I'd say that that's just your opinion, but I wouldn't want somebody getting into a conniption fit because I don't agree with you.
Starships of the 2230's
- Thread starter Redshirt214
- Start date
I'd say that that's just your opinion, but I wouldn't want somebody getting into a conniption fit because I don't agree with you.
What? No, by the person sitting right in front of the window.
Seconds before we see that the windows of a certain height are half the height of a docking port, we see them being the height of a person? I doubt that very much.
That's more than enough accuracy for this particular argument, and it is disingenious to argue otherwise. The two window rows on the spine are correctly placed in the fan model, and the analysis can also easily be repeated on the screencap provided; we know the deck height (and doorway height, and porthole height) in the spine, and if it's markedly different elsewhere in the ship, that's just plain weird. Is the ship built for a lower-decks slave race of giants or midgets in addition to being suited for normal humanoids in the command superstructures?
The model has no bearing on this, because the saucer rim portholes are not included in the scaling analysis. Indeed, they have no bearing to the scaling of the TOS or TMP ships, either.
Even the TNG ship would be incorrectly scaled if the rim windows of the original model were considered to be the 10-Forward ones. But that's a slightly different situation where the detailing was later "corrected".
For a good reason: it's a virtual Trek rule that the saucer rim windows belie the scale. Here, as in so many other ships, they are inconsistent with the deck height established elsewhere.
We see the Kelvin engine portrayed in varying sizes and shapes, elongated, shrunk and truncated. The existence of variants of the saucer is almost a given in such a situation.
And that hardly alters the basic premise of the Kelvin having been designed to be a certain size, even if she were shot at another size incompatible with her design.
There are some impossibilities involved in the TOS design, too. But yeah, that's another case of the ship being shot at a scale different from the one established by exterior design, by giving her some out-of-scale interiors.
Timo Saloniemi
Nope. You posted a diagram of the bridge dome in particular which shows an inaccurate dome and window size and is invalid for comparison. Again, in the screencap here you can plainly see the entire bridge fits into the dome, and ONLY the dome, and does not extend below that; this is consistent with the 457 meter figure and nothing else.
Oh? When was the deck height for ANY Federation starship ever canonically established?
Again: exterior design clearly presents a 457 meter starship. There's virtually no visual evidence from the ACTUAL CG model to suggest otherwise. Richter's mesh does so only because Richter himself was not sure of the size of the vessel when he first modeled it and only had guesswork to go on, hence the inaccuracies.
Far be it for me to distract you from obsessively hounding anyone who pisses you off for a week, but:
So here's your big chance to come out and demonstrate to us that in real world navies "heavy cruiser" describes the largest and most powerful type of vessel in the entire fleet.
Voyager would also qualify as a heavy cruiser under the same scheme; it's very heavily armed for a ship of its size and is designed for long-duration semi-autonomous missions in deep space. This is obviously true of the K'Tinga class as well, which is still referred to as a Battlecruiser in the 24th century despite the presence of larger ships like the Vorcha and Neg'Var.
So here's your big chance to come out and demonstrate to us that in real world navies "heavy cruiser" describes the largest and most powerful type of vessel in the entire fleet.
The hatch itself inside the docking port (again, far more visible in the art book) is much smaller than the outer collar you're measuring by, Timo. It's details like this that are inaccurately reproduced in fan models and lead to incorrect assumptions about the size of the ship. The exact size of the windows is also paramount when deciphering the possible space inside.
At 1:54 into the film (on the PAL DVD) we see a crewman looking out one of the round windows found on the level below the bridge deck (and on the sides of the bridge deck itself). Those windows are about 5 foot in diameter.
As well as on the saucer rim, two levels of windows can be seen towards the end of the engineering hull, which match the deck heights that would be present in the 2-deck saucer rim. Furthermore, the smaller windows along the saucer rim and on the engineering hull would be microscopic if the Kelvin saucer were the same diameter as the TOS Enterprise's. They work out at a more reasonable size on the 457m ship.
At 1:54 into the film (on the PAL DVD) we see a crewman looking out one of the round windows found on the level below the bridge deck (and on the sides of the bridge deck itself). Those windows are about 5 foot in diameter.
As well as on the saucer rim, two levels of windows can be seen towards the end of the engineering hull, which match the deck heights that would be present in the 2-deck saucer rim. Furthermore, the smaller windows along the saucer rim and on the engineering hull would be microscopic if the Kelvin saucer were the same diameter as the TOS Enterprise's. They work out at a more reasonable size on the 457m ship.
Last edited:
How many of us think that the Kelvin was not part of the pre TOS timeline, but is really part of the JJverse?
I think of "These are the Voyages" as a inaccurate holoprogram. Does anyone think that post ENT stories can transition the tech to "the Cage" and TOS successfully?
I think of "These are the Voyages" as a inaccurate holoprogram. Does anyone think that post ENT stories can transition the tech to "the Cage" and TOS successfully?
