Starship construction yards in rural areas?

[Timo]

Okay, the Pike dialogue cinches it. (Those screencaps don't, because they would have been in reference to the putative second starship, the one potentially in California.)

It's a bit annoying that the dedication plaque of this new ship still says "San Francisco" when there's no need for it to say that any more. But the interpretation of "San Francisco Yards" as an organization ultimately unrelated to the city of San Francisco is a valid one. Perhaps the yards are even named after the saint, not the city at all?

Timo Saloniemi

 

[fishingforships]

I'm not sure, you're probably right, but it'll give me a great excuse to watch the movie again!!!!

 

[Jeri]

Okay, the Pike dialogue cinches it. (Those screencaps don't, because they would have been in reference to the putative second starship, the one potentially in California.)

There is no second starship; no second shipyard. Kirk goes immediately there after the bar talk with Pike.

 

[SalvorHardin]

Trek fans never cease to amaze...
Here we are still wondering if what Kirk saw on his bike was the Enterprise or the same ship we see later in the shipyard.

Simply amazing.

 

[Jeri]

I know. I just don't get where that came from.

 

[fishingforships]

Wasn't he the one on security duty that grabbed Kirk and Scotty after they beamed back to the Enterprise? I'm sure it was the same guy, he called him cupcake.

That is one of the guys, but I'm referring to the guy with him who was punching Kirk when he had him pinned to the table when Pike came in.

Sorry Jeri, I was referring to the conversation I was having with SilentP about a cadet, not disputing the fact that there was only one ship. I'm on dial-up right now and Timo posted that while I was surfing something else. I didn't get a chance to read it. Mybad

 

[Jeri]

What?

 

[fishingforships]

There is no second starship; no second shipyard. Kirk goes immediately there after the bar talk with Pike.

This was right after my post where I said I agreed, maybe I misunderstood. I thought you thought I was agreeing with TIMO. My f**kin god this sounds like some high school shit, sorry. been up for awhile

 

[Jeri]

Not to worry. I think I only read Timo's post and not yours. "Resume your disorder."

 

[fishingforships]

RightO

 

[Sector 7]

Trek fans never cease to amaze...
Here we are still wondering if what Kirk saw on his bike was the Enterprise or the same ship we see later in the shipyard.

Simply amazing.

Verily, though Gene Roddenberry come back from the grave to bless each scene, they shall argue til the end of time; for this is TrekBBS. Amen.

 

[fishingforships]

Can I hear a hallelujah!

 

[Voyagerian]

I'm just glad there was an Enterprise to argue over!May she sail longly and proudly!

 

[Franklin]

Look, here's how it it happened. In the 23rd century, a powerful Iowan who represents the district that includes Eastern Iowa (with Riverside) is on the Appropriations Committee of the lower house of the legislative branch of the UFP.
He was able to get an earmark for the San Francisco Shipyards, Corp. (headquarters in SF) to build a ship-building facility near Riverside, Iowa. The whole George Kirk thing is just windowdressing to hide what was purely a pork-barrel project. At least, that's MY canon for them being there.

Besides, if Wichita, Kansas, smack dab in the rural heartland of America, can be a hub of aircraft construction these today, why can't rural Iowa be a hub of starship construction a couple of hundred years from now?

 

[Ar-Pharazon]

^ And if the only US Navy recruit training center can be nowhere near an ocean...

 

[Nightfall to-Ennien]

It's a bit annoying that the dedication plaque of this new ship still says "San Francisco" when there's no need for it to say that any more.

Timo Saloniemi

It is also possible that the plaque does not indicate the place of construction, but rather the "Home Port" where she was commissioned.

 

[Timo]

A bit funny nevertheless: wouldn't ships in the mid-23rd century list planets as their "home ports", not cities? Or perhaps it's more of a sponsorship thing.

Also, we might mind the difference between the older plaques that say "San Francisco, Calif." and the newer ones (beginning with ST5:TFF) that say "San Francisco Fleet Yards". The former unambiguously establishes a location, while the latter establishes an enterprise that may operate in various locations. TOS had the former, STXI had the latter (with the qualifier "Earth" added to the end to indicate location - and Iowa is certainly still on Earth in the movie).

Timo Saloniemi

 

[Silversmok3]

A bit funny nevertheless: wouldn't ships in the mid-23rd century list planets as their "home ports", not cities? Or perhaps it's more of a sponsorship thing.

Also, we might mind the difference between the older plaques that say "San Francisco, Calif." and the newer ones (beginning with ST5:TFF) that say "San Francisco Fleet Yards". The former unambiguously establishes a location, while the latter establishes an enterprise that may operate in various locations. TOS had the former, STXI had the latter (with the qualifier "Earth" added to the end to indicate location - and Iowa is certainly still on Earth in the movie).

Timo Saloniemi

Well, id also imagine the reason the shipyard is in Iowa is security reasons. After seeing the Narada stomp the Kelvin, Starfleet might decide its better to put your shipyard in a different spot than in the same state as your headquarters.

It may make more sense to build a starship on Earth than we'd like to think.As stated above, acess to resources and raw materials is better.

Security concerns are also better-its easier to lob a torpedo at an orbital shipyard, then it is to have to fly into the planet (and defeat the close-in defenses) to do the same job.

Ditto, the ship (and workers) are not exposed to solar flares, hostile cosmic radiation,micrometeroids, space junk, and other hazards of space travel.

Third, its probably more practical to build the ship on the ground, and have it move itself into orbit ( complete with champagne and circumstance, allthough we know from the movie the christening doesn't happen on the ground) than to drag the subassemblies-including the engine parts, presumably-into orbit using a specialized transport vehicle.

 

[Balrog]

I wonder if ground-based starship construction sites are located in rural areas because people would think they’re a blight or eyesore if they’re in an large urban area like Chicago, San Francisco or NYC? Maybe they’re NIMBYs in Trek's 23rd century earth too, just as they are now? Though previous cannon states that the Enterprise was constructed in the San Francisco ship yards, there’s no on-screen evidence suggesting the construction yards are actually in San Francisco. In the late 20th century San Franciscoans were known for their NIMBYism when it came to freeways, especially these that are elevated and block the city view.. I’d hate to see the reaction to giant shipyards within the city if the NIMBY mindset still exists in the 23rd century. I think a rural area away from the major population area would be the best for a ground-based starship construction yard. It's a lot easier to acquire and develop land too in a rural setting without as much worry about the surrounding populace when compared to an urban city.

The only place they wouldn't build starships is of the coast of Cape Cod in Massachusetts. Ted Kennedy's descendants would block any attempt.

That's canon you can take to the bank!

 

[M'Sharak]

^ Can we leave politics and swipes at recently-deceased politicians to forums more appropriate to such topics? Let's stick to the movie, please.