Stark wrote:How is that even REMOTELY relevant to my question? I'm asking Bounty if the ship is particularly outsize or large IN UNIVERSE (ie a one-off megaship to kill Unicron or whatever) or if larger-than-TOS ships are the norm (since the only two ships I've seen appear to be much larger).
Spoiler
She's the Federation flagship-to-be, so she's on the upper end of the size scale in-universe, but the few other ships we see are pretty close volume-wise. Big ships is the trend in this version of Trek, not the exception.
That said... the movie is really clever about the parallel universe idea: Spoiler
The characters explicitly say that Nero caused the new universe to exist and that the point of divergence is the Kelvin. But it also doesn't explicitly say where Spock Prime originally came from - whether he's from TOS-verse or a movie-verse TOS where the Kelvin incident never happened. So as far as the movie is concerned, it's up in the air and you can believe what you want to believe, either that up to the Kelvin JJverse is TOS and the Kelvin was a peculiar design, or that it's all JJverse.
I am pretty excited by some of the spoiler comments in this thread and look forward to some awesome spaceship pron.
You will so not be disappointed
Re: Size of the new Enterprise
Posted: 2009-05-06 04:35am
by Bounty
Furthermore about the size: Spoiler
It's not just the outside that's huge. The guts of the ship are shown in a few scenes, never long enough to get a good overview, but there's one shot of Kirk on the so-called "Engineering Decks" (it's all very TOS in nomenclature) where the camera pans out to show a cavernous hall spanning half a dozen decks and going several hundred feet into the distance filled with assorted machinery. Everything belowdecks looks like the boiler room on a Victorian steamer built for giants.
It's in the detailing, too. I don't think a Federation ship has been seen to be so busy and crawling with assorted technicians and crewman since TMP. It doesn't just look huge, it feels huge, but in an awe-inspiring way, not a wankish one.
Re: Size of the new Enterprise
Posted: 2009-05-06 05:04am
by Stofsk
Goddamnit, Saturday can't come quickly enough.
Re: Size of the new Enterprise
Posted: 2009-05-06 03:54pm
by tim31
Tell me about it.
This one's probably already been done, but the size of the Monsterprise should have been apparent back in January of last year; in this screencap from the first teaser, you can see workmen on the leading edge of the saucer surrounded by mounted floodlights. Look further up the saucer above the 'T' in ENTERPRISE and you can see the dude who was welding in the opening shots of the teaser; or at least, see the welding arc. Compare this to a similar shot of people standing on the primary hull in TMP.
OK, that makes it look a lot bigger, like five times.
Re: Size of the new Enterprise
Posted: 2009-05-08 10:52am
by SylasGaunt
After seeing it on Thursday it seems the Enterprise is big but not the biggest ship there is. Spoiler
There's a truly stupedously huge saucer section floating around in the debris field left from Nero's battle with starfleet. Unless it's from one of those ships that's almost all saucer section, that would be a big mother of a ship.
Re: Size of the new Enterprise
Posted: 2009-05-08 01:56pm
by Anguirus
^ I did catch that, it definitely looked like a primary hull that was severed from an even larger ship. It had a diameter comparable to the Enterprise's length.
Re: Size of the new Enterprise
Posted: 2009-05-10 10:34am
by Worlds Spanner
Memory Alpha has the following in their still brief article on the new ship: Spoiler
The following specifications are given on the Enterprise Tour website:
Class: Constitution class ship. Type: Heavy Cruiser. Registry: NCC-1701. Designer: W. Matt Jeffries [sic]. Construction Site: Starfleet Division, San Francisco Fleet Yards. Overall Mass: 495,000 metric tonnes. Length: 2500 feet. Saucer Diameter: 1100 feet. Ship Height: 625 feet
The overall length is close to the 3000 feet stated in the Post Magazine article 'Star Trek' Returns. We also learn during the tour that the bridge is located on A Deck, while the sickbay is located on G Deck, and that there are 1100 crewmembers aboard.
Re: Size of the new Enterprise
Posted: 2009-05-10 10:44am
by Bounty
I'd take that info with a grain of salt. In the movie proper the decks are numbered, not assigned a letter, and Sickbay was on six.
Oh, for fuck's sake; just pick one and be consistent, please?
Re: Size of the new Enterprise
Posted: 2009-05-11 03:07am
by TithonusSyndrome
SylasGaunt wrote:After seeing it on Thursday it seems the Enterprise is big but not the biggest ship there is. Spoiler
There's a truly stupedously huge saucer section floating around in the debris field left from Nero's battle with starfleet. Unless it's from one of those ships that's almost all saucer section, that would be a big mother of a ship.
Spoiler
Maybe it wasn't a ship. Maybe it was the remains of an orbital defense station. Why should a founding member of the Federation not have at least one such defensive station in orbit over their homeworld?
Re: Size of the new Enterprise
Posted: 2009-05-11 03:23am
by tim31
I'm on board with that. Hell, it could even be part of a full spacedock facility, even though transit time from Earth to Vulcan at warp was Not Very Long. The Vulcan science academy surely maintained its own vessels seperate from Starfleet?
