So THAT'S what those lines represent?! I always thought those were some sort of major power distribution network. Cool
Size Of The New Enterprise (large images)
- Thread starter Strat
- Start date
- Status
So THAT'S what those lines represent?! I always thought those were some sort of major power distribution network. Cool
You know, I had totally forgotten about that shot. Coolness.
But what's with those little branches off the main lines in the saucer, on the top view? I see three possibilities:
1) These shafts actually go downward from the endpoint (this is what it actually looks like). Or...
2) People in the TMP era are incredibly lazy, and just don't want to walk the extra few meters to the mess hall. Or...
3) They actually aren't lazy at all, because the TMP Enterprise is really five million meters long!
Spock rode a turbolift from the shuttlebay to the bridge in three and a half seconds.
Spock rode a turbolift from the shuttlebay to the bridge in three and a half seconds.
Inertial dampeners within the turbolift?
Here's my take on it. The early ships were always huge
The Federation needed huge, huge ships pre-TOS in order to be able to move the sheer numbers of colonists and all of their possessions to the various colonies, Starbases, mining facilities, etc shown in TOS- and it all had to be done in the period between ENTERPRISE and TOS.
A justification for the smaller TOS Connies is that with the initial colonization period largely over, the need was for smaller, faster cruisers that were designed to be deployable quickly to support the burgeoning Federation.
They jumped back to super-sized in size in the NG time was not to transport families to their new homes, but actually to be their homes.
All canon issues solved!
Good day.
The Federation needed huge, huge ships pre-TOS in order to be able to move the sheer numbers of colonists and all of their possessions to the various colonies, Starbases, mining facilities, etc shown in TOS- and it all had to be done in the period between ENTERPRISE and TOS.
A justification for the smaller TOS Connies is that with the initial colonization period largely over, the need was for smaller, faster cruisers that were designed to be deployable quickly to support the burgeoning Federation.
They jumped back to super-sized in size in the NG time was not to transport families to their new homes, but actually to be their homes.
All canon issues solved!
Good day.
Wasn't there a scene in early TNG where something goes wrong with the Turbo system and it throws Geordi right out the door?
Yup, Contagion in the second season:
http://tng.trekcore.com/gallery/albums/s2/2x11/contagion114.jpg
http://tng.trekcore.com/gallery/albums/s2/2x11/contagion115.jpg
http://tng.trekcore.com/gallery/albums/s2/2x11/contagion116.jpg
http://tng.trekcore.com/gallery/albums/s2/2x11/contagion117.jpg
http://tng.trekcore.com/gallery/albums/s2/2x11/contagion118.jpg
http://tng.trekcore.com/gallery/albums/s2/2x11/contagion122.jpg
http://tng.trekcore.com/gallery/albums/s2/2x11/contagion123.jpg
If you watch closely, when Kirk steps into the turbolift, there's a white circle of light where his turbolift is supposedly located. After he orders it to the Bridge, that circle of light begins to move as the sound effect cues.
All I'm going to say regarding the size of the new Enterprise is that in my mind I'm sticking with the 300~ meter length. A 700~ meter Enterprise throws off ALL Starfleet scale. Not only would the Enterprise be huge, but contemporary ships seen leaving spacedock would be equally massive, to say nothing of later ships. The ship was scaled up to adjust for the shuttles and possibly the engineering set. THESE are the goofs, and should be ignored accordingly.
That is all.
That is all.
Odd, that, since the tube he entered in the cargo area was strictly vertical, yet the dot representing his turbocar shoots off in a horizontal direction.
Well, you stick with whatever makes you comfortable. But then don't complain when the next movie comes with even more evidence that it's ~700m, not ~300m and everything else is out of whack.
I'm hoping they'll correct it by the next movie. If not, I'll do what I always do when Trek tech is inconsistent - Stick my fingers in my ears, shut my eyes, and chant "LALALALALALALA!" as loud as possible.
I'm hoping they'll correct it by the next movie. If not, I'll do what I always do when Trek tech is inconsistent - Stick my fingers in my ears, shut my eyes, and chant "LALALALALALALA!" as loud as possible.
I've got no problem with that, at all. Just don't expect us to chant along.
You honestly think that this, is 300 metres long?
Forget trying to match lengths and dimensions etc.... just look at this photo.
There is no way that that starship only 300 metres long. Starfleet ships are bigger in JJ's universe, get used to it.
This is 330 metres long:
http://www.swapmeetdave.com/United/Salute/Carrier.jpg
[It's also hotlinked, which it shouldn't have been. Converted to link. - M']
Last edited by a moderator:
Given the relative size of the people on the cranes and gantries, yes. 300-ish meters is a fine estimate. The only exterior shots that throw off the 300-meter number are those with the shuttles and the pan-out from the bridge window, which wasn't originally where it ended up.
You honestly think that this, is 300 metres long?
Forget trying to match lengths and dimensions etc.... just look at this photo.
There is no way that that starship only 300 metres long. Starfleet ships are bigger in JJ's universe, get used to it.
This is 330 metres long:
http://www.swapmeetdave.com/United/Salute/Carrier.jpg
Last edited by a moderator:
Take a look at the gantry crane heading into the lower saucer from the left, just above Kirk's head. You can clearly see two people walking down its length, especially in a higher resolution shot. Their relative size indicates a similar deck size and layout to the refit Enterprise.
What are you basing your estimate on? The ship was originally designed to be about the same size as the refit, and many effects shots reflect this, not to mention the window and airlock size. There's also the matter of Kirk's escape pod. Yes, a few shots (shuttlebay, bridge window pan-out) indicate a 700-some-odd meter length as well. But as both are seen, both are valid. I prefer the smaller size because it doesn't throw all other starship scaling relative to the Enterprise out the window. How is this "delusional"?
What are you basing your estimate on? The ship was originally designed to be about the same size as the refit, and many effects shots reflect this, not to mention the window and airlock size. There's also the matter of Kirk's escape pod. Yes, a few shots (shuttlebay, bridge window pan-out) indicate a 700-some-odd meter length as well. But as both are seen, both are valid. I prefer the smaller size because it doesn't throw all other starship scaling relative to the Enterprise out the window. How is this "delusional"?
The gantry isn't touching the saucer. Move that person and make him stand against the hull and he'll be a lot smaller.
What am I basing my estimate on? Eyesight and common sense. 300 metres is nothing. Look at all the structures below. The ship is massive.
You should be less concerned about canon and how the ship fits in with other Starfleet ships in other universes and more concerned with a) official statistics and dimensions showing it to be ~700metres, b) on-screen evidence and c) common sense. Look at the under construction shot, look at Kirk and Scotty running through the enormous engineering set, look at the shuttle bay etc...
It's a different universe. Kelvin attacks. Starfleet makes BIG ships.
Abrams has changed enough visually to show he wouldn't have a problem making the ships themselves a differnet size.
1) I believe the gantry IS touching the saucer.
2) Eyesight and common sense don't work when there are different effects shots showing the ship at two different sizes.
3) Official dimensions were grossly fudged to allow for the shuttles and (possibly) the engineering set.
4) I might be able to buy the alternate universe/BIG ships scenario if the other ships in the spacedock scene weren't kitbashes of Kelvin components. There's no way the Kelvin was Galaxy-sized. It doesn't fit with the prime timeline nor with what we saw onscreen.
I like 300 meters better. Makes more sense to me. Don't like it? Sorry to hear. I think 700 meters reeks of penis-envy toward Star Wars and BSG. To me bigger isn't necessarily any cooler.
Well, quite frankly, all that image does is support what we already know... that the effects put together of the ship under construction (many of which were used in the teaser in January of 2008) were rendered back when the ship was still intended to be 366 meters.
But even then, the guys on the gantry (which is casting a shadow on the hull where it touches) are too large. Their size was determined by what was needed to be seen in that shot rather than an accurate scaling.
None of that really makes any difference, the people making the movie changed the scale for other effects and have (finally) settled on a length of around 720 meters. And other effects footage supports that length.
The film makers really have final say on this as it is their work.
We can ponder why they made the change (though reasons have been stated), we can consider what it would have been like had it stayed the original scale, and we can point out effects that were originally intended for that scale. All are valid points to consider even if the thought police would tell you otherwise.
But I highly doubt that any of this will change the minds of the people who are making this stuff who were already considering this type of technical minutia the problem with original Trek (and Trek fans). They didn't care about this, and they consider all of us to be quite bizarre.
It doesn't matter which length you think the ship is, the point is that the makers of Trek XI aren't laughing with us... they are laughing at us.
But even then, the guys on the gantry (which is casting a shadow on the hull where it touches) are too large. Their size was determined by what was needed to be seen in that shot rather than an accurate scaling.
None of that really makes any difference, the people making the movie changed the scale for other effects and have (finally) settled on a length of around 720 meters. And other effects footage supports that length.
The film makers really have final say on this as it is their work.
We can ponder why they made the change (though reasons have been stated), we can consider what it would have been like had it stayed the original scale, and we can point out effects that were originally intended for that scale. All are valid points to consider even if the thought police would tell you otherwise.
But I highly doubt that any of this will change the minds of the people who are making this stuff who were already considering this type of technical minutia the problem with original Trek (and Trek fans). They didn't care about this, and they consider all of us to be quite bizarre.
It doesn't matter which length you think the ship is, the point is that the makers of Trek XI aren't laughing with us... they are laughing at us.
I'm laughing harder at them, Shaw. I liked their movie and respect their talents, but glaring inconsistencies like these could easily have been avoided, especially by professionals. But really, I don't think its the artists who are laughing - a lot of them tend to be geeks themselves, and they know better. Those who are confounded, bewildered, and amused by discussions like this are the higher-ups who pass down the final word, and many of them seem to be the ones oblivious to technical minutia.
- Status
Similar threads
