'd already broken the light-barrier, invented matter transportation, manipulated gravitional fields, anti-matter conversion and storage, energy weapons and shields, universal transators, eradicated poverty and established a thriving interstellar community that spans 150 odd worlds; getting a starship of the ground seems so unbelievably trivial its barely worth debating.
Why hold on to such a foolish idea that was never even confirmed on screen?
You've totally missed the point - warping the very fabric of the universe so that an object can travel thousands of times pass the speed of light is far easier than lifting a solid object ten miles into space.
I suspect they have a device which wraps the whole thing in a anti-gravity field which completely cancels it's weight relative to gravity's pull. With the field in place a human could probably bench press the whole damn thing. Simply then throw a tractor beam on it and tow it to orbit.
Fearing the unknown is natural.
Fearing the unknown is natural.
If I meet too many people like Data Holmes here, I'm afraid I won't have the desire or patience to rise above my 'rank', as you put it.
It really irks me when someone puts so much time and thought into a post and the first response is 'yawn, too long, you're boring'.
That's a nicely plausible solution, because you're left with the simpler task of getting the mass moving. The thrusters and impulse engines should be able to accomplish that easily.
Failing that, a few hundred European or African swallows could probably get the job done. [/montypython]
I haven't read this whole thread, as I don't need a migraine, but in regards to a starship surviving in earth's atmosphere, I cite this:
"Tomorrow is Yesterday", TOS
J.
You do realize that this wasn't exactly a planned maneuver within the standard operating parameters, right?
But it wasn't exactly destroyed either, was it?
More than that, there is no suggestion in the episode that flying in the atmosphere is stressing the ship in any way.
Their effort to gain altitude quickly is not in order to protect the Enterprise from damage but to outrun a jet fighter and hide from ground-based radar.
