• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Will there be an explaination for how enterprise can go underwater?

Re: Will there be an explaination for how enterprise can go underwater

I demand that a character break the fourth wall and give that exact explanation to reassure us, or I will forever boycott the franchise. :mad::censored::scream:
 
Re: Will there be an explaination for how enterprise can go underwater

I demand that a character break the fourth wall and give that exact explanation to reassure us, or I will forever boycott the franchise. :mad::censored::scream:

But will they give an explanation for how the 4th wall was broken?
 
Re: Will there be an explaination for how enterprise can go underwater

Erm... is this going to be this film's version of the Blue Warp Nacelles thread? ;)

Apparently not. :vulcan:

M'Sharak tried to kick it in that direction, here. Then I tried to jump start it in the post above yours, but no takers. People are more interested in treating it as a worthy topic.
 
Last edited:
Re: Will there be an explaination for how enterprise can go underwater

As far as we know, the Ent does not actually fly around under water, it just does a controlled descent under the surface and then comes straight up again. That would be far easier than actually flying around under water.
 
Re: Will there be an explaination for how enterprise can go underwater

You know, if the pool walls/floor where greenscreened that would be an interesting way of doing model work.
 
Re: Will there be an explaination for how enterprise can go underwater

Agreed. I didn't see any distortion or water movement. Too bad he didn't film it surfacing. :rommie:
 
Re: Will there be an explaination for how enterprise can go underwater

^ Yeah, I went to his YouTube page and there are quite a few vids like this.
 
Re: Will there be an explaination for how enterprise can go underwater

The thing that's funny is that Trekkies have, for 46 years, been suspending disbelief in a massive, unconventionally designed starship traveling through the galaxy at faster-than-light warp speed, shooting phaser (better than laser!) beams and photon (eh??) torpedoes at klingon warriors, omnipotent beings, cyborgs, space amoebas, and Spock's Brain. They use a transporter to beam their energy patterns down to planets. They generate gravity with a graviton generator (and magic deck plates). They use nadions and cadions and baryons and chronitons (what??) and whatsitons and TRONitons to open/close subspace/wormhole/singularity/rift/void/eddy/fissure/scaryfrakkingholes in space, and the aliens all have 2 legs, 2 arms, and funny nose/forehead/neck ridges and weird ears. (I know, tholians... but they are an exception, not a rule lol).

We've seen ships fly so close to a star they should be burned to a crisp in a microsecond or crushed in the atmosphere of a gas giant. We've seen a starship land, we've seen it fly through fluidic space (waht??), and we've seen them go underwater. We've seen them use transwarp conduits and quantum singularities/slipstreams to travel hundreds of lightyears in minutes. We've even seen someone occupy every place in the universe at once before de-evolving and mating with the captain (ewww).

Its only because this is "Abrams and his bastardized Trek" that people are coming down so hard and being so inflexible that any explanation (which should not really be needed if it serves story or adds to the uniqueness of Star Trek, particularly in light of the above) is automatically too outlandish, or somehow an affront to Gene Roddenberry, Star Trek, and the Q Continuum. I agree with Abrams 100%. Enjoy the reruns. I'm happy for Star Trek to keep going boldly.



and sling shot around the sun to create a time warp, or pulling away from a black hole to do the same thing. Traveling to parallel universes, etc. I think you nailed it! nuTrek doesn't get caught up spewing Trekno BS like modern trek which was a fallback to solving the story plot, it killed the drama in a lot of cases, it goes back to the original series that it is the story first.

I don't remember hearing many complaints when the Enterprise was struggling to get out of Earth's atmosphere because an F104 was trying to shoot it down with a nuclear missile. it was pretty freaking cool is what I remember when I first saw it.


-Chris
 
Re: Will there be an explaination for how enterprise can go underwater

I would think that this is the new standard method of washing starships. It would have come in handy for the TOS Enterprise after it got covered in space amoeba goo.
Just remember to turn off the Bussard collectors. They're designed to attract and collect hydrogen for the propulsion systems. Seawater is loaded with hydrogen and deuterium.
They could depict a swimming session for the crew by having the ship be partially submerged with the upper part of the saucer a few feet below the water level. Open some hatches and throw out some deck chairs on the dry upper deck area that would serve as a beach. It would give the crew something to do while Bones and Kirk are out spying on the natives.
 
Re: Will there be an explaination for how enterprise can go underwater

I really don't care about the technical reasoning behind it being underwater, I just want a logical mission reason for it.
 
Re: Will there be an explaination for how enterprise can go underwater

I really don't care about the technical reasoning behind it being underwater, I just want a logical mission reason for it.

my impression is that there isn't a good mission reason for it... perhaps why Pike gives Kirk the speech that is used in the 2-minute trailer about him being reckless
 
Re: Will there be an explaination for how enterprise can go underwater

I really don't care about the technical reasoning behind it being underwater, I just want a logical mission reason for it.

my impression is that there isn't a good mission reason for it...

Considering the 9-minute preview end prior to that scene ending, my impression is that we can't tell either way if they will provide us with a logical mission reason or not.

Maybe they mention the reason in the 10th or 11th minute. Considering that they were busy trying to save Spock, I doubt the crew would waste time debating with each other logic of being underwater. They may wait until Spock is safely back on the ship to hold that discussion -- or it may even be implied by their dialogue WHILE they are saving Spock.
 
Re: Will there be an explaination for how enterprise can go underwater

I really don't care about the technical reasoning behind it being underwater, I just want a logical mission reason for it.

my impression is that there isn't a good mission reason for it...

Considering the 9-minute preview end prior to that scene ending, my impression is that we can't tell either way if they will provide us with a logical mission reason or not.

Maybe they mention the reason in the 10th or 11th minute. Considering that they were busy trying to save Spock, I doubt the crew would waste time debating with each other logic of being underwater. They may wait until Spock is safely back on the ship to hold that discussion -- or it may even be implied by their dialogue WHILE they are saving Spock.

thats not the point i was making. i really don't care if we get an explanation for how it can go underwater. its capable of bloody interstellar travel... a little moistness shouldn't do it much harm :)
 
Re: Will there be an explaination for how enterprise can go underwater

^
^^I think there may be an explanation given. I'm not saying they will go out of there way to provide the logical explanation as to why they were there, but that reason may become evident as the scene plays out.

That's the proper way to explain those types of things -- imply the explanation in a natural way as the scene unfolds.
 
Re: Will there be an explaination for how enterprise can go underwater

my impression is that there isn't a good mission reason for it...

Considering the 9-minute preview end prior to that scene ending, my impression is that we can't tell either way if they will provide us with a logical mission reason or not.

Maybe they mention the reason in the 10th or 11th minute. Considering that they were busy trying to save Spock, I doubt the crew would waste time debating with each other logic of being underwater. They may wait until Spock is safely back on the ship to hold that discussion -- or it may even be implied by their dialogue WHILE they are saving Spock.

thats not the point i was making. i really don't care if we get an explanation for how it can go underwater. its capable of bloody interstellar travel... a little moistness shouldn't do it much harm :)
Pretty sure there is a warning on the underside of the Enterprise that says "Never get wet or feed after midnight".
 
Re: Will there be an explaination for how enterprise can go underwater

And YET in the first nine minutes..

Scotty is babbling about the Enterprise being underwater.

"Do you have any idea how ridiculous it is to have a starship on the bottom of the ocean. We've been doon here since last night. The salt water is going to ruin the <unintelligble>"

Clearly the Enterprise is delicate.
 
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top