Starship Size Argument™ thread

[Belz...]

In Trek 2009, Kirk ran from sickbay to engineering to bridge without ever taking stairs or turbolifts.

How do you know, since there's this thing called "editing" ?

 

[Kemaiku]

There were several jump cuts, important bits along the way but we saw little of the actual route they took at all.

 

[CorporalCaptain]

Yep, pretty much.

It is true, though, that a lot of time is spent running through the ship. It's more dramatic than riding a turbolift, but I have to think that there should be more of a turbolift system than there evidently is. So many of the problems in STID that Kirk and Scott had with the change in gravity on their way to the warp core could have been solved if they could have just gotten into a turbolift. Maybe they can get upgrades for that, more lifts and better coverage, installed on Tuesday.

 

[beamMe]

Yep, pretty much.

It is true, though, that a lot of time is spent running through the ship. It's more dramatic than riding a turbolift, but I have to think that there should be more of a turbolift system than there evidently is. So many of the problems in STID that Kirk and Scott had with the change in gravity on their way to the warp core could have been solved if they could have just gotten into a turbolift. Maybe they can get upgrades for that, more lifts and better coverage, installed on Tuesday.

I don't think the lifts worked at that point.

 

[Kemaiku]

Yep, pretty much.

It is true, though, that a lot of time is spent running through the ship. It's more dramatic than riding a turbolift.

True, you'd have them running for dear life to dramatic music, then suddenly a slow turbolift ride, standing there like idiots, listening to musak. Kind of breaks up the flow.

 

[CorporalCaptain]

Yep, pretty much.

It is true, though, that a lot of time is spent running through the ship. It's more dramatic than riding a turbolift, but I have to think that there should be more of a turbolift system than there evidently is. So many of the problems in STID that Kirk and Scott had with the change in gravity on their way to the warp core could have been solved if they could have just gotten into a turbolift. Maybe they can get upgrades for that, more lifts and better coverage, installed on Tuesday.

I don't think the lifts worked at that point.

I'm sure they'll be fixing that on Tuesday, too.

 

[Belz...]

So many of the problems in STID that Kirk and Scott had with the change in gravity on their way to the warp core could have been solved if they could have just gotten into a turbolift.

I'm pretty sure those lifts work on electricity.

 

[CorporalCaptain]

So many of the problems in STID that Kirk and Scott had with the change in gravity on their way to the warp core could have been solved if they could have just gotten into a turbolift.

I'm pretty sure those lifts work on electricity.

Your point? Lots of electrical systems still worked on the ship. Which ones were out was a function of plot and dramatic necessity, more than any plausible sense of how to wire up a starship. That's just par for the course in Star Trek.

 

[gerbil]

So many of the problems in STID that Kirk and Scott had with the change in gravity on their way to the warp core could have been solved if they could have just gotten into a turbolift.

I'm pretty sure those lifts work on electricity.

Your point? Lots of electrical systems still worked on the ship. Which ones were out was a function of plot and dramatic necessity, more than any plausible sense of how to wire up a starship. That's just par for the course in Star Trek.

What a thrilling scene that would have been. The "waiting in the escalator" scene.

 

[CorporalCaptain]

I'm pretty sure those lifts work on electricity.

Your point? Lots of electrical systems still worked on the ship. Which ones were out was a function of plot and dramatic necessity, more than any plausible sense of how to wire up a starship. That's just par for the course in Star Trek.

What a thrilling scene that would have been. The "waiting in the escalator" scene.

Where might I have agreed with that sentiment?

It is true, though, that a lot of time is spent running through the ship. It's more dramatic than riding a turbolift

 

[WarpFactorZ]

That's cute that you think so, but no. There are at least four, and I believe five full decks in the saucer rim alone, and the scene you're describing (see below) does nothing to dissuade me from that idea.

(click to enlarge)

Nope. Take a look at that first image. The large white part in the middle is a typical Enterprise hallway. The other lights are windows. The saucer thickness is enough for only two levels of those, with suitable space in between for infrastructure. The way you've divided it up in the last image makes no sense, because it doesn't allow for the latter.

Also, resort to common sense: why would there be three full decks without windows on the saucer (as per your diagram)?

 

[Kemaiku]

The area damaged we see momentarily from the inside, there are balconies several feet back from the outer hull, it looks like some variation of the RecDeck from TMP, each "level" is hard to descern the full height of.

The rest of the saucer is at least 5 full decks high.

 

[Locutus of Bored]

Nope. Take a look at that first image. The large white part in the middle is a typical Enterprise hallway. The other lights are windows. The saucer thickness is enough for only two levels of those, with suitable space in between for infrastructure. The way you've divided it up in the last image makes no sense, because it doesn't allow for the latter.

Also, resort to common sense: why would there be three full decks without windows on the saucer (as per your diagram)?

We've already had this argument before, and I already shown that there is plenty of space above and below the windows to carry machinery and piping (the yellow lines in the picture would be at least a meter thick), in addition to the "half decks" on the top and bottom of the saucer rim. You see what you want to see, you provide no visual evidence for your argument, you talk about "common sense" as if your views are correct by default, and you keep mentioning the lack of windows on the saucer when we've already acknowledged that the ship was originally much smaller (TMP Enterprise-Refit sized) but was greatly upsized during the design process (something the designers themselves have said) to accommodate larger interior sets, shuttles, and a grander sense of scale.

