Page 52 of 168 FirstFirst ... 24248495051525354555662102152 ... LastLast
Results 511 to 520 of 1671
  1. #511
    Yet another discrepancy, the Constitution's size compared to the Excelsior. In Star Trek 6 you saw them side by side 1701-A is half the size of NCC 2000.

  2. #512
    The person who runs EAS (Bernd Schneider) doesn't base the scales solely off of what is seen on screen, if a person did then things would be massively out of proportion. DS9 is a good example of this, the Defiant is HUGE in the opening sequence but it should be tiny compared to the station, considering when the Enterprise-D was docked on a pylon it was basically dwarfed by the station.

    He bases scales off of information listed in the canon tech manuals and any other sources as long as it's canon. If something's size is too inconsistent between sources he actually does an indepth analysis of where he should put the scale. The Defiant for instance. http://www.ex-astris-scientia.org/ar...t-problems.htm
    "Hokey packaging and ancient gimmicks are no match for good detail on your figure, kid."
    "I am a Klingot from Oklahoma in human boy form."
    "We came, we saw, we conquered... We, woke up!"

  3. #513
    Parts of that chart are wrong. Nuff said. The Defiant was shown to be 75% the size of Miranda in one episode.

  4. #514
    Quote Originally Posted by JediTricks View Post
    Where did you read that? Everything I've read suggests that the refit is the longer of the 2, including published tech manual books from before there was a public internet.
    Quote Originally Posted by James31278 View Post
    What books said that? If possible please scan them. The thing about the internet is people can say whatever they want and not have to back it up with real information.
    I'm with JediTricks. I've seen umpteen million sources, nintey-nine point nine percent of which not having anything to do with unfounded Internet speculation that says the Enterprise refit is longer than the original version. Which book? All of them that give a length or size comparison. Do you have a scan from a book that shows it's smaller is a better question.

    Quote Originally Posted by James31278 View Post
    Parts of that chart are wrong. Nuff said.
    No, saying enough, would would be to mention that there is no "correct" source. The VFX guys varied the size of Defiant only slightly less than the Okuda/Sternbach techie crowd. The Encyclopedia contradicts the DS9 Technical Manual, contradicts the VFX in almost every shot, and most of the VFX shots contradict themselves. I don't know if any two canon sources have ever agreed on how long she is.

    As it is, Bernd is a friend of a friend (or more accurately was since I and my friend both have lost a great deal of interest in Star Trek and I don't think they've communicated in years), so I'm familiar enough with the group who would have contributed to that chart to know that if they get an idea in their heads, they are right and Sternbach, Okuda, Berman, Roddenberry, and the deity of your choice are wrong if they disagree, and I would never defend that, but as far as the length of Defiant goes, I don't really see any problem with their assessment. You can point to evidence; I can point to evidence; neither of us is correct.
    Member 104 of the SWC forums . . . but it's good to be back.

    Good traders: DarkJedi5, jediguy, Jedi_Master_Guyute, jedimastergeorge06

  5. #515
    Show me the book that says the refit is longer.

  6. #516
    First I'm at work, so I don't have my books handy. Second the burden of proof isn't on us regardless of how you may perceive it. Third, I don't have anything that scans and would only be able to tell. Fourth I don't care whether you agree with . . . well pretty much everyone else. If you were to go on thinking the refit is shorter than the original, my life will continue in much the same way it would if you believed as I do.
    Member 104 of the SWC forums . . . but it's good to be back.

    Good traders: DarkJedi5, jediguy, Jedi_Master_Guyute, jedimastergeorge06

  7. #517
    I don't believe its smaller I know it is. Proof is in the show and movies. The chart also shows an enlarged Miranda class. The Excelsior is too small in the chart.

  8. #518
    Quote Originally Posted by James31278 View Post
    I don't believe its smaller I know it is. Proof is in the show and movies. The chart also shows an enlarged Miranda class. The Excelsior is too small in the chart.

    Let's ignore the Miranda because I agree (and haven't mentioned it), and let's ignore the Excelsior because I haven't mentioned it (and don't care to see if you're right).

    The length of the Enterprise before refit and after refit. If you have visual evidence from the show, what would you be scaling against? I can't think of any situation in which a pre refit Constitution shares the screen with a post refit Constitution nor shared the screen with anything that shared a screen with a post refit Constitution nor for that matter shared the screen with anything that shared the screen with anything that shared the screen with a post refit Constitution. And if there were anything that shared a screen that shared a screen (etc.) we're starting to fudge numbers a bit, like making a copy of a copy.
    Member 104 of the SWC forums . . . but it's good to be back.

