test content
Logo
What is the Arc Client?
Install Arc
No, just no
wardcalis
Member Posts: 1,137 Arc User
http://images-cdn.perfectworld.com/www/67/c0/67c0f7bc0d9f0f6bd238d99865efbf9a1374263546.jpg
uh no, that concept art doesn't work. a ship the size of the enterprise D could never stay in the air on a world the size of earth, no way it could enter the atmosphere of a world that must be large enough to have such a structure. before people say JJ, realize it's JJ and it's TRIBBLE and he makes up completely TRIBBLE concepts a child could understand wouldn't work. ships like voyager and BoPs even the Defiant and some smaller raptors could enter the atmosphere but nothing constitution size (enterprise A) or larger would have a chance, it's thruster capability just wouldn't be great enough to offset the ship mass. That structure could stick out of a small moon, say 2/3 the size of our moon at most and be plausible but that also means no atmosphere. a large asteroid would make sense. Now if that ship flying through the structure was a shuttle, much different story, that would work and make sense, but if your talking about a pace adventureland (a concept i like a lot because I really hate any kind of ground mission) I doubt thats a shuttle, from it's appearance it's a galaxy class.
uh no, that concept art doesn't work. a ship the size of the enterprise D could never stay in the air on a world the size of earth, no way it could enter the atmosphere of a world that must be large enough to have such a structure. before people say JJ, realize it's JJ and it's TRIBBLE and he makes up completely TRIBBLE concepts a child could understand wouldn't work. ships like voyager and BoPs even the Defiant and some smaller raptors could enter the atmosphere but nothing constitution size (enterprise A) or larger would have a chance, it's thruster capability just wouldn't be great enough to offset the ship mass. That structure could stick out of a small moon, say 2/3 the size of our moon at most and be plausible but that also means no atmosphere. a large asteroid would make sense. Now if that ship flying through the structure was a shuttle, much different story, that would work and make sense, but if your talking about a pace adventureland (a concept i like a lot because I really hate any kind of ground mission) I doubt thats a shuttle, from it's appearance it's a galaxy class.
Post edited by wardcalis on
0
Comments
What happens when you turn off the anti-gravity is another issue.
Second of all, THIS ISN'T EARTH.
And of all the things to nitpick, you completely ignore the ultra-mega-super-sized building that - technically - should have shattered the tectonic plate it is resting on from sheer weight alone?
Really?
cause sometimes its party time!
Nope. Nuclear was abandoned long ago in Star Trek. (Preachy environmentalist and pacifist propaganda) It runs on the same matter/anti-matter reaction as everything else.
You do know that the Enterprise (NCC-1701. No bloody A, B, C, or D.) entered Earth's atmosphere (Tomorrow is Yesterday)? Also, the Enterprise-D entered the atmosphere of a similar class M planet at least once (The Arsenal of Freedom). You do know that the size difference between Constitution and Intrepid is pretty small? And you do know, that the impulse thrusters of the Enterprise in TMP were powerful enough to get her to warp 0.5?
Sometimes, if you want to bury the hatchet with a Klingon, it has to be in his skull. - Captain K'Tar of the USS Danu about J'mpok.
One, how can you even tell that's a Galaxy-class? All I can see is a saucer and two nacelles.
Also, you're wrong about the Contitution-class; I introduce you to the TOS episode "Tomorrow Is Yesterday."
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v446/kardel/IMG_1988_zps388a97d6.png
Get off of your JJ-hater rant.
Don't like starships in atmosphere? Get the hell over it. It was made canon in 1967.
"Tomorrow is Yesterday"
Which is why in the TOS episode "Tomorrow is Yesterday" we see the Enterprise flying in Earth's atmosphere. Also, you do realize that the Intrepid class is larger (albeit not by much) than a Constitution class right?
"Let go" a bit
Um... The Constitution Class is smaller than an Intrepid Class... It was only supposed to be a bit larger than a Nimitz Class Carrier... I think you are confused. Now the Galaxy Class is a whole other thing and yeah that is a bit crazy in Atmosphere.
If Star Trek can create bubbles that allow ships to travel faster than light, then they can create bubbles using forcefields that allow easier atmospheric entry. They also use materials that are thousands or even millions of times better than anything we have. What doesn't make sense in reality, makes sense in Star Trek within reason.
"Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic."
The Federation is Awesome and highly advance, but is far from the absolute peak of Technological Marvels. We have seen Many times over And over And over And Over again And again that the Federation is not the most advance government in the galaxy, past or present.
Therefore, you should not assume that because Federation or Starfleet technology is not capable of such a construct, that is completely impossible.
Year: 2245 launched under Cpt April
NCC-74656 USS VOYAGER
Year: 2371 launched under Cpt Janeway.
After 126 years there had better have been a hell of a lot of improvement between the two ships.
Now.....current game year is 2409 so add in another 38 years plus the Borg tech Voyager brought back.
164 years ago, USS Enterprise 1701 managed to fly through Earth's atmosphere.
It is not a stretch to believe that current starships can do the same even if they are twice the size.
It wasn't preachy environmentalist or pacifist propaganda. Fusion is what powers impulse engines, and antimatter is what powers the warp core - and both are far, far more powerful than fission reactors. Fusion>>>Fission is a staple of scifi and has been for decades.
Going into an atmosphere is fine, it's landing on a planet that is out of the question. JJTrek depicted the Enterprise being build in Iowa, which is completely stupid, no matter how you look at it.