Starship Size Argument™ thread
- Thread starter WarpFactorZ
- Start date
- Status
It is correct.
It can be piloted by one person?
Whats all the space for?
No. Sense. Whatsoever.
In what way ? Automating a ship with a top-of-the-line computer will make it possible for one person to pilot it. "Computer, do X."
It's no more a super-ship than the Enterprise-D or E, both of which are significantly larger. Hell, except for the warp nacelles it's about the same size as the Enterprise-C. Maybe this is just the mid 23rd century/pre-refit version of the Ambassador class?
KISS.
Keep it simple, stupid.
If they'd gone to redesign the entire ship at the last minute, it probably would have come away looking silly and implausible.
; it's as if they just went into the options menu and clicked the ship size box from 100% to 200%. They didn't bother to shrink any of the outer ports or windows on the ship's hull to fit the more massive size.[/QUOTE]
It would have been a nice touch if they made some reference to it being a Daystrom "M-series" computer or something...
trevanian
Rear Admiral
That's why you provide an armed escort, because the transport isn't going to be able to do that and carry the load.
Starfleet's equivalent of a destroyer, or as I think they described it in some ancient volume of noncanonical BEST OF TREK, a flying phaser bank would be the appropriate kind of support.
trevanian
Rear Admiral
It's no more a super-ship than the Enterprise-D or E, both of which are significantly larger. Hell, except for the warp nacelles it's about the same size as the Enterprise-C. Maybe this is just the mid 23rd century/pre-refit version of the Ambassador class?
KISS.
Keep it simple, stupid.
If they'd gone to redesign the entire ship at the last minute, it probably would have come away looking silly and implausible.
; it's as if they just went into the options menu and clicked the ship size box from 100% to 200%. They didn't bother to shrink any of the outer ports or windows on the ship's hull to fit the more massive size.
Maybe you're not getting where he is coming from. Scaling the ship up without adjusting the specific details is what makes it seem wrong & silly and implausible, and what makes it, in something like your parlance, a MIS.
Make It Stupid.
But why waste an extra ship and crew if you can build a transport that can also serve as a warship?
Because making something try to be everything means it's good for nothing.
At that scale, on the ground, the ISS's orbital altitude would send it into the hangar deck.
Not necessarily. The original Enterprise obviously served multiple functions from exploration to defense to scientific missions and I don't see anyone making the claim that it was good-for-nothing. In-universe a functional multi-capability vessel is nothing new.
That's like saying that because a 747 can haul some freight that you don't need or want cargo versions of the plane sans passengers. You could do it, but its not optimized for either. It's why every time they try to make an all-service fighter the thing always ends up compromised up the wazoo and expensive as Hell.
Last edited:
I do think there'd be some awfully big differences between aircraft and spaceships with transporters that would never be required to land.
There'd likely be some things you can do that aren't practical with aircraft.
In universe that is.
Hey, it's been 40 pages of thread, and they obviously don't get where he (or previously, me) is coming from. For whatever reason, the thought of massive starships just does it for some people. It doesn't make a lick of sense, but, well... BIG STARSHIPS, YEE-HAH!
Hey, it's been 40 pages of thread, and they obviously don't get where he (or previously, me) is coming from. For whatever reason, the thought of massive starships just does it for some people. It doesn't make a lick of sense, but, well... BIG STARSHIPS, YEE-HAH!
I've asked you twice now and you haven't responded. if there is no sense to larger starships, why does Starfleet have three versions of the same shape (Nova-small, Intrepid-medium and Sovereign-large) in service in the 24th century? What can the Enterprise-E do that Voyager couldn't?
It's not "yee-hah" it's "why not?"
Hey, it's been 40 pages of thread, and they obviously don't get where he (or previously, me) is coming from. For whatever reason, the thought of massive starships just does it for some people. It doesn't make a lick of sense, but, well... BIG STARSHIPS, YEE-HAH!
And after 40 pages, I still don't know why you think it doesn't make sense.
But it seems to work out for the fictional starship Enterprise.
What details should they have adjusted?
I'm sure someone will correct me if I'm wrong but isn't it the story from the VFX people that the ship was designed to be pretty much the same scale as the original and then well into production they realized that it needed to be significantly bigger to accommodate the shuttle bay, engineering, etc. and so they just scaled down the windows and that side docking port (at least it used to be a docking port, apparently now it's a recalcitrant crewman ejection tube) and didn't bother to add more windows so that it would look like there were more decks?
And the main phasers on USS Vengeance are exactly that: in Khan's final attack against the Enterprise, those two phaser banks detach from the ship and attack Enterprise independently.
Also, isn't this more or less the whole point behind TNG saucer separation? The saucer section was a dedicated science platform while the battle section had most of the ship's main weapons and engines?
They would have had to shrink the windows and change their locations, which in turn would have made them harder to see on the actual model and would have changed the aesthetics of the model itself. Instead, they simply scaled up the model and scaled up the windows with it. So instead of having a deck with a 3 x 5 foot window, you have a deck with a floor-to-ceiling window.
- Status
Similar threads
