Flare Sci-fi Forums
Flare Sci-Fi Forums
Topic Closed  Topic Closed
Post New Topic  
Topic Closed  Topic Closed
my profile | directory login | search | faq | forum home

  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» Flare Sci-Fi Forums » Star Trek » Starships & Technology » Hermes/Saladin/Ptolemy (Page 9)

  This topic comprises 11 pages: 1  2  3  ...  6  7  8  9  10  11   
Author Topic: Hermes/Saladin/Ptolemy
Guardian 2000
Senior Member
Member # 743

 - posted      Profile for Guardian 2000     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
Originally posted by Vanguard:
It was NEVER about being 'hard sci-fi', ever.

Who said it was supposed to be that? Not I, certainly.

quote:
The 190,000 figure came from all four of TOS's guides, which all CAME AFTER the final size of the ship.
First I've heard of such. Please go on.

quote:
Also, you know, considering that a full third of the secondary hull is expressly HOLLOW on the Enterprise,
First I've heard of such. Where is that from?

quote:
I think Rick started with a foolish assumption, and you're continuing the assumption in order to... win debates with Warsies because you MUST have as big as numbers as possible?
This started because of your general attack on the mental processes of those who accepted the evidence of the show to describe the show.

Now, you're making a specific attack on my honesty, and doing so in a silly way.

(Do you not comprehend that for any given engine power, to make a ship faster I would *want* it lighter? Especially against lumbering ISDs? I'm just sayin', before making needless and childish character attacks, at least try to not make them stupid, too.)

quote:
he certainly didn't need to report to the CAPTAIN on the mass of the ship
Why in the world would you try to spin the statement into Scotty reporting the mass of the ship?

He was making a point about how dire their predicament was, akin to me saying 'I have to run a 4000 pound car on a bit of fuel the size of a thimble', or 'a damaged drive belt as thick as a pencil', or some other such thing.

(4000 pounds is the average weight of a US automobile. It is also two (non-metric) tons.)

You're saying that what one would actually say is that 'I have to run my ten ton car on a bit of fuel the size of a thimble' out of calmly-spoken exasperated exaggeration. Moreover, you state that all who disagree are wrong-headed canonistas.

And when called on those peculiar points of view, you claim that such a statement about a ten ton car is actually a report to the audience about the car's weight, not a statement making the point of how screwed one might be. And then you try to start flaming the guy who called you on it.

Your thinking, sir, is entirely silly.

--------------------
G2k's ST v. SW Tech Assessment

Registered: Nov 2001  |  IP: Logged
Vanguard
Member
Member # 1780

 - posted      Profile for Vanguard     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
Who said it was supposed to be that? Not I, certainly.
Your entire web site, basically?

quote:
First I've heard of such. Please go on.
The writer's guides are available from Majel's marketing site. Pretty cheaply as well. But the writer's guide, when it describes the Enterprise, gives rough dimensions (about 1000 feet long) and it's weight. It was being compared to an aircraft carrier.

quote:
First I've heard of such. Where is that from?
The hangar deck ring a bell?

Seriously, for the amount of attention you throw at SFX shots, and all the 'frame by frame' measuring and everything on your site, you seem incredibly unfamiliar with Star Trek itself.

But, we're done. No more replies from me to you.

--------------------
www.pixelsagas.com
www.jaynz.info - The Record of Star Fleet

Registered: Dec 2005  |  IP: Logged
Daniel Butler
I'm a Singapore where is my boat
Member # 1689

 - posted      Profile for Daniel Butler     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Why did you have to turn this into a childish ad hominem thing, Vanguard? It's an argument about the mass of a ship, not whose cock is bigger (i.e., interpretation of canon is more accurate).
Registered: Jul 2005  |  IP: Logged
Fabrux
Epic Member
Member # 71

 - posted      Profile for Fabrux     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Stop it, you two. Now. Or this'll be locked up, and that'd be a shame.

--------------------
I haul cardboard and cardboard accessories

Registered: Mar 1999  |  IP: Logged
Guardian 2000
Senior Member
Member # 743

 - posted      Profile for Guardian 2000     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
Originally posted by Vanguard:
quote:
First I've heard of such. Where is that from?
The hangar deck ring a bell?
Ah, sorry, the exaggeration of "one-third" and implied stating of "expressly" confused me.

quote:
But, we're done.
Very good. And again, thanks for your assistance with my page.

--------------------
G2k's ST v. SW Tech Assessment

Registered: Nov 2001  |  IP: Logged
Vanguard
Member
Member # 1780

 - posted      Profile for Vanguard     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
Originally posted by Daniel Butler:
Why did you have to turn this into a childish ad hominem thing, Vanguard? It's an argument about the mass of a ship, not whose cock is bigger (i.e., interpretation of canon is more accurate).

You have to realize, I don't really care about canon all too much. But I do care about believability and consistancy (which, ironically, is why I don't care about canon).

Besides, the guy wrote an article on his web-page about how obviously stupid I was, and how everyone that every mentioned the signed-off on 190K MT figure was some sort of moron .. or maybe a Warsie in disguise.. I dunno. And now he's gleefully pordding the bear here about how I 'helped' him with his site.

You're right that I shouldn't have 'done the urinal contest thing' here, and I didn't mean to. I was just annoyed.