IMO these things don't have to be explained any more than Saavik totally changing appearance and character between Wrath of Khan and Search for Spock. The actor was changed, end of story.
Heck, there was no transition between the look of TOS and TMP. Vague allusions to an Enterprise refit aside, such a total fleet-wide new look in 2.5 years (one easter egg in the director's edition aside, nothing looks as it did in TOS) isn't likely. Yet if that was possible in 2.5 years, a transition from the look of the Kelvin to the look of "The Cage" in twenty years certainly is. I just accept that the look was modernized (again), and that Trek's future moves with the present.
^It's astonishing how fans will accept a recast actor without complaint, and waste no energy trying to make sense of it in-universe, but if even one detail of a hero ship is modified, or if the same ship is "played" by a new design, or a ship from an era we've never even seen before doesn't look like they think it "should," then they suddenly have to imagine altered timelines or massive, pointless refits, or entire parallel realities to explain it away.
I swear some people are only fans of the technobabble.
I swear some people are only fans of the technobabble.
Bumpy headed Klingons in TMP was enough for me to say slightly different continuityTrek is just one big mess of continuities where I expect a supermarionnete version to pop up
"Make the nacelle caps spin."
"But sir, they don't spin."
"But things that spin are so much cooler than things that don't spin. I'm the captain, I say make it spin."
Considering some of the canonical/visual/plot weirdness going on in "These Are The Voyages" I'm inclined to think that that entire episode occurred in an alternate time-line anyway... one in which the Enterprise-D wasn't commissioned until the 2280s and Will Riker didn't make commander until his mid fifties (by which time holodecks become advanced enough to produce customized clothing without the need to physically change wardrobe).
Again,
When you factor in the Romulan War, where lots of tried and true weapons systems were needed immediately, thus forcing the more exotic stuff like phase pistols and photonic torpedoes back on the shelf for a while, it becomes fairly easy.
Ironically, I caught this in an image that was originally posted by Timo a few weeks ago.
When you compare the window size from the exterior view to the one on the other screenshot (from the inside of the bridge) then it's perfectly clear the entire bridge fits into the top level dome. Even Richter's mesh renders the saucer thickness as (almost exactly) twice the height of the bridge dome.
And with that note we glide back on topic with a certain sudden realization: whatever the in-universe reason (temporal cold war, Narada's debris showing up in the 22nd century, whatever) it can be said that scaling and technology in the Abramsverse is derived from ENT in almost the same way TNG is derived from TOS. So after a hundred years ships the size of NX-01 would still be in service but ships only slightly larger--Kelvin, for example--would be in position to takeover as the fleet workhorse by the turn of the century. By the 2250s, Starfleet would be ready for more far-reaching and ambitious projects, hence the even larger Enterprise. Being the new "flagship" seems to suggest, in Starfleet terminology, that the ship is meant to travel deeper into space and into more dangerous areas than any other vessel; so in this regard it fits the bill.
We never did see what the 2230s flagship would have looked like; to be sure it would be bigger than Kelvin but slightly smaller than Enterprise... something like the USS Newton with a full saucer?
Could I please have the "screencap here" for clarification? I don't see how inaccuracies in the dome and window size could in any way affect my argument about superstructure deck heights, unless we're talking about 50% inaccuracies or something.
Yet it is not - the spacing between window rows is. This is what the superstructure (the two rows of spine windows, the concentric tiers of truncated cones in the middle) provides.
After all, the only windows we see from the set point of view are the three in front of the bridge - and even these are different from the corresponding outer frames in angle. The utility of "exact window sizes" is basically nil, then.
Just out of curiosity:
What new look is this? We only ever saw a single starship in TMP, after 18 months of refitting (but possibly more like half a decade after we last saw another starship). We returned to see one more ship another decade later, then started witnessing some signs of a fleetwide change in the following movies. It't not much faster than the Kelvin teaser/"The Cage" hop.
Timo Saloniemi
Which is why I pointed out the rows towards the rear of the engineering hull, which match the saucer rim. Not every deck had windows in TOS or TMP - why should they here? Or is it another case of "the windows don't count unless they're the ones I point out"?Timo said:
So I refer you to the window rows, and the docking ports in the engineering hull - an engineering hull which would be (at it's widest point!) the diameter of the TOS Enterprise's nacelle if the saucer diameters matched. How many decks would fit in a TOS nacelle? How much usable floorspace in such decks?
ST-One
Vice Admiral
Yeah, totally... but only when you completely ignore the Space Office Complex, the Airtram, the TravelPod, Epsilon IX, the tram-station of frigging Starfleet Headquarters.
Keep in mind that TOS never went to Earth except when going back in time. For all we know, Earth looked like that prior to TMP and the Starbases "out there" were behind in getting upgrades and new paint
ST-One
Vice Admiral
Keep in mind that TOS never went to Earth except when going back in time. For all we know, Earth looked like that prior to TMP and the Starbases "out there" were behind in getting upgrades and new paint
Then Dr. Daystrom must have used some outdated-looking parts to build his M-5...
Similar threads