    Good traders: DarkJedi5, jediguy, Jedi_Master_Guyute, jedimastergeorge06

  9. #519
    Corrider vs Corrider Shuttlebay vs Shuttlebay plus crew number. Funny thing is on wiki if any of the info is true there is at least one photo of various ships and structures one of them being 1701 tos showing the ship to be 1000 feet which is 305m. From the looks of it people are getting the numbers backwards. The engine room of 1701 TOS is also larger. I even have old baseball cards showing ship sizes from 1701 on up I'll have to find the binder they're in. The same cards quoted 1701-D's length in feet, 2,108. These came out before the internet was in full swing.

  10. #520
    Quote Originally Posted by James31278 View Post
    1701 has longer warp engines and a bigger body. 1701 has 430 vs the refit's roughly 300.
    What's your source on that? I've never seen any claim besides yours that the 1701's engineering hull and warp engines were bigger than the refit (which defies the point of a refit, in your art your refit chops off 20% of the ship). And what is 430 vs 300 there? No way it's meters, and I don't believe it's crewman because the refit had a slightly higher number of crewman.

    What books said that? If possible please scan them.
    I don't have a working scanner, but I'll try to get a photo. But at least 1 official tech manual, the Mr Scott's one probably, plus the ST encyclopedia says it. Also, in the Art of Star Trek I believe, it said that ST:TMP's art director took the numbers from the Phase 2 Enterprise refit and ran from there, those design numbers had the refit's saucer get bigger and the ship was lengthened slightly.

    The thing about the internet is people can say whatever they want and not have to back it up with real information. It's a classic case of downsizing after the fact, big ships used to be all the rage now they aren't thus 1701 being larger than the refit.
    "The thing about the internet is people can say whatever they want and not have to back it up with real information." That's exactly what's happening with your post, you're under some mistaken impressions and you're running hard with them.

    1701's corridors are also much larger than the refit's.
    Set redesign meant to be more accurate, the original version's were done without care, Andrew Probert when he worked on TMP ensured the sets were designed to match his ship designs' scale.

    I just noticed the Miranda class is too big, damn whoever made this chart if you watch Star Trek II you can see a comparison when the Reliant barely misses the Enterprise after being fired at the Reliant's size is mostly the Enterprise's saucer.
    You're judging incorrectly, the scale chart you provided is correct and your perception is correct, but what you're seeing is the ship from THE FRONT where it's no wider than the Enterprise's saucer (since it's designed around that saucer), yet there's a significant section behind the bridge that's not saucer which makes it not just the size of a saucer section. You'll notice in the fleet chart that the front "saucer" half of the ship and the warp nacelles correspond to the refit Ent-A.

    Quote Originally Posted by James31278 View Post
    Yet another discrepancy, the Constitution's size compared to the Excelsior. In Star Trek 6 you saw them side by side 1701-A is half the size of NCC 2000.
    This is the same thing as the Miranda-class thing, you're juding them from only 1 angle, from the back, the Excelsior is significantly larger than the Enterprise because she's more massive - taller and wider - but from the side she's only 1.5 times the length (the FX designers on this ensured it from ST3 on).


    Quote Originally Posted by James31278 View Post
    Show me the book that says the refit is longer.
    Here, I just went and grabbed the first one I could think of and shot it (I shot it 3 times, then realized the last pic showed everything I needed): http://img403.imageshack.us/img403/7190/img0003kh2.jpg
    That's from the 2nd version of the ST Encyclopedia written by Mike and Denise Okuda, it's an authorized book and they're the ones who came up with all the technical data for TNG and beyond, they WORK on Trek, so if you can't trust this source as canon, I dunno what else can be said.


    Quote Originally Posted by James31278 View Post
    I don't believe its smaller I know it is. Proof is in the show and movies. The chart also shows an enlarged Miranda class. The Excelsior is too small in the chart.
    You're just plain wrong about the Excelsior and the Miranda, and as for arguing on the Defiant, it's impossible to argue one way or the other because the show never had a set size, never had a full set of blueprints, never even had a set number of decks.


    Quote Originally Posted by James31278 View Post
    Corrider vs Corrider Shuttlebay vs Shuttlebay plus crew number. Funny thing is on wiki if any of the info is true there is at least one photo of various ships and structures one of them being 1701 tos showing the ship to be 1000 feet which is 305m. From the looks of it people are getting the numbers backwards. The engine room of 1701 TOS is also larger. I even have old baseball cards showing ship sizes from 1701 on up I'll have to find the binder they're in. The same cards quoted 1701-D's length in feet, 2,108. These came out before the internet was in full swing.
    Crew number, you've got the wrong one, so I don't count that. For all I know, you took that number as the accurate count from when the ship was undercrewed in ST2, 3, and 5, but the dialogue mentioned that the ship was understaffed in each.

    Your baseball card number for the 'D is right, she's 642 meters long, that's based on behind-the-scenes predetermined technical data from the show's producers and design staff. Let's see what they say about the 1701 and refit.
    Darth Vader is becoming the Mickey Mouse of Star Wars.

    "In Brooklyn, a castle, is where dwell I"
    The use of a lightsaber does not make one a Jedi, it is the ability to not use it.

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO