The E-D was built on the ground, don't see why The 1701 couldn't
- Thread starter RAMA
- Start date
- Status
Only if the ingredients are concocted on the ground and the ice cream is made in orbit.
Captain X
Rear Admiral
Gee, really? No, I thought they pressed and shaped all the sheet metal and riveted everything together right there and orbit...
The point still stands.
Well, no it doesn't. Your reference to the ISS supports the premise of the Enterprise's major components being built on Earth more effectively than it does the claim that the ship was built in orbit.
No, you're pretty much just arguing semantics here. The point was that the ISS was "assembled/built/constructed/glued together/whatever the hell you want to call it" in orbit of our planet with our comparatively primitive technology, without anyone's suit being torn or floating off into oblivion. Since these are facts not in question, it's plainly obvious that the point is valid and stands as made.
Awww ... damn. Now I'm gonna have to switch sides just to be iconoclastic.
Thanks Probert!
But really, I've looked at this as a question of futurism. There's three solutions: the ships are built entirely on the ground and somehow launched from there (as the Saturn V and Orbiters have been); the ships are manufactured as subsystems on the ground which are then launched and assembled in orbit (as the ISS is); or industry has largely left the planet and is spread between Earth orbit and other parts of the Solar System and the ships are built entirely in space (Gerry O'Neil's "High Frontier" details such a shift, illustrating advantages to space manufacture ... once an infrastructure is in place).
Now which sounds most futuristic?
Showing a starship from 300 years in the future being built on the ground just feels a bit like filming the construction of a nuclear submarine with techniques from 300 years ago -- starting with lumberjacks cutting down trees to be used for the boat's keel.
Last edited:
trevanian
Rear Admiral
The point still stands.
Well, no it doesn't. Your reference to the ISS supports the premise of the Enterprise's major components being built on Earth more effectively than it does the claim that the ship was built in orbit.
No, you're pretty much just arguing semantics here.
No, we're discussing where the thing was "built" as if it has some relevance to where the Enterprise ought to be built. The ISS was largely constructed on the ground and assembled in space, so it's reasonable to suggest that the same be done with the Enterprise - as it apparently is.
Captain X
Rear Admiral
The argument was that the entire ship was build/assembled/whatever you want to call it on the ground because then the yard workers wouldn't have to worry about tearing their EVA suits or floating off. I effectively showed that the astronauts of today seem to have no problem with that. What's so hard about this to understand?
So basically....
Star Trek Starships are Created/Made into Individual Sub-Sections/Parts out of raw materials on the ground in a Gravity Well (i.e. Planet) and then those Individual Sub-Sections, are Assembled/Put Together in a high orbit around that same Gravity Well in an extremely slow, decaying orbit until they can power themselves up and escape said Gravity Well.
Uhmnnn.... Sounds to me like just about everyone (with one definite exception with HIS First Hand Knowledge) who has posted in this thread has been slightly correct in Their ASSUMPTIONS!
Ain't being a Star Trek Fan wonderful...
Star Trek Starships are Created/Made into Individual Sub-Sections/Parts out of raw materials on the ground in a Gravity Well (i.e. Planet) and then those Individual Sub-Sections, are Assembled/Put Together in a high orbit around that same Gravity Well in an extremely slow, decaying orbit until they can power themselves up and escape said Gravity Well.
Uhmnnn.... Sounds to me like just about everyone (with one definite exception with HIS First Hand Knowledge) who has posted in this thread has been slightly correct in Their ASSUMPTIONS!
Ain't being a Star Trek Fan wonderful...
Ummm...
I believe that it's a fairly well known fact, that anything within a planetary gravity well is in a constant state of falling (thus a decaying orbit), unless someone or something intervenes occasionally to keep it up there.
And my comment has nothing to do with with any pre-knowledge of the Trek-11 script, other than I am assuming that it will probably take into account (either on purpose or by accident) the Natural Laws of Physic's.
So please don't get yerself all bent outta shape over it.
The Moon? Every year it moves a few centimeters farther away from the Earth. Objects a few hundred miles or less are subject to atmospheric drag and lose a little velocity (and thus altitude) at a rate that's difficult to predict exactly. This is what took down Skylab. It was originally planned to rescue it with one of the early shuttle launches, but its orbit decayed too quickly and the shuttle faced a series of delays.
The "Galileo Seven" however, was never even in an orbit. It was simply following a ballistic trajectory out into space. The sort of sub-orbital hop John Glenn enjoyed.
Actually welding is one of the strongest ways to hold two metals together. That's why they are always working on new forms of welding like...
Shields, too. And when they're down, you depend on a hull made of tritanium, not something put together with a welding torch. The welding gag was an excuse to show sparks, an effective marketing thing, as well to grab the attention of those who find welders sexy--another marketing thing.
I rest my sombrero.
