Starship Size Argument™ thread

Heck, the Enterprise-A had over 70 decks in Star Trek V. The Enterprise-E went from 24 decks to 26 in the same movie, and then at least 29 in Nemesis. And don't even get me started on the inconsistency of the Defiant.

 

JJ's mantra of "Bigger Is Better".
"Let's have a 725 meter starship Enterprise! Let's have the 1500 meter dreadnought Vengeance! Let's have the 8000 meter mining vessel Narada!"

 

How mature.

 

Well, he definitely wants things to be "bigger"... in Force Awakens he opted out for a 1200m in diameter Starkiller Starbase instead of a 160km in diameter Death Star...

 

You know, the ship is clearly in the 725m range by all official accounts.

Trying to tease out the ship's "real size" from screenshots is absurd. If we do that than we have to accept the Hood (Excelsior class) and Stargazer (Constellation class) as being nearly the size of the Enterprise D from on screen evidence.

 

Hey, who are you calling mature?! Take that back! You are the one who is mature!

 

Death Star I diameter: 120 km
Death Star II diameter: 160 km
Death Star III diameter: 1200 km

JJ sat in a room for a straight week trying to think of how to do the Death Star again but not make it too obvious. Eventually he just said "I know, I'll just make it bigger"!

 

Meh. Isn't there a quote from Roddenberry about being able to park a fleet of 747's in the Enterprise hangar bay back in the 60's? Then there is McQuarrie's Planet of the Titans remake that looks like it would've been absolutely huge.

I'm still not sure why a bigger ship is a problem?

 

Because it doesn't mesh with what we're used to. I sympathize because I felt the same way, too.

But it's pretty apparent that the ship is bigger. Most of the amenities and facilities are in the saucer and the engineering hull is devoted to support craft and that the guts of the ship are exposed and raw instead of paneled away.

 

Honestly, I like it bigger. When I figured out the size of the original, it kinda disappointed me that it's only the size of a current day aircraft carrier.

 

It's plain and simple. The Enterprise from 2255 shouldn't be larger than the Enterprise from 2372. And not twice as large as its Prime Universe counterpart. But hey, it's a different timeline/universe. We agree we like them bigger so why stop at 725 meters? Why not make it 1600 meters, the size of a Star Destroyer. Oh, I know, let's make it 3200 meters so it can be double the size of a Star Destroyer!

 

It's in the Writer's Bible I think.

Of course, so is this gem

 

It isn't, some still can't deal with it though.

This isn't really an argument thread any more, it should be renamed the "Its not fair, Boohoo, its bigger and I dont like it" thread.

 

That only applies if one cares how big the Enterprise from 2372 is. I don't.

 

No problem, I respect that. For me the only Enterprise that should be equal in length or longer than the Enterprise-E would be the Enterprise-F. But as the wall on the Discovery writers office (or is it their observation lounge?) shows, the JJprise is officially 725 meters long and that's that.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spacecraft_in_Star_Trek

Yep. I am so much happier now that freaking out over Trek minutia is in my past. The sooner people get over it the better their Trek experience will be.

Wanna bet?

 

Actually she's listed as 726.2 on some sites and that's before Beyond pushing it to nearer 750, so he's kind of right, it's not exactly 725.

 

I thought someone posted some orthos that showed shrinking the warp engines kept the the overall length pretty much the same even though they're now pushed back.

 

I thought they were just thinner, not shorter?

 

Are you talking about these?

Spoiler

Spoiler