Post A Reply
my profile
|
directory
login
|
search
|
faq
|
forum home
»
Flare Sci-Fi Forums
»
Star Trek
»
Starships & Technology
»
Static Galaxy-class spaceframes at UP's surface base?
» Post A Reply
Post A Reply
Login Name:
Password:
Message:
HTML is enabled.
UBB Code™ is enabled.
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Lee: [QB] No, Fawny, I repeat, it's a daft idea, and you're a daft person obviously trying to make a name for himself. I suggest you rein in your little jibes or I might start taking it personally. There are plenty of reasons why there'd be the components of a GCS emplaced in a shipyard. But to go off on this thing about how this "obviously" means all ships are built planetside is (there's that word again) daft. Two-dozen-plus known ship classes, how many have a proven-onscreen ability to land? Not counting shuttles and runabouts, I can think of, er, one. Two if you include the Insurrection Holoship. And all the orbital construction facilities we've seen onscreen easily trump one single Photoshop image from. . . thirteen? . . . years ago. To build a ship on the ground would require massive gravity-nullification, plus constant and rapidly-shifting and evolving Structural-Integrity field application. Copntrast that with building in a zero- or micro-gravity environment, where occasionally people need to wear spacesuits. Yes, occasionally. You think they got people with wrenches in there installing all those corridors one panel at a time? It's all modular, probably fabricated in industrial-size replicators! You couldn't build these ships without massive automation, the image of thousands of grease-monkeys swarming over a ship, building it with their bare hands, is one I don't buy. [/QB][/QUOTE]
Instant Graemlins
Instant UBB Code™
What is UBB Code™?
Options
Disable Graemlins in this post.
*** Click here to review this topic. ***
© 1999-2024 Charles Capps
Powered by UBB.classic™ 6.7.3