Energy beam
Energy beam welding methods, namely laser beam welding and electron beam welding, are relatively new processes that have become quite popular in high production applications. The two processes are quite similar, differing most notably in their source of power. Laser beam welding employs a highly focused laser beam, while electron beam welding is done in a vacuum and uses an electron beam. Both have a very high energy density, making deep weld penetration possible and minimizing the size of the weld area. Both processes are extremely fast, and are easily automated, making them highly productive. The primary disadvantages are their very high equipment costs (though these are decreasing) and a susceptibility to thermal cracking. Developments in this area include laser-hybrid welding, which uses principles from both laser beam welding and arc welding for even better weld properties.[25]
[edit] Solid-state
Like the first welding process, forge welding, some modern welding methods do not involve the melting of the materials being joined. One of the most popular, ultrasonic welding, is used to connect thin sheets or wires made of metal or thermoplastic by vibrating them at high frequency and under high pressure. The equipment and methods involved are similar to that of resistance welding, but instead of electric current, vibration provides energy input. Welding metals with this process does not involve melting the materials; instead, the weld is formed by introducing mechanical vibrations horizontally under pressure. When welding plastics, the materials should have similar melting temperatures, and the vibrations are introduced vertically. Ultrasonic welding is commonly used for making electrical connections out of aluminum or copper, and it is also a very common polymer welding process.
Another common process, explosion welding, involves the joining of materials by pushing them together under extremely high pressure. The energy from the impact plasticizes the materials, forming a weld, even though only a limited amount of heat is generated. The process is commonly used for welding dissimilar materials, such as the welding of aluminum with steel in ship hulls or compound plates. Other solid-state welding processes include co-extrusion welding, cold welding, diffusion welding, friction welding (including friction stir welding), high frequency welding, hot pressure welding, induction welding, and roll welding.[26]
Actually Shockwaves propigate very well in a vacumn, Vacumn means no oxygen. but there is other matter in space that is effected by energy or eles collisions and explosions in space wouldn't knock asteroids out of orbit of effect the paths of celestial bodies.. You're thinking is that shockwaves have to do with gasses and not the energy that is used to propel the shockwave. Hence why a shockwave can travel miles through solid ground.. It has nothing to do with air and everything to do with energy and matter.
Solar flares, Solar winds, are all enegry particels that have an effect on earth and guess what they are moving through the vacumn of space. A shockwave is the same thing, just because on earth it moves air or water doesn't mean it needs these things to actually travel......
Watch American Choppers. The boys do alot of Test fitting, where they spot weld peices in place where rthey go and then break it down to be sent for finishing and then do the major welding (the permanent welds) when the pieces come back. So this could be something very similar. Spot welds to see if the pieces fit to speck or if they have to send a section back to be re-tooled so that it does fit. You know you don't want to launch a section twice.
The point is, that in the on-screen 'canon' of Trek (which Star Trek can ignore as far as I'm concerned) it is very much established that starships can operate within a planet's atmosphere.
NOT the canon of TOS, it doesn't.
And that is what they're dealing with here, not every bit of ModernTrek Berman burdened us with.
THEY AREN'T SEPRERATE CANONS.... Enterprise is a prequel to TOS, Then the movies, then TNG, then DS9, then Voyager. This isn't like Transformers where you have 8 different continuities to pick and chose from Trek canon isn't seperated, no matter how muddled up the continuity is.. HENCE why this movie is a good thing. It's starting all over rebooting and prequelling the original series so that a new less strained canon can be established. I mean if Gene couldn't even keep it straight and he created the fraking thing.... How can we? As for your Berman bump as much as I hate the guy. The projects he was invovled with were all part and parcel to the Original Trek universe. There was no shift once Rodenberry died. Paramount put the man in charge of a property that had become theirs, and his ideas and concepts became what trek was. There is no Modern Trek because the Modern Era of Trek was kicked off by the same man who made the original Trek, the con was handed over to Berman while the grand admiral was still in the captains seat. Hence Trek is Trek with no factionization. PERIOD...
The New Canon is coming.. The New canon BEGINS with this movie. It begins with J.J. Abrams' Star Trek.
Or if you look at the closeups most of the running lights illuminate the ships hull. Maybe they were used for ship to ship identification close up, or so that Mickey the slow ensign could see as he washed the outside of the ship on tuesdays....
Please feel free to cite the sources in your possession that quote Gene Roddenberry - or any other TOS staffer - invoking scientific accuracy to justify either the nacelle caps or running lights(*).
TGT
* The running lights may actually have a real-world application when maneuvering in crowded (by other space vehicles and platforms) planetary orbits where relative velocities can range from zero to several kilometers per second, particularly if a segment of the orbit passes through the planet's shadow cone.
Assembly and construction are two different things...... but ultimately they are both called a build so the modules were built on earth and the build was finished in space. No need to argue now...
The point still stands.
Well, no it doesn't. Your reference to the ISS supports the premise of the Enterprise's major components being built on Earth more effectively than it does the claim that the ship was built in orbit.
No, you're pretty much just arguing semantics here. The point was that the ISS was "assembled/built/constructed/glued together/whatever the hell you want to call it" in orbit of our planet with our comparatively primitive technology, without anyone's suit being torn or floating off into oblivion. Since these are facts not in question, it's plainly obvious that the point is valid and stands as made.
ST-One
Vice Admiral
- Status
Similar threads