--------------------
www.pixelsagas.com
www.jaynz.info - The Record of Star Fleet

Registered: Dec 2005  |  IP: Logged
Teh PW
Self Impossed Exile (This Space for rent)
Member # 1203

 - posted      Profile for Teh PW         Edit/Delete Post 
you know.... ever since i clip arted that Mobuck pic of the Hadron things [If teh balls touch we die], when ever i even see the word 'cock' typed, i giggle...
Registered: Jan 2004  |  IP: Logged
Jason Abbadon
Rolls with the punches.
Member # 882

 - posted      Profile for Jason Abbadon     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
Originally posted by Daniel Butler:
Why did you have to turn this into a childish ad hominem thing, Vanguard? It's an argument about the mass of a ship, not whose cock is bigger (i.e., interpretation of canon is more accurate).

Ye, but who's cock is more massive?

Really, in spite of common sense, the ship really could be super-massive: If the exotic containment elements of the antimatter were super-dense (Neutronium or something close) and if the nacelles each contained it's own intermix chamber, along with various super-dense antimatter storage devices, it's possible Kirk's Enterprise was such a cow.
Certainly it's more dense than a scaled-u[ Apollo capsule or an aircraft carrier.

Registered: Aug 2002  |  IP: Logged
Vanguard
Member
Member # 1780

 - posted      Profile for Vanguard     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
You know, and just touching upon this, I still have to disagree. The only areas that could be that dense, to justify the huge mass, would be the nacelles.

But, like I said, we KNOW that at least 1/3 of the secondary hull is pretty much hollow, and that the bridge, corridors, and all that are VERY spacious and room.

Plus, exotic materials, even at high density, are limited to physics. I would doubt that substantial parts of the ship would be made of heavy elements. In fact, we know that the 'fuel stores' of the Enterprise, for both matter and antimatter, are close to the lightest mass of all, short of vaccum... deuterium.

--------------------
www.pixelsagas.com
www.jaynz.info - The Record of Star Fleet

Registered: Dec 2005  |  IP: Logged
Jason Abbadon
Rolls with the punches.
Member # 882

 - posted      Profile for Jason Abbadon     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
I dont know about that "secondary hull is hollow and spacious" bit: do we ever see anything except the hangar bay in the secondary hull?
I dont think so- It would make no sense for the saucer to be so crammed and the secondary hull so roomy.
As to dense materials, how 'bout the hull?!
The TOS E did not have S.I.F. fields for support and managed to dip into the atmosphere on occasion- that could indicate exotic materials construction in it's spaceframe and nacelle pylons if nothing else.
Probably wherever the conduits channel warp and impulse power as well.

--------------------
Justice inclines her scales so that wisdom comes at the price of suffering.
-Aeschylus, Agamemnon

Registered: Aug 2002  |  IP: Logged
Daniel Butler
I'm a Singapore where is my boat
Member # 1689

 - posted      Profile for Daniel Butler     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Deuterium isn't the 'lightest mass of all, short of vacuum.' In fact, what you meant to say was the least dense. And it isn't. Protium would be less dense. Free electrons, less dense still. Two or three atoms of protium in a confined area, less dense still. You get the picture.
Registered: Jul 2005  |  IP: Logged
Jason Abbadon
Rolls with the punches.
Member # 882

 - posted      Profile for Jason Abbadon     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Er...it's established that at least someone out there uses "neutronium fuel" in Trek.
Kobayashi Maru, enyone?

--------------------
Justice inclines her scales so that wisdom comes at the price of suffering.
-Aeschylus, Agamemnon

Registered: Aug 2002  |  IP: Logged
Vanguard
Member
Member # 1780

 - posted      Profile for Vanguard     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Daniel, but those aren't what we would call 'remotely stable matter', nothing you could power a starship with. But hydrogren massing ALMOST the same as Helium, but in M/AM would be pretty light.

As for what we see in the secondary hull.. certainly by the TMP version we know that at least 1/6 of it is taken up by an arborium! It really does seem that the TOS and TMP Enterprises were designed with similar thinking to a modern aircraft carrier... which is exactly what Matt Jefferies and Gene Roddenberry was going for.

Moving on...

Jason, it's 'neutronic' fuel carrier... which is, actually, another way of referring to heavy hydrogen. 'Neutronic' means 'heavy matter', as in there is an extra neutron present, causing some radioactivity.

Trek is surprisingly consistant on this matter.

--------------------
www.pixelsagas.com
www.jaynz.info - The Record of Star Fleet

Registered: Dec 2005  |  IP: Logged
Vanguard
Member
Member # 1780

 - posted      Profile for Vanguard     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Ugh.. man I wish I could edit my posts here more easily.

I meant that the design being based on an aircraft carrier as far as overal crew, mass, equipment, and so on would go... not that a secondary hull has a park in it. [Smile]

--------------------
www.pixelsagas.com
www.jaynz.info - The Record of Star Fleet

Registered: Dec 2005  |  IP: Logged
Mars Needs Women
Sexy Funmobile
Member # 1505

 - posted      Profile for Mars Needs Women     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
If you wonder how he eats and breathes and other science facts, repeat to your self, "its just a show, I should really just relax".
Registered: Feb 2005  |  IP: Logged
  This topic comprises 11 pages: 1  2  3  ...  6  7  8  9  10  11   

Post New Topic  
Topic Closed  Topic Closed
Open Topic   Feature Topic   Move Topic   Delete Topic next oldest topic   next newest topic
 - Printer-friendly view of this topic
Hop To:


© 1999-2008 Solareclipse Network.

Powered by UBB.classic™ 6.7.3