Narada GROUP: Members POSTS: 4006  |
Report this
Jan. 05 2010, 2:20 pm
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| | | | | | | border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0">>>Quote (starbase63 @ Jan. 05 2010, 2:16 pm) | > id="QUOTE"> border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0">>>Quote (Narada @ Jan. 05 2010, 2:03 pm)> id="QUOTE"> border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0">>>Quote (VAD_BAXTER @ Jan. 05 2010, 1:54 pm)> id="QUOTE"> border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0">>>Quote (Narada @ Jan. 05 2010, 10:51 am)> id="QUOTE"> border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0">>>Quote (VAD_BAXTER @ Jan. 05 2010, 1:49 pm)> id="QUOTE"> border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0">>>Quote (Narada @ Jan. 05 2010, 10:42 am)> id="QUOTE">
It does not matter. There is other evidence which clearly shows the ship cannot be 322 meters. This is extraneous evidence. I never stated it was canon. |
|
Narada GROUP: Members POSTS: 4006 |
Report this
Jan. 05 2010, 2:26 pm
| Quote (starbase63 @ Jan. 05 2010, 2:23 pm) | | Quote (Narada @ Jan. 05 2010, 2:16 pm) | | Quote (trekbuff @ Jan. 05 2010, 2:10 pm) | | Quote (Narada @ Jan. 05 2010, 1:42 pm) | | Quote (trekbuff @ Jan. 05 2010, 1:35 pm) | | Quote (JM1ICEMAN @ Jan. 04 2010, 9:23 pm) | Not that I actually give a hoot about how large the new Enterprise is, but after watching this debate go on and on I decided to do a little size comparisons myself using strictly the original Enterprise blue prints scaled in feet.
The original Enterprise measures in at 947 ft
Over laying the Nu-Enterprise and sizing it's shuttle bay area height to that of the original's shuttle bay area height, the Nu-Enterprise comes in at roughly 1,150 ft in length.
Windows and hatches appear to be correct in this overlay almost matching the original ship.
For what it's worth, this is my 2 cents and I'm happy with the results.
Pictures below:
http://i37.photobucket.com/albums/e67/JMartist/oRIGINALnUeNT.jpg
http://i37.photobucket.com/albums/e67/JMartist/VIEW2.jpg |
Somewhere in all of this mess was given by someone at ILM a length of the nuEnt of 1200 feet long. This somehow ended up in the Art of the Movie book as 1200 meters 
Your 1150 ft in length is surprisingly close 
This could be because of Church's design, ILM enlarging the nuEnt to a size to make the shuttle bay doors work. This was probably until ILM found out Abrams wanted there would be 20 shuttles in the shuttle bay which required the nuEnt to be almost 1/2 mile long to make the shuttle bay large enough.
The problem some of us are having is the detail of the rest of the nuEnt wasn't rescaled, the saucer section detail and the docking port for example.
Nice point and really spooky guess at the 1,150 foot length!!!! |
Do you know what was the source given for the 1200 meter value and is that in all the books or just some which were printed? Also please note there is a final and official value given by ILM which is a value of 725 meters. And also please note that comparing proportions and shape does not prove a size. |
You are a trip!!!
I pay someone a compliment and you jump in with derogatory remarks?
I said where the 1200 meter value is and you asking me if it is in "all the books" is clearly hostile and juvenile.
That "final and official value" is, I believe, the number you derived from the disc release of the movie.
You have a clearly confrontational attitude and it is quite objectionable. Nothing you said in your response rebutted my comments in the post you quoted. Everything I said is from documented comments and other evidence from those involved with the movie - quantifiable.
You accuse others of offering nothing but agitation, yet you do it with such consistance.
As I said earlier, unless it is your intent to instigate hostilities, I suggest you think about it before you post.
Your post was clearly reportable and "please note that comparing proportions and shape does not prove a size" was clearly insulting |
Accuse me of what you wish. The comments are not derogatory.
Why is my question hostile and juvenile? It is a simple question can you answer it?
The final and official value is not what was given on the bluray dvd.
The final and official value was given by ILM to the scale model replica company.
If you wish I can quote the sources again.
I believe your attitude is confrontational and objectionable.
If I did not rebut your comments please just answer the questions.
If these values are quantifiable then are we not quantifying them?
More accusations?
My intent is not to instigate hostilities and I do think before I post. |
Right.
"I know you are but what am I?"