That's the production explanation for why there are so few windows on the ship and not a row for each deck, which would have made the ship seem much larger, like it does on the Enteprise-D for example. In-universe you can make up an explanation like saying that the ship carries heavy armor and therefore windows are minimized only to recreation and other major crew spaces as a result so there are fewer vulnerable areas. Crew quarters and smaller rooms have window-shaped video displays which simulate the external view instead, or give you a pleasant image like a meadow or beach. It's a poor man's personal holodeck.

Can we just be perfectly honest though and admit that no matter what anyone shows you in support of their argument, you're just going to stick to your guns on the ship being roughly the same size of the TOS movie refit Enterprise/Enteprise-A and pop in occasionally to say how something definitively proves your point but really doesn't?

 

[beamMe]

The area damaged we see momentarily from the inside, there are balconies several feet back from the outer hull, it looks like some variation of the RecDeck from TMP, each "level" is hard to descern the full height of.

That's what it looks like to me, too.

If the TMP-Enterprise had a hull-breach in that location WarpFactorZ would probably conclude that the saucer is only three decks high.

 

[Gonzo]

Nope. Take a look at that first image. The large white part in the middle is a typical Enterprise hallway. The other lights are windows. The saucer thickness is enough for only two levels of those, with suitable space in between for infrastructure. The way you've divided it up in the last image makes no sense, because it doesn't allow for the latter.

Also, resort to common sense: why would there be three full decks without windows on the saucer (as per your diagram)?

We've already had this argument before, and I already shown that there is plenty of space above and below the windows to carry machinery and piping (the yellow lines in the picture would be at least a meter thick), in addition to the "half decks" on the top and bottom of the saucer rim. You see what you want to see, you provide no visual evidence for your argument, you talk about "common sense" as if your views are correct by default, and you keep mentioning the lack of windows on the saucer when we've already acknowledged that the ship was originally much smaller (TMP Enterprise-Refit sized) but was greatly upsized during the design process (something the designers themselves have said) to accommodate larger interior sets, shuttles, and a grander sense of scale.

That's the production explanation for why there are so few windows on the ship and not a row for each deck, which would have made the ship seem much larger, like it does on the Enteprise-D for example. In-universe you can make up an explanation like saying that the ship carries heavy armor and therefore windows are minimized only to recreation and other major crew spaces as a result so there are fewer vulnerable areas. Crew quarters and smaller rooms have window-shaped video displays which simulate the external view instead, or give you a pleasant image like a meadow or beach. It's a poor man's personal holodeck.

Can we just be perfectly honest though and admit that no matter what anyone shows you in support of their argument, you're just going to stick to your guns on the ship being roughly the same size of the TOS movie refit Enterprise/Enteprise-A and pop in occasionally to say how something definitively proves your point but really doesn't?

I agree...

Even though it is as big as the Enterprise D it will not carry any families so it wont have/need as many windows, having said that even though it has fewer windows they do seem to be larger many of which seem to be floor to ceiling like the bridge. Which makes me think the areas around the outer edge of the dish are communal/recreational or possibly even some kind of hot bunking areas for the junior crew whereas on the Enterprise D they are individual and spacious cabins.

 

[Belz...]

That's just par for the course in Star Trek.

Yes. So ?

The power was unreliable, so they went on foot.

 

[Belz...]

Nope. Take a look at that first image. The large white part in the middle is a typical Enterprise hallway.

Looks like two to me.

We've been through this before: the shuttlebay is impossibly large for a TOS-sized ship. The official size is 725m. The shot of the bridge window indicates a much larger ship than the original. Etc.

There is NO WAY you can argue against that unless you are entirely emotionally attached to the idea of a 300-ish meter ship. Give it up.

 

[saddestmoon]

Yep - it's logical: she's a big ship, and it works just fine onscreen.

 

[CorporalCaptain]

That's just par for the course in Star Trek.

Yes. So ?

The power was unreliable, so they went on foot.

I don't even know why were arguing about this. I have no objection to them repeatedly dashing through the corridors, say because the lifts don't work, any more than I objected the consoles exploding all the time back in the day. They're both different sides of the same coin of power wonkiness, and they're equally amusing, to me.

I was simply agreeing with the observation that there's a lot of running through the ship, in both this movie and the last. The lifts weren't out all the times that was shown. And, no, we don't know how far lifts were taking people in at least most of those cases, either, cuz of that thing called editing.

Anyway, ship's huge! I love her this huge! It's the future, so I expect her to be huge.

 

[WarpFactorZ]

Can we be perfectly honest though and admit that no matter what anyone shows you in support of their argument, you're just going to stick to your guns on the ship being roughly the same size of the TOS movie refit Enterprise/Enteprise-A and pop in occasionally to say how something definitively proves your point but really doesn't?

I know what I saw in the film: the hull breach revealed ONE typical circular Enterprise corridor. That's also what you can see through the windows to the right of the breach (note the "rectangles" on the wall). There are clearly three rows of them in both cases, as with this:

[Hotlinked image removed. The website scifanatic.wpengine.netdna-cdn.com is an image hosting server belonging to TrekMovie.com and may not be used for the purpose of posting embedded images at TrekBBS. - M']

There's no "balcony", as some else said, and there certainly aren't two corridors on top of one another. Why doesn't someone use their Photoshop prowess and show me where there are two decks, or a balcony, or a movie theatre, or whatever else people see in that picture.

Otherwise, I recommend you go back and see the movie again, if for no other reason that to watch that one scene.