Re: Size of the new Enterprise
Posted: 2009-05-11 05:19am
by Havok
Worlds Spanner wrote:Memory Alpha has the following in their still brief article on the new ship: Spoiler
The following specifications are given on the Enterprise Tour website:
Class: Constitution class ship. Type: Heavy Cruiser. Registry: NCC-1701. Designer: W. Matt Jeffries [sic]. Construction Site: Starfleet Division, San Francisco Fleet Yards. Overall Mass: 495,000 metric tonnes. Length: 2500 feet. Saucer Diameter: 1100 feet. Ship Height: 625 feet
The overall length is close to the 3000 feet stated in the Post Magazine article 'Star Trek' Returns. We also learn during the tour that the bridge is located on A Deck, while the sickbay is located on G Deck, and that there are 1100 crewmembers aboard.
Wow. That is completely fucking stupid. The ship was built in Iowa. It was sorta, y'know, in the movie.
Re: Size of the new Enterprise
Posted: 2009-05-11 05:39am
by Stofsk
Hang on, I thought the ship that was under construction was just a Connie, and Kirk and everybody got aboard a shuttle and went up to the enterprise which was in orbit (and obviously already built) didn't they?
You know what this means? I need to watch the film again.
Re: Size of the new Enterprise
Posted: 2009-05-11 05:46am
by Havok
Stofsk wrote:Hang on, I thought the ship that was under construction was just a Connie, and Kirk and everybody got aboard a shuttle and went up to the enterprise which was in orbit (and obviously already built) didn't they?
Nope. They just flew of to Starfleet SF.
You know what this means? I need to watch the film again.
Sounds like it.
Re: Size of the new Enterprise
Posted: 2009-05-11 06:15am
by tim31
Havok wrote:
Nope. They just flew of to Starfleet SF.
What's bizarre about this is that McCoy seemed to think this would mean a suborbital trajectory. Or was he just freaking out about being in a spacecraft full stop?
Re: Size of the new Enterprise
Posted: 2009-05-11 06:20am
by Bounty
tim31 wrote:
Havok wrote:
Nope. They just flew of to Starfleet SF.
What's bizarre about this is that McCoy seemed to think this would mean a suborbital trajectory. Or was he just freaking out about being in a spacecraft full stop?
Considering that he was also being pissy about getting shingles, I'd say that was just a drama queen moment.
Hang on, I thought the ship that was under construction was just a Connie, and Kirk and everybody got aboard a shuttle and went up to the enterprise which was in orbit (and obviously already built) didn't they?
Word Of God is that the ship in the field was the Enterprise. Later Kirk takes the shuttle to San Francisco, we get the "three years later" card, and the Enterprise is in orbit awaiting her maiden voyage.
Re: Size of the new Enterprise
Posted: 2009-05-11 12:40pm
by Knife
I didn't think the 'giant saucer' was that much larger than the one on the Enterprise. Rather a matter of perspective seeing it full on with a cross section of the Ent saucer section. Anyways, the caterman-like ship looked a lot bigger than the Enterprise and with two engineering sections probably more volume too.
Re: Size of the new Enterprise
Posted: 2009-05-11 01:50pm
by Worlds Spanner
Hang on, I thought the ship that was under construction was just a Connie, and Kirk and everybody got aboard a shuttle and went up to the enterprise which was in orbit (and obviously already built) didn't they?
Word Of God is that the ship in the field was the Enterprise. Later Kirk takes the shuttle to San Francisco, we get the "three years later" card, and the Enterprise is in orbit awaiting her maiden voyage.
As the camera pans out to watched the shuttle depart you can clearly see '1701' on the ship.
Re: Size of the new Enterprise
Posted: 2009-05-11 01:53pm
by Darth Wong
Question: will the new continuity reverse the bizarre trend established in earlier Star Treks where freighters are always tiny vessels compared to warships? Real freighters can be huge, particularly oil tankers.
Re: Size of the new Enterprise
Posted: 2009-05-11 01:56pm
by Worlds Spanner
Havok wrote:
Wow. That is completely fucking stupid. The ship was built in Iowa. It was sorta, y'know, in the movie.
Perhaps "San Fransisco Fleet Yards" is the designation for all Earthbound construction facilities in North America. It's not like they have room for a shipyard in SanFran itself. Maybe the idea is to spread ships out in case of attack (although it seems really inefficient, even on top of building them surface-side in the first place).
More likely, that information was written before they decided that the image of the ship under construction was so cool that they wanted to keep it in. "SanFran Fleet Yards" was probably a facility in orbit above SanFran.
Re: Size of the new Enterprise
Posted: 2009-05-11 02:16pm
by Ryan Thunder
Darth Wong wrote:Question: will the new continuity reverse the bizarre trend established in earlier Star Treks where freighters are always tiny vessels compared to warships? Real freighters can be huge, particularly oil tankers.
Maybe there just wasn't all that much interstellar frieght to be had, so they haven't built larger ships for that purpose because there's no need?
