Ghost Train Posted May 14, 2009 Share Posted May 14, 2009 I'm not so sure about the length of the new Enterprise... that would make it longer than a Galaxy class . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UN_MARINE Posted May 14, 2009 Share Posted May 14, 2009 http://drexfiles.wordpress.com/2009/01/11/...bash-pictorial/ <---- Pictures of the original Stargazer model seen on Picard's desk. yup. i see the back of a battroid VF-1 behind the bridge dome. that 700 meter Enterprise is just wrong. i agree, arbitrary misinformed wild-ass guesstimate "oh, it's bigger than..." so who cooked those numbers up? the same guy that said "we won't do mass-shifting" ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Killer Robot Posted May 14, 2009 Share Posted May 14, 2009 I'm not so sure about the length of the new Enterprise... that would make it longer than a Galaxy class . I don't care if it is: new continuity and all. I just object to this because the Galactica is more than twice the size (1400m) that it is in this image, making the new Enterprise look far larger than it actually is. And casting doubt on the whole image for me. I can't find any other sources for the length of the new Enterprise on a quick search, and some of the others (Original Enterprise refit, ISS) are giving me (slightly) different numbers than on this sheet. Was there research on this, or just numbers thrown next to pictures? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chen Posted May 14, 2009 Share Posted May 14, 2009 Yeah that seems a little large. I think I'll wait for one of those official spec books to come out. Anyways here's a pic depicting all the Enterprises. Interesting it looks like the trend to go larger with each new version was starting to reverse with the Sovereign class ship. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghost Train Posted May 14, 2009 Share Posted May 14, 2009 (edited) I don't care if it is: new continuity and all. I just object to this because the Galactica is more than twice the size (1400m) that it is in this image, making the new Enterprise look far larger than it actually is. And casting doubt on the whole image for me. I can't find any other sources for the length of the new Enterprise on a quick search, and some of the others (Original Enterprise refit, ISS) are giving me (slightly) different numbers than on this sheet. Was there research on this, or just numbers thrown next to pictures? Yea I know, new continuity, but new continuity has to make sense. The only thing different up until the events of the film are: - Kirk's personal history - Kelvin gets blown up by Nero - The Federation hires a robotic Steve Jobs as an interior designer Since both of these events are unlikely to impact ship size, we assume that starfleet ship development pretty much took on a similar course as the original continuity, hence I feel that the larger size (though not improbable) is unusual. Edited May 14, 2009 by Ghost Train Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
miles316 Posted May 14, 2009 Share Posted May 14, 2009 (edited) Yeah that seems a little large. I think I'll wait for one of those official spec books to come out. Anyways here's a pic depicting all the Enterprises. Interesting it looks like the trend to go larger with each new version was starting to reverse with the Sovereign class ship. Whom ever put together that size chart got the space shuttle wrong. Space shuttle 56 m long, CV-6 Enterprise 230 m long. Edited May 14, 2009 by miles316 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr March Posted May 14, 2009 Share Posted May 14, 2009 (edited) http://gizmodo.com/5253324/how-big-is-the-...ed-to-galactica The Battlestar Galactica from the Re-imagined series (which I believe is the schematic used in the picture) is 1,438.64 meters long according to the Battlestar Galactica Wiki. So it'd be over twice the size as shown in the picture. EDIT: According to Ex-Astris Scientia (apparently one of the oldest and most accurate Trek technical sites on the internet), the new Constitution Class ship from Star Trek (2009) is still only 295 meters in length. An in-depth analysis can be found HERE for what it's worth. Edited May 14, 2009 by Mr March Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Einherjar Posted May 14, 2009 Share Posted May 14, 2009 Does anyone remember the Star Fleet Universe variant of the franchise. Maybe they incorporated stuff from there into the new reboot, especially with the Enterprise's weapons. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eugimon Posted May 14, 2009 Share Posted May 14, 2009 The Battlestar Galactica from the Re-imagined series (which I believe is the schematic used in the picture) is 1,438.64 meters long according to the Battlestar Galactica Wiki. So it'd be over twice the size as shown in the picture. EDIT: According to Ex-Astris Scientia (apparently one of the oldest and most accurate Trek technical sites on the internet), the new Constitution Class ship from Star Trek (2009) is still only 295 meters in length. An in-depth analysis can be found HERE for what it's worth. oh good, so the panic and gnashing of teeth over the size of the make believe space ship has come to an end? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chen Posted May 14, 2009 Share Posted May 14, 2009 Whom ever put together that size chart got the space shuttle wrong. Space shuttle 56 m long, CV-6 Enterprise 230 m long. Yeah, that's why next to the pick there's a little triangle which denotes that the Space Shuttle isn't to scale with the others. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peter Posted May 14, 2009 Share Posted May 14, 2009 Does any one have a picture of poor Captain Garrett after getting skewered? I tried to find an image.....no luck. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
