Size Of The New Enterprise (large images)

[EJD1984]

... The detailing was scaled to the hull of the ship with a certain ship size in mind. AFTER the detailing was done, the size of the ship was altered ...

This is only conjecture that some people have accepted as fact. You have no evidence to support this.

Well.........This picture comparison seems to support SomicRanger's theory.

Looks like IML had thought the bridge would be in it's "normal" location (along with the ship's scale), and added upper detailing to simulate the placement of the elevators - similar to the TMP Enterprise.

I think that there were definitely some mid-course changes in the size, and ILM didn't have enough time to make the substantial changes to the CG to reflect the new "super-size"

I wouldn't be the least bit surprised if all of this scaling conflicts changes/corrected in the Haynes book and next movie.

 

[Soar_Dude]

I already stipulated that I accepted the 3m shuttle height.

At any rate, here's the "fantail" cap and my anyalysis. My figures in red...the other guy made a mistake in measuring, IMO, and used a 4m shuttle height.

Dude there is no way that the shuttle is 4 meters tall let alone 3. it might be little over 2

 

[darkwing_duck1]

Well.........This picture comparison seems to support SomicRanger's theory.

Looks like IML had thought the bridge would be in it's "normal" location (along with the ship's scale), and added upper detailing to simulate the placement of the elevators - similar to the TMP Enterprise.


I think that there were definitely some mid-course changes in the size, and ILM didn't have enough time to make the substantial changes to the CG to reflect the new "super-size"

One thing. Even if the bridge WAS moved down a few decks, there still would be need for the turbolifts to go all the way up (access to the equipment and airlock, for example).

 

[SonicRanger]

... The detailing was scaled to the hull of the ship with a certain ship size in mind. AFTER the detailing was done, the size of the ship was altered ...

This is only conjecture that some people have accepted as fact. You have no evidence to support this.

Looks like IML had thought the bridge would be in it's "normal" location (along with the ship's scale), and added upper detailing to simulate the placement of the elevators - similar to the TMP Enterprise...

I think that there were definitely some mid-course changes in the size, and ILM didn't have enough time to make the substantial changes to the CG to reflect the new "super-size".

That's not "evidence" -- that is still just conjecture based on specious assumptions.

 

[darkwing_duck1]

I already stipulated that I accepted the 3m shuttle height.

At any rate, here's the "fantail" cap and my anyalysis. My figures in red...the other guy made a mistake in measuring, IMO, and used a 4m shuttle height.

Dude there is no way that the shuttle is 4 meters tall let alone 3. it might be little over 2

The shuttle is DEFINITELY at least 3m, based on the "boarding the shuttles scenes". I no longer think it's 4m, but it's definitely 3m

 

[darkwing_duck1]

Requoting this since everyone SEEMS to have missed it. I have reconsidered my position.

Edit, ok, using the model image found here

http://www.trekbbs.com/showpost.php?p=3040259&postcount=745

I snapped some lines and started counting

since this is a pure profile shot, no perspective distortion should mar the numbers.

The length overall of the ship is 48 "shuttlebay heights" .

Plugging in the three top contenders for that figure gets us:

15m shuttlebay = 720m (2362') length
20m shuttlebay = 960m (3149') length
24m shuttlebay = 1152m (3779') length


Take your pick.

#1 is only 6% under the 2500' (762m) given on the Interactive Tour site.

#2 is only 5% over the 3000' (914m) length given by various other sources, including ILM.

#3 is 21% over the 3000' (914m) from ILM, et al.

At this point, barring any new evidence, I'll agree to throw out #3.

I would still prefer #2, based on the apparent size of the shuttles in conjunction with the shuttle bay, but I suppose I could accept the 2500' length as well (bigger than newtype's preferred figure, but only 6%).

Edit again: using the 2500' length, by the way, on that image scales out the airlock AND the window at ~2-2.5m tall. That actually WOULD be a very close fit to their actual assumed sizes. newtype may be closer to being right than I am, just a little short.

After giving it even morethought, I have settled on taking the Interactive Tour length (762m). This is only 6% above newtype's estimate based on a 15m shuttlebay height (my figure adds less than 1m to that when the numbers are crunched).

It also has the benefits, as I noted above, of having the airlock scale to ~2.5m, and the bridge window to ~2m. Which would indicate that they are in fact VERY proportional to that length.

 

[Praetor]

The 762 length seems to work...

 

[darkwing_duck1]

To settle the issue of the shuttle height I have this cap:

Note that you can see the landing gear under the shuttle which gives us a "ground line". I moved that line to the left/closer a bit to account for the gear being so far under the shuttle (to minimize distortion).

Next note the doorway with a humanoid figure IN the actual doorway. Using the standard 1.8m height for humanoids, that makes the door ~2m.

Copying the doorway image and aligning the bottom with the ground line and stacking, 2m is ~ the "midline" (where the two slopes meet) on the side of the shuttle. (The use of the term "midline" is relative, since the upper slope is shorter than the bottom.)

From the "midline" to the "top" is an additional 1.3-1.4m. I chose 1.3m, to be conservative, but also because that would, when stacking the resulting shuttle heights give me within centimeters of the shuttlebay height (15.875m)I calculated for a 762m ship.

So the shuttles scale out at ~3.3m ground to top.

 

[Shaw]

Just out of curiosity... where are these diagrams of the new Enterprise coming from? Are these "official" illustrations of the new ship or fan derived from the various inconsistent images seen on screen?

It seems to me that unless there are some orthogonal views of the actual model released, what you have is guess work being applied to guess work yielding more guess work.

