I was able to confirm that the CGI artist did scale Defiant to 170 meters during it's Death Scenes Spoiler: Really Big Intrepid was scaled to its known 344 meters and the life pod was fit just inside the hatch as shown in one episode. So since we know these are the same escape pods in Defiant I scaled Defiant according to the escape pod scenes and amazingly it came out to almost precisely 170 meters the first time. While the 120 meter Defiant can't fit this the two pods forward and the two pods aft. Soo despite ex atris analysis of the most common size there does seem to be a litteral opperation limit to how small Defiant should be.
Well, the hatch doors for the Voyager escape pods seem to be 4.26 m wide on the CGI, and in the nice images at drex files each door seems to be a little more than a foot wider on each side than the opening for the pod. If an escape pod is 3.5 meters wide, as stated and which works perfectly with a 120-meter Defiant, then a door on Voyager would calculate out to 14.76 inches wider on each side than the pod itself, which includes jam space (clearly visible in the drex files scenes of doors open and pods being launched) plus and small gap between the opening and the pod. On the Voyager CGI (dorsal view) with overall length at 1130 pixels and most easily measured hatch door at 14 pixels, and with stated ship length of 344 meters: (344 meters/1130 pixels) x 14 pixels = 4.26 meters door width (344 meters/1130 pixels) x 1 pixel = .3 meter margin of error In this drex files pictorial, you can clearly see the approximately 30" difference between door width and opening: http://drexfiles.wordpress.com/2009/06/05/intrepid-class-escape-pod/ Intrepid CGI: http://drexfiles.wordpress.com/2011/02/06/uss-voyager-cgi-pictorial/
Personally, I wouldn't trust the CG model of Voyager for anything. The sizes of some of the escape pod hatches aren't even consistent (at least, the 4 on the side towards the bridge are hugely off). Not that I don't trust your reasoning, it's just that the CG model of Voyager isn't very reliable.
That's just to demonstrate that Voyager's escape pods don't have to be larger than the stated width of 3.5 meters. They might even be 3.5 for Voyager and 2.8 for a 120-meter Defiant and still look that same (as per Bernd's measurements and calculations, which I haven't tried to verify). Anyway, the designers effects people don't always get their stories straight. Otherwise this thread might not even exist. Show us your math. Bernd's calculations must have taken what I said about the doors into account, since he arrived at 3.5 meters (or he just took somebody's word for it).
That's one of the reasons why I didn't use the CGI Voyager. The only probable I have with the 2.8 pod is that it requires us to believe that schematically the pods are litterally (not just virtually) identical. How ever that a becomes a completely different design. There would be at least some external scale issues, the phaser strip shouldn't be the exact same size, the entry hatch should, and things like that but from what I'm seeing these are identical. The drawing shows for Defiant that those pods would have to be 10% (?) smaller but that doesn't seem to go with the tight fit they have on Voyager or Defiant.
This Beith the New Cannon! Sayith Lord Garth. Subject is closed (and good lord in the E-D fugly) kindly stow her overly neon and portholed hull away from mine eyes in the New E's hangarbay
The Excelsior looks like some kind of fixture holding the Kelvin and the JJPrise together. It's a very visually deceptive image.
You'd think that after years and years online you'd get used to things. Sorry, I know I'm sounding very nasty towards people who really are interested in this. For me personally the size of a starship has nothing to do with the story being told. But there are people out there who enjoy picking things apart like that, so I should respect that. Again, my apoligies if I offended anyone with my earlier comment.
I don't think anyone cares about it for the sake of the story. Whether the Defiant is 120m or 170m long, doesn't affect how the episode plays out. I think the appeal of these treknobabble discussions is to come up with some plausible continuity and reality that adds an extra layer of realism to the Trek universe beyond what we see in the episodes and movies. When I see these ship schematics and tech diagrams and ship sizes, it makes it all feel real like it exists in a real fleshed out universe, instead of just some funky looking futuristic ships that some guys fly around in sometimes. Does it really matter? Not really. But does it enhance the experience for the hardcore Trek fan? For some people, definitely.
You are, ofcourse, completely right. The fact that these ships are very well thought out is a big appeal, to me as well. I'd be lying if I said I never wished I could stand on the bridge of the Enterprise. And even though I don't understand the entire discussion about how long the Defiant is, I can understand how some people get a real kick out of analyzing screencaps and data from manuals. And even though I wouldn't do something like that myself, I respect how other people get there enjoyment out of it.
It all comes down to what aspect of the show appeals to certain people. Me, I love scifi for the tech, so the ships alone are a big part of the appeal to me. For other people, they couldn't care less if they were flying around in a shoebox, and are more drawn solely to the characters and stories being told. Just like the really nerdy scifi tech storylines appeal to me, while others may prefer the character driven episodes. Just personal preference of what appeals to different people.