Tidbits from Kirk's viewing of Enterprise
- Thread starter MacGyvr
- Start date
My memory of TAS dates from seeing reruns of it on Going Live/Live and Kicking on BBC 1 saturday mornings. So it was atleast shown sometime in the early to mid 90s.
Being built on the ground makes far more sense to me than in space, especially given the logistics of the manpower alone.
Having to provide environmental suits for all the laborers, housing, etc- difficulties in working in a zero-g environment.
We know the ship can operate in an atmosphere-= particualrly Earth's. We saw it in Tomorrow is Yesterday.
Maybe 100 years later in TNG time with replicator technology far more advanced it's become practical.
All supposition, of course.
As for Kirk seeing the Enterprise built, he's driving past it on his way to the Academy to enter Star Fleet. It's a few years later when McCoy sneaks him aboard.
Absolutely Right(TM).
Best. Post. Ever.I think I found something. Did someone notive the giant headgear in the background?
[snip photo]
I see the sombrero is being constructed separately. No doubt they will do the final assembly of 'hat to ship' in space. That's the only logical way to do it.
It is completely and utterly ludicrous to think that a Somrero could be flown from earth into space - where are it's warp engines? how would it maintain a warp field in the atmosphere.
It is clear to me that off-screen some giant robot Mexicans are being constructed. They will wear the Sombrero and fly into space. It is logical.
Eat that, Cogley!
maybe.
nice visual, but given the chance, I bet you wouldn't have written it this way.
nice visual, but given the chance, I bet you wouldn't have written it this way.
I also like the idea of the ship been built on the ground even if it doesn't make any sense to the canon in me. It's the beautiful shot of Kirk watching the ship been built and him starting his love affair with her. If we follow certain rules we'd never get a shot like that. At most just the saucer which wouldn't have quite the same impact.
I remember TAS also showed on BBC 2 on Sundays mornings also for a while.
I remember TAS also showed on BBC 2 on Sundays mornings also for a while.
Given the chance, I would have convinced them not to make any more Star Trek after Voyager ended. But after seeing the trailer, I'm glad they are.
I'm not up on ship design ... but I was wondering. When the Enterprise is finished, what happens? Do they take down the scaffolding and let it sit on the ground, fire up the engines or whatever, and ship it out into the atmosphere and then into space? Or do they just blast it off the scaffolding and into space? And aren't they a little close to a building to set off impulse engines (or thrusters or whatever)? This all probably sounds ridiculous, but really ... how do they get that thing into space?
lol.
I'm not wired that tight, construction in space isn't a 'canon' issue for me. (I don't swing that way.) I just think it's a reasonable SFnal expectation that construction/assembly occur in orbit. Not even related to Trek specifically. If it were more 'rocket' like, or vertical in orientation I could buy it. "WALL-E" had a nice sequence with their John Berkey inspired ship, on the other hand.
As it's edited, the overlap of the arcologies, and the construction of the ship is nice. There's a lot of scope there. Just prefer to see it accomplished in a different setting. Still- I'll take a wait and see approach to how this all plays out on film.
I'm not wired that tight, construction in space isn't a 'canon' issue for me. (I don't swing that way.) I just think it's a reasonable SFnal expectation that construction/assembly occur in orbit. Not even related to Trek specifically. If it were more 'rocket' like, or vertical in orientation I could buy it. "WALL-E" had a nice sequence with their John Berkey inspired ship, on the other hand.
As it's edited, the overlap of the arcologies, and the construction of the ship is nice. There's a lot of scope there. Just prefer to see it accomplished in a different setting. Still- I'll take a wait and see approach to how this all plays out on film.
Anti-gravity tugs.
With imagination.
I am 39. I think was about 8 or 9 when it aired.
but really ... how do they get that thing into space?
Tractor Beam from an orbital station.
With imagination.
I imagine the huge space stations that we see in Star Trek were built in space. Because I certainly can't see Starfleet's space station from the TOS movies and the one we glimpse in this movie's trailer being built on the ground. They must be miles in length. But components of them certainly could've been. So, are we to believe everything that went up there to build those world-like structures were pieces smaller than the Enterprise? And were sent up with great effort? It would take forever to build at that pace. Maybe components the size of the Enterprise or even bigger are commonly sent into space.
That's it, really. What we're losing here, is a little perspective. That's the eureka experience I had starring at Kirk starring at the Enterprise being built on the ground. The Enterprise is really not all that big. So, I guess is could be built on the ground and ferried into space somehow.
There. I've converted!
This would make sense; the motorcycle ride starts in Iowa but ends in San Francisco.
...by the way, I love your signature quote...the one about the atom-smashers and beautiful girl who will be turned into a chimpanzee...but S.J. Perelman originally said that, not John Locke -- at least not the 18th century philosopher John Locke (obviously). If the Character on "Lost" named John Locke said this (and I don't know if he did or not), then he was quoting S.J. Perelman...
...but like I said, I love the quote. Perelman was a genius of 20th century humor, up there with Ogden Nash and P.G. Wodehouse.
Of course. It would make no sense to add such an 'effect' to this scene.
---------------
Yeah, I agree, it would make no sense whatsoever. Unless you wanted to make it more realistic, of course.
That's utterly rediculous. Do we have that kind of problem when we build any large structure? Not really, and they take a heck of a lot longer than a week to build. I guess our fleet of nuclear aircraft carriers took a decade to clean out after launch, then.
Similar threads
- Poll
