Compassion and humor for not noticing it.
And horror as well because your might have started one of those "why did they build it on the ground" threads
The Enterprise under construction
- Thread starter Dragonfare
- Start date
- Status
Compassion and humor for not noticing it.
And horror as well because your might have started one of those "why did they build it on the ground" threads
What's your source for that?
From Memory Alpha (I have the Tech manual at home, but I'm not home or I'd post more):
Aircraft carriers aren't built in Iowa.
Yeah, look at the second picture down on the left on the Utopia Planitia page...ground-based shipyard.
But aircraft carriers are still built on the surface before being put in the water for final construction. I don't think it's a remarkable stretch for a spaceship to be built on land before being sent off into space. We do that now amazingly enough.
Yeah that's because it makes no sense to try to build the thing in salt water. But salt water ain't no vacuum. And there's a huge difference between dropping a ship into the ocean and lifting a ship into space.
Actually, it makes more sense to build everything in space. No oxidation, no weather, no gravity. You'd build smaller parts somewhere and assemble it in space. But you would not construct the entire fucking thing on the ground as shown in the new movie. That's totally laughable.
This.
They have the capacity to overcome both g-forces and gravity already (shuttles able to fly, for instance) and the capacity to travel faster-than-light. Is the idea that they'd be able to easily lift a ship into space after building it on the ground really all that hard to buy?
This idea that 23rd century UFP with all its forcefields, gravity manipulation capabilities, tractor beams, transporters, space-time warping capabilities, weather control networks and god knows what other magical technologies somehow can't possibly & safely build and launch a starship from Earth has to be one of the most laughable ever.
Bingo!
As for my comment on aircraft carriers - yes, they are built on the ground, in dry docks, immediately adjacent to water. They aren't built landlocked in the middle of the country. Parts, components and systems could come from anywhere, but the vessel is built where it can most easily be birthed into a waterway.
I would expect the same in Trek, except final assembly would be in space, in orbit, like a dry dock.
The ship being built on the ground in the new movie had nothing to do with any of that.
It was all so there could be that scene of a conflicted Kirk rolling up on his future cycle, looking at the ship, and in that moment making his decision to enlist in Starfleet.
Outside of that story point, it makes no sense.
And, frankly, that story point is far more important than technicalities that don't aid in telling a good story.
Yes, we've known all of that ever since the first trailers came out.
I was addressing the...concerns that it's somehow technologically impossible to do so.
Which is the point they were trying to make, successfully & beautifully made and which is all that really matters anyway.
Because...?
And because we know how those always turn out, I'll strongly suggest that we dispense with that topic for the purposes of this thread.
Compassion and humor for not noticing it.
And horror as well because your might have started one of those "why did they build it on the ground" threads
Anyone wishing to discuss why the ship can/should be or cannot/shouldn't be built on the ground is invited to start a thread for that express purpose in the Trek Tech forum. I may even follow the discussion there, should it occur, but no more about it here, please.
Wow...and 7 times. No, I think you might be alone in this.
Better late than never I suppose ?
Just wait until you guys turn 40; it will become much easier to believe, trust me. I find now that theater movie screens fall into an awkward gap between where my reading glasses are effective and where my still half-decent distance vision kicks in. In that middle-range zone, details can sometimes be difficult to make out. 'Tis inconvenient, to say the least.
I say this will all the care and respect due Your Modship's position -- you may want to go visit an optometrist. Seriously -- eye conditions can worsen if they go untreated, and next time it may not be something as innocuous as the Enterprise that you miss... Good luck.
Sometimes there's only so much an optometrist can do, when you pass 40. At some point entropy wins.
I just got new glasses, and I am still similarly afflicted. But I did see the Big E at that moment, though I couldn't be sure it was her because I miss the 1701, too.
Dragonfare, first I agree, I think it is difficult to see, on DVD anyway (well, to me, I'm over 40 and my eyes have started going downhill fast )...perhaps my TV is crap, but, though I knew it was there, and had seen the trailer screencaps, it does look very dark, vague, just lights.
I'm glad this topic was brought up, something I've been wondering about.
Given Abram's desire (?) to use models, camera/perspective tricks instead of CG, and
that news photo/story concerning a helicopter shot of the studio lot, which seemed to show a 20' (?) blurry model of something enterprise-shaped next to a building...I wonder if that construction shot was accomplished with an actual miniature, enhanced in the end with little CG details?
I don't know...
Perhaps I'm losing more than my eyesight.
)...perhaps my TV is crap, but, though I knew it was there, and had seen the trailer screencaps, it does look very dark, vague, just lights.I'm glad this topic was brought up, something I've been wondering about.
Given Abram's desire (?) to use models, camera/perspective tricks instead of CG, and
that news photo/story concerning a helicopter shot of the studio lot, which seemed to show a 20' (?) blurry model of something enterprise-shaped next to a building...I wonder if that construction shot was accomplished with an actual miniature, enhanced in the end with little CG details?
I don't know...
Perhaps I'm losing more than my eyesight.
You mean the item seen in the picture here?
(Complete news segment here -- they zoom in on the object starting at about 0:20)
Yup, although one of the news people does say in the clip something like "that must be the Star Trek Enterprise".
That's because aircraft carriers cannot fly.
I find it hard to believe a ship that can travel faster than light, can blast its way out of a black hole, and can shrug off impacts from multi-megaton antimatter warheads fired by Klingon battlecruisers would find it all that difficult just to haul its own heavy ass out of a cornfield in Iowa. If you have a starship with that kind of power, you can build it anywhere that's convenient for you.
Ah, yes, the joys of old age...
I've been packing three pairs of glasses since I was 48...
One (bifocal) pair for Driving...
One pair for the Computer...
And One for Everything else!!
Let me tell ya, it's never good to grab the wrong pair when heading out of the house on a mission...
One feels as doomed as Guy Fleegman...
- Status
Similar threads