Is there any good foundation for what the ship actually looks like?

Remember, fans had access to screen grabs and the actual filming model itself for nearly 35 years before a relatively decent set of drawings of the TOS Enterprise were available.

Are there actual orthogonal views of the actual CG model used available somewhere?

 

[Praetor]

Are there actual orthogonal views of the actual CG model used available somewhere?

Not that I know of. So far, we've seen Tobias Richter's mesh used, and Bernd's drawing from Ex Astris used, neither of which, as you correctly point out, are totally accurate.

 

[darkwing_duck1]

Just out of curiosity... where are these diagrams of the new Enterprise coming from? Are these "official" illustrations of the new ship or fan derived from the various inconsistent images seen on screen?

It seems to me that unless there are some orthogonal views of the actual model released, what you have is guess work being applied to guess work yielding more guess work.

Is there any good foundation for what the ship actually looks like?

Remember, fans had access to screen grabs and the actual filming model itself for nearly 35 years before a relatively decent set of drawings of the TOS Enterprise were available.

Are there actual orthogonal views of the actual CG model used available somewhere?

I wish there were.

We tried using shuttlebay screencaps (the best to show an absolute scale relationship), but people kept bitching about perspective distortion, etc. Still, the shuttlebay caps can give us at least a ballpark figure to apply to a profile and get SOME kind of result from.

Should it be a true render from the shooting mesh. Absolutely. Find one and we'll all be running the numbers again.

The other problem is that JJ apparently doesn't want us doing TOO much "measuring"...he had Geoff Mendell FIRED from the design team just for doing a rough scale comparison.

 

[Shaw]

So what you guys are saying is that the height of the hangar bay in those diagrams could have an error range of +/- 30%, and this is what most of the hard work of analysis in this thread is being based on?



And aren't these the same effects people who did Transformers? You know, anyone who envisions a small car transforming into a robot the size of a house most likely doesn't spend much time sweating issues of scale.

 

[darkwing_duck1]

So what you guys are saying is that the height of the hangar bay in those diagrams could have an error range of +/- 30%, and this is what most of the hard work of analysis in this thread is being based on?

A very few of us (myself included) were holding out for a higher number. The primary point of contnention was the shuttle height. I think that's pretty well nailed down as ~ 3.3m. That pretty much rules out 800m and above for LoA.

Newtype, using 15m for the shuttlebay has her at ~716m. I'm favoring the 762m Interactive Tour number, which is only ~6% bigger, not 30%.

And aren't these the same effects people who did Transformers? You know, anyone who envisions a small car transforming into a robot the size of a house most likely doesn't spend much time sweating issues of scale.

Well, then it falls back on us, doesn't it. One thing we know is that those shuttles came out of that shuttlebay. They have a definite size relationship. All the windows and hull seams etc in the world can't change the fact that the shuttle bay must be "x" size to fit those shuttles.

It definitely CANNOT be the shuttlebay from the old ~290-300m Enterprise. There is just no way to make it work.

 

[Kpnuts]

It's 762m long.

Not only do most people's calculations end up around the 6-7 hundreds, but that's the official length given on an official Paramount website.

 

[Silversmok3]

It's 762m long.

Not only do most people's calculations end up around the 6-7 hundreds, but that's the official length given on an official Paramount website.

Agreed.I think its time to retire the debate,and conclude that the official length is 762 meters,given that independent calculations by several different people here and elsewhere confirm that masurement + or - 5% ,which is about as best as you will ever get to a 'verified' second take on the measurement.I'd actually say someone @ ILM had to sweat some scaling details,otherwise A) this thread would find any gross scaling errors and B)we would have hodgepodge numbers from all over the place,but every decent calculation is fairly close to the 'official' measurement,so I'd consider this mystery solved.Until JJ puts the blueprints on the DVD,I'd call it a day.

 

[SonicRanger]

It's 762m long.

Not only do most people's calculations end up around the 6-7 hundreds, but that's the official length given on an official Paramount website.

Agreed.I think its time to retire the debate,and conclude that the official length is 762 meters,given that independent calculations by several different people here and elsewhere confirm that masurement + or - 5% ,which is about as best as you will ever get to a 'verified' second take on the measurement.I'd actually say someone @ ILM had to sweat some scaling details,otherwise A) this thread would find any gross scaling errors and B)we would have hodgepodge numbers from all over the place,but every decent calculation is fairly close to the 'official' measurement,so I'd consider this mystery solved.Until JJ puts the blueprints on the DVD,I'd call it a day.

Motion seconded.

 

[miraclefan]

It's 762m long.

Not only do most people's calculations end up around the 6-7 hundreds, but that's the official length given on an official Paramount website.

Agreed.I think its time to retire the debate,and conclude that the official length is 762 meters,given that independent calculations by several different people here and elsewhere confirm that masurement + or - 5% ,which is about as best as you will ever get to a 'verified' second take on the measurement.I'd actually say someone @ ILM had to sweat some scaling details,otherwise A) this thread would find any gross scaling errors and B)we would have hodgepodge numbers from all over the place,but every decent calculation is fairly close to the 'official' measurement,so I'd consider this mystery solved.Until JJ puts the blueprints on the DVD,I'd call it a day.

Motion seconded.

Thirded! Seriously people how long can this GO?

 

[Praetor]

And fourthed. 762 meters she is.

 

[M'Sharak]

And there was much rejoicing...

 

[miraclefan]

And there was much rejoicing...

HALLELUJAH! PRRAAASEE THE LAWRD!