-
There seems to be an uptick in Political comments in recent months. Those of us who are long time members of the site know that Political and Religious content has been banned for years. Nothing has changed. Please leave all political and religious comments out of the forums.
If you recently joined the forums you were not presented with this restriction in the terms of service. This was due to a conversion error when we went from vBulletin to Xenforo. We have updated our terms of service to reflect these corrections.
Please note any post refering to a politician will be considered political even if it is intended to be humor. Our experience is these topics have a way of dividing the forums and causing deep resentment among members. It is a poison to the community. We appreciate compliance with the rules.
The Staff of SOH
More Star trek pics
- Thread starter Eoraptor1
- Start date
Panther_99FS
Retired SOH Administrator
I wonder how long (since it's in the future :d) will it take them to build it...?
S
Silver Fox
Guest
I like it! She's different from the old Enterprise, but clearly of the same family. I thinks she's ancestor to the Refit Enterprise as well.
GT182
Charter Member
As the old saying goes.... "Two weeks." Well actually...... :costumes:
H
hewman100
Guest
As long as it isn't a case of things 'arriving on Tuesday':gossip:
Well, the shipyard workers must have had the blueprints upside down or something because they forgot they were supposed to assemble the ship in orbit! Now they'll have to strap on eight or nine of those solid rocket boosters to get that puppy into space! Looks cool though.
Interesting....
Why would they build the Enterprise on the earth and not in orbit?
How does this "re-imagining" of Star Trek dovetail into "Enterprise"? (or is that an anomaly of which we should not speak
)
Is Christopher Pike going to be in the new movie?
I admit the wife and I want to see the new movie (I got her hooked on the updates to TOS being run on Saturday late night TV...which she had never seen before...cracks her up to see the make-up, sets and characters...LOL)
-G-
Why would they build the Enterprise on the earth and not in orbit?
How does this "re-imagining" of Star Trek dovetail into "Enterprise"? (or is that an anomaly of which we should not speak
)Is Christopher Pike going to be in the new movie?
I admit the wife and I want to see the new movie (I got her hooked on the updates to TOS being run on Saturday late night TV...which she had never seen before...cracks her up to see the make-up, sets and characters...LOL)
-G-
Interesting....
Why would they build the Enterprise on the earth and not in orbit?
How does this "re-imagining" of Star Trek dovetail into "Enterprise"? (or is that an anomaly of which we should not speak
Is Christopher Pike going to be in the new movie?
I admit the wife and I want to see the new movie (I got her hooked on the updates to TOS being run on Saturday late night TV...which she had never seen before...cracks her up to see the make-up, sets and characters...LOL)
-G-
I can't answer the continuity questions, but Christopher Pike will be in the new movie. If you watch the trailers, that's Capt. Pike convincing young James Kirk to enlist in Starfleet. I was watching Enterprise on Sci-Fi network yesterday, and was noticing how many characters in the Star Trek universe are estranged from their families for signing on to a Federation starship. I mean, what could possibly be cooler than signing on to a Federation starship???
JAMES
Lazerbrainz2k3
Charter Member
?
Where'd you find that? I thought the whole idea behind the transporter was that even the great starship engineer Gene Roddenberry himself couldn't figure out a way to get the Enterprise to land. I do recall some vague reference in the series to the TOS Enterprise being able to separate its saucer from the engineering section in an emergency like the -D could, but nothing about it landing.
your mostly right lazer, the saucer section had landin pads but would only be used if the main hull was destroyed. Since the warp core was in the main hull it wouldn't have warp speed capabilities. They were supoosed to find an land on an earth like planet an wait for rescue
Unlike the D model , the earlier version (not sure bout the C model) could not reconnect by themselves. they would've had to return to a space dock to do it.
but it seems the "history" cahnges with each new version of ST. So maybe in the new version it can land.....
Unlike the D model , the earlier version (not sure bout the C model) could not reconnect by themselves. they would've had to return to a space dock to do it.
but it seems the "history" cahnges with each new version of ST. So maybe in the new version it can land.....
H
hewman100
Guest
The Original Series Enterprise was built in orbit. As this is supposed to be the same ship this is one of those playing with 'canon' things:gossip:
Here's a webpage with an essay about the problems associated with interstellar travel: http://www.projectrho.com/rocket/rocket3v.html Interesting how many space operas break the rules. I recommend this page to anyone considering writing science fiction. My only comment is: Who knows what we'll discover about spacetime and astrophysics by the time period in which Star Trek is set? It wasn't so long ago that we were setting women on fire as witches when the creeam went bad.
Also, has anyone else seen the sheer number of web postings as to who would win a battle between the Battlestar Galactica and the Starship Enterprise? It's an internet obsession. Of course, real nerds are by now aware that Galactica takes place 150,200 years before the Federation charter. The Enterprise would have to time warp back with the express purpose of spoiling for a fight, which is against the Temporal Prime Directive.
JAMES
Also, has anyone else seen the sheer number of web postings as to who would win a battle between the Battlestar Galactica and the Starship Enterprise? It's an internet obsession. Of course, real nerds are by now aware that Galactica takes place 150,200 years before the Federation charter. The Enterprise would have to time warp back with the express purpose of spoiling for a fight, which is against the Temporal Prime Directive.
JAMES
Actually, way back when, they were saying that Enterprise (from the first series) was made in the San Francisco shipyards. They had a name for the shipyards as well, something like Planatia or something.
I used to have the Star Trek blueprints. They were very cool to roam through and see all the various levels of the ship... I could sit for hours going through those, lol..
Now.. How it would get to orbit, I have no idea. Perhaps 'some' people were saying it was made in San Francisco, and some were saying it was made in Orbit...
Note the Star Trek series Voyager ship was always landing on planets.. Much smaller ship, complete landing gear.
Bill
I used to have the Star Trek blueprints. They were very cool to roam through and see all the various levels of the ship... I could sit for hours going through those, lol..
Now.. How it would get to orbit, I have no idea. Perhaps 'some' people were saying it was made in San Francisco, and some were saying it was made in Orbit...
Note the Star Trek series Voyager ship was always landing on planets.. Much smaller ship, complete landing gear.
Bill
They obviously have the technology to create gravity; a scene I think in Star Trek the Motion Picture shows crates just floating on the hanger deck, so they could probably "turn off" gravity as well. Just strap a bunch of "anti-gravity" belts to it, and watch it float away.
Still, I would imagine that a descent into the atmosphere was still a challenge, and highly risky to the ship. It still made more sense to just beam down a few individuals, rather than risk the entire ship. I think the other reason transporter technology was invented was to eliminate the tricky special effects of ships descending and ascending into orbit.
My son found the original Star Trek T.V. series on the CBS website this past weekend and loves it. Watching it again after all these decades; some of the special effects and scale issues (compare the size of the shuttlecraft and the U.S.S. Constitution as each enter the Doomsday funnel) look lame now; but still better than what little junk (in content) we have seen on the tube today.
Oh, and I have a cutaway poster of the Enterprise II from Star Trek - The Motion Picture. The poster itself came from a friend who passed away a long time ago; two of my other high school buddies had it framed and gave it to me. Definitely one of my prized possessions.
-James
Prowler1111
Charter Member 2011
Since i really don´t have an elephant´s memory i do remember back in the 80´s watching a "behind the scenes" of Star Trek IV The Voyage Home..anyway what i DO remember is director Spock..er..Leonard Nimoy saying that the bird of prey was ideal for the whole thing since it did had atmospheric capacity while big federation ships didn´t (not his exact words, but anyway)..i do remember this since i had a big fight afterwards with a friend (female..she was like 14 then)who kept saying "it´s obvious, if not, why do they have teletransportation" vs my logical statement (it´s obvious since they don´t have wings!).....lol..kid times, gentlemen....
Prowler
Prowler
dcc
P-38 nut
I still have the set of blueprints I bought ages ago when I was a kid. How they sparked the imagination back then! Still fun to look at once in a while with my kids now.
It does indeed say San Francisco. I don't know if the blueprints are officially canon, but I think they're close ... (boy, this brings back the memories.)
- dcc