@artan42 Your attempts to invalidate the arguments presented by exaggerating them (I'm not sure, but I think that's called 'reductio ad absurdum' in formal circles) pretty much make further discussion pointless.
It's really not. So far the only arguments presented have been that different special effects in the three AR films prove some sort of special point that all the different special effects in other films or TV series don't. I'm not exaggerating anything, I'm pointing it out.
Actually, all I was trying to point out, is that the effects guys on the JJ Films took their own approach to the effects (regardless of anything previously established or seen in Trek)
In exactly the same way they did in TMP, and again in TWoK, then for TNG, then for DS9 and VOY, and finally for ENT.
Norway and Yeager dammit... I still want my Typhoon and Jupiter though. JJ Trek The Kelvin Timeline is just Trek and it's fully canon... get over it. But I still prefer TAR.
#TASforSTO
'...I can tell you that we're not in the military and that we intend no harm to the whales.' Kirk: The Voyage Home
'Starfleet is not a military organisation. Its purpose is exploration.' Picard: Peak Performance
'This is clearly a military operation. Is that what we are now? Because I thought we were explorers!' Scotty: Into Darkness
'...The Federation. Starfleet. We're not a military agency.' Scotty: Beyond
'I'm not a soldier anymore. I'm an engineer.' Miles O'Brien: Empok Nor
'...Starfleet could use you... It's a peacekeeping and humanitarian armada...' Admiral Pike: Star Trek
@artan42 Your attempts to invalidate the arguments presented by exaggerating them (I'm not sure, but I think that's called 'reductio ad absurdum' in formal circles) pretty much make further discussion pointless.
It's really not. So far the only arguments presented have been that different special effects in the three AR films prove some sort of special point that all the different special effects in other films or TV series don't. I'm not exaggerating anything, I'm pointing it out.
Actually, all I was trying to point out, is that the effects guys on the JJ Films took their own approach to the effects (regardless of anything previously established or seen in Trek)
In exactly the same way they did in TMP, and again in TWoK, then for TNG, then for DS9 and VOY, and finally for ENT.
Yes, except TNG, DS-9, VOY and ENT were then more consistent in their effects, compared to the TOS movies... Also, while those movies showed a different warp effect, they did not show the nacelles behaving any differently...
@artan42 Your attempts to invalidate the arguments presented by exaggerating them (I'm not sure, but I think that's called 'reductio ad absurdum' in formal circles) pretty much make further discussion pointless.
It's really not. So far the only arguments presented have been that different special effects in the three AR films prove some sort of special point that all the different special effects in other films or TV series don't. I'm not exaggerating anything, I'm pointing it out.
Actually, all I was trying to point out, is that the effects guys on the JJ Films took their own approach to the effects (regardless of anything previously established or seen in Trek)
In exactly the same way