miles316 Posted May 14, 2009 Share Posted May 14, 2009 Yeah, that's why next to the pick there's a little triangle which denotes that the Space Shuttle isn't to scale with the others. Sorry I should have been more observant. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr March Posted May 14, 2009 Share Posted May 14, 2009 oh good, so the panic and gnashing of teeth over the size of the make believe space ship has come to an end? I wasn't really aware of a grander argument about the sizes (though I'm learning fast, LOL), I merely saw the chart in this thread and reacted to what I saw as an error. If you recall, I built a BSG-Macross ship chart some time ago and remembered from that experience that the Battlestar Galactica Re-Imagined was much larger than it appeared on the chart EXO posted here. That's all. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sharky Posted May 14, 2009 Share Posted May 14, 2009 Yeah that seems a little large. I think I'll wait for one of those official spec books to come out. Anyways here's a pic depicting all the Enterprises. Interesting it looks like the trend to go larger with each new version was starting to reverse with the Sovereign class ship. You know I think the new Hot Wheels Reliant (and I suppose the Enterprise for that matter) is almost to scale as the Art Asylum Enterprise-E. I'm going to check when I get back home from work. That's a nice coincidence if that's the case. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eugimon Posted May 14, 2009 Share Posted May 14, 2009 I wasn't really aware of a grander argument about the sizes (though I'm learning fast, LOL), I merely saw the chart in this thread and reacted to what I saw as an error. If you recall, I built a BSG-Macross ship chart some time ago and remembered from that experience that the Battlestar Galactica Re-Imagined was much larger than it appeared on the chart EXO posted here. That's all. Oh, I know... it's just that, the die hard trekkies are rallying around any little thing to say this new movie isn't "real" star trek, including that the enterprise is too big, blah blah blah. I wonder if it really helps them enjoy ST more to be so hyper critical of everything new. Hmm, I guess I could ask the same of some Macross fans. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Knight26 Posted May 14, 2009 Share Posted May 14, 2009 I guess it is time to hand in my geek card, because, well I hated the movie, I want my time and my money back. From a trekkie perspective, I disliked it, from a perspective of someone coming in with no knowledge of trek I hated it, and from my personnal perspective I found too much wrong with it to enjoy it. Toss it in the trash, because that is where it belongs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kanedaestes Posted May 14, 2009 Share Posted May 14, 2009 Ouch, care to elaborate more as to why you hate it so much? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr March Posted May 14, 2009 Share Posted May 14, 2009 Oh, I know... it's just that, the die hard trekkies are rallying around any little thing to say this new movie isn't "real" star trek, including that the enterprise is too big, blah blah blah. I wonder if it really helps them enjoy ST more to be so hyper critical of everything new. Hmm, I guess I could ask the same of some Macross fans. Well, even though the new 2009 film might not be too bright, it was infinitely more entertaining than the past two decades of Trek. Entertainment is supposed to be the point ("As I'm certain that I read that somewhere once") so we can cheer for that In all honesty, the new ship looks like the same size as the old ones, at least to me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vostok 7 Posted May 14, 2009 Share Posted May 14, 2009 The Battlestar Galactica from the Re-imagined series (which I believe is the schematic used in the picture) is 1,438.64 meters long according to the Battlestar Galactica Wiki. So it'd be over twice the size as shown in the picture. EDIT: According to Ex-Astris Scientia (apparently one of the oldest and most accurate Trek technical sites on the internet), the new Constitution Class ship from Star Trek (2009) is still only 295 meters in length. An in-depth analysis can be found HERE for what it's worth. That's MUCH better. At the 700-900m mark a single nacelle is bigger than the original Constitution! Vostok 7 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eugimon Posted May 14, 2009 Share Posted May 14, 2009 Well, even though the new 2009 film might not be too bright, it was infinitely more entertaining than the past two decades of Trek. Entertainment is supposed to be the point ("As I'm certain that I read that somewhere once") so we can cheer for that In all honesty, the new ship looks like the same size as the old ones, at least to me. I'm fine if people don't like it... but to say things like, the ship is too big or the uniforms don't look right therefore it's not "real" star trek... it's hard to take those people seriously. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RedWolf Posted May 14, 2009 Share Posted May 14, 2009 Indeed if it weren't for the size Nero wouldn't have recognized it for the Enterprise even if radically different from the 1701 he knew from history. But as for the crew complement of this Starfleet it is overinflated compared to ships of the TOS era. The Enterprise, Constitution class, the biggest capital at the time had 430 crew members. The smaller D7 battlecruiser had a similar crew complement. Thus my surprise that the Kelvin, which looks like Hermes/Saladin class with a engineering section on top, had 800 crew. Klingons had what looked like their version of the D7 in the Kobayashi Maru. The way I see it with the Kelvin being closer to the TOS Enterprise whatever Constitution designer was influenced by the Kelvin incident or one of the major designers from the OTL was killed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Killer Robot Posted May 14, 2009 Share Posted May 14, 2009 Even accepting the scale of the new Enterprise on the original image, someone made a version with the Galactica to proper scale: Of course, if the other size is correct it's even smaller, but in any case it's not dwarfing Battlestars or Macross class vessels or anything. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EXO Posted May 14, 2009 Share Posted May 14, 2009 Live long and lens flare.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr March Posted May 14, 2009 Share Posted May 14, 2009 (edited) I'm fine if people don't like it... but to say things like, the ship is too big or the uniforms don't look right therefore it's not "real" star trek... it's hard to take those people seriously. On that issue you'll get no argument from me Live long and lens flare.... <object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value=" name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src=" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object> LOL Guess I'm one of the few that kinda liked the cinematography in the new movie. It's not setting any new benchmarks, but it perfectly matched the ebb and flow of the thrill ride that was this movie. Edited May 14, 2009 by Mr March Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikeszekely Posted May 14, 2009 Share Posted May 14, 2009 Yeah that seems a little large. I think I'll wait for one of those official spec books to come out. Anyways here's a pic depicting all the Enterprises. Interesting it looks like the trend to go larger with each new version was starting to reverse with the Sovereign class ship. That pic looks off, even if you allow that the shuttle is out-of-scale. While yes, the Sovereign has fewer decks and (I think) less internal volume, that pic has the Sovereign as being shorter than the Galaxy. Ex Astris Scientia and Memory Alpha both list 642m for the Galaxy, and 685 for the Sovereign Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vostok 7 Posted May 14, 2009 Share Posted May 14, 2009 Live long and lens flare.... LOLZ that's pretty good! KAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHHHNNNNNNNNN!!!! Vostok 7 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EXO Posted May 14, 2009 Share Posted May 14, 2009 On that issue you'll get no argument from me LOL Guess I'm one of the few that kinda liked the cinematography in the new movie. It's not setting any new benchmarks, but it perfectly matched the ebb and flow of the thrill ride that was this movie. I love the look, but I also love the lens flare jokes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vostok 7 Posted May 14, 2009 Share Posted May 14, 2009 I love the look, but I also love the lens flare jokes. I liked the look too, but I agree, the lens flare was a little ridiculous at times. Hazardous work environment or what, with all those lights right at eye level! Vostok 7 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kaiotheforsaken Posted May 14, 2009 Share Posted May 14, 2009 I've seen this thing now 3 times since it hit theaters and I love it more each time. Everything from the story, to the performances to the new look of the Enterprise has grown on me 100 fold (and I liked them all the first go around). I really want Art Asylum to do a nice movie Enterprise so I can add that to my shelf. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vostok 7 Posted May 14, 2009 Share Posted May 14, 2009 I've seen this thing now 3 times since it hit theaters and I love it more each time. Everything from the story, to the performances to the new look of the Enterprise has grown on me 100 fold (and I liked them all the first go around). I really want Art Asylum to do a nice movie Enterprise so I can add that to my shelf. The Playmates one isn't bad. Vostok 7 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UN Spacy Posted May 15, 2009 Share Posted May 15, 2009 I'd also like to see Art Asylum tackle the new Enterprise. Vostok do you have the Playmates Enterprise? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wolfx Posted May 15, 2009 Share Posted May 15, 2009 Live long and lens flare.... <object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value=" name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src=" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object> I don't get it. I guess you need to be a trekkie to understand? note: Oh hey i didn't know we can use the embed for youtube vids here. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vostok 7 Posted May 15, 2009 Share Posted May 15, 2009 I'd also like to see Art Asylum tackle the new Enterprise. Vostok do you have the Playmates Enterprise? Yep. It's not perfect, but it's not as chunky as older Playmates offerings. I don't have any of the Art Asylum ships to compare it to (though I really want their Refit Enterprise), though, so I can't say how it compares. I don't get it. I guess you need to be a trekkie to understand? I'm assuming you haven't seen the new movie yet? Because if you have you'd get it. Vostok 7 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kaiotheforsaken Posted May 15, 2009 Share Posted May 15, 2009 Their refit Enterprise is fantastic. The finish and detail on it are really top notch, especially for the price range. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Duke Togo Posted May 15, 2009 Share Posted May 15, 2009 I'm fine if people don't like it... but to say things like, the ship is too big or the uniforms don't look right therefore it's not "real" star trek... it's hard to take those people seriously. Thankfully, a majority of those people are unable to reproduce, so they'll be all but extinct within a generation or two. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.