Maybe what you need is a little more study of how to use the English language then, if your intent isn't to insult, demean or denigrate, maybe you need to learn better ways to say things. Because the way you do now usually comes off as snide, rude and demeaning, especially when in a situation where someone doesn't share your opinion.
In other situations, you're all just sunshine and flowers and agreeing with everyone and thanking everyone for their posts and just laying on the saccharine.
|
I am being respectful in this discussion. I am not compelled to agree with anyone and just because I disagree does not mean I am giving a personal insult or attack. Thank you. |
JM1ICEMAN GROUP: Members POSTS: 1633 |
Report this
Jan. 05 2010, 2:51 pm
| Quote (trekbuff @ Jan. 05 2010, 1:35 pm) | | Quote (JM1ICEMAN @ Jan. 04 2010, 9:23 pm) | Not that I actually give a hoot about how large the new Enterprise is, but after watching this debate go on and on I decided to do a little size comparisons myself using strictly the original Enterprise blue prints scaled in feet.
The original Enterprise measures in at 947 ft
Over laying the Nu-Enterprise and sizing it's shuttle bay area height to that of the original's shuttle bay area height, the Nu-Enterprise comes in at roughly 1,150 ft in length.
Windows and hatches appear to be correct in this overlay almost matching the original ship.
For what it's worth, this is my 2 cents and I'm happy with the results.
Pictures below:
http://i37.photobucket.com/albums/e67/JMartist/oRIGINALnUeNT.jpg
http://i37.photobucket.com/albums/e67/JMartist/VIEW2.jpg |
Somewhere in all of this mess was given by someone at ILM a length of the nuEnt of 1200 feet long. This somehow ended up in the Art of the Movie book as 1200 meters
Your 1150 ft in length is surprisingly close
This could be because of Church's design, ILM enlarging the nuEnt to a size to make the shuttle bay doors work. This was probably until ILM found out Abrams wanted there would be 20 shuttles in the shuttle bay which required the nuEnt to be almost 1/2 mile long to make the shuttle bay large enough.
The problem some of us are having is the detail of the rest of the nuEnt wasn't rescaled, the saucer section detail and the docking port for example.
Nice point and really spooky guess at the 1,150 foot length!!!! |
A real aircraft carrier such as the USS America, CV-66 has a complement of 87 planes. They were a mix of F-14's, EA6-B's, A-4s and 2 AWACS. That's a lot stuffed in there. I see no reason why a starship can't have a complement of 20 shuttles even at 1,200 ft. Actually it makes perfect sense that it would be able to hold that many shuttles. |
|
JM1ICEMAN GROUP: Members POSTS: 1633 |
Report this
Jan. 05 2010, 6:55 pm
That's why it's called movie magic  |
|
Narada GROUP: Members POSTS: 4006 |
Report this
Jan. 05 2010, 7:10 pm
The poll is looking good though it is balanced so far so at least we can say there are many opinions on this topic.
|
|
JM1ICEMAN GROUP: Members POSTS: 1633 |
Report this
Jan. 06 2010, 8:03 pm
Just trying to come up with a visual of this...there's a chance we may all be mistaken.   I'll be working on this. |
|
Narada GROUP: Members POSTS: 4006 |
Report this
Jan. 07 2010, 4:25 pm
Well this poll has an even value at this point (6-6-6) and with the latest findings by Captain Venckman there are certain values revealed. Instead of continuing to debate or argue this topic maybe we can come to an agreement to disagree. This is a good time for this because the poll is even and in Captain Venckmans findings there are certain things which we are considering to be true. I also verified his findings in my own research and I think we are in agreement. So what do you say everyone?
|
4_of_20 GROUP: Members POSTS: 1052 |
Report this
Jan. 07 2010, 9:55 pm
THE OFFICIAL CHOICE PEOPLE!!!
Cannon is based on official Star Trek films and episodes, such as Star Trek XI, which has NO CANNON VIOLATIONS, because it says so!
It's a new universe. Everything is different. We trade with Cardassians in the TOS timeframe. WHO CARES! It's bigger, it's a good film, and trekkies make up a small population of its fans.
|
![Star Trek Into Darkness Enterprise Falling Movie Poster [11x17]](http://shop.startrek.com/img/product/resized/672/00452345-948672_catl_125.jpg?k=eda57382&pid=452345&s=catl&sn=startrek "Star Trek Into Darkness Enterprise Falling Movie Poster [11x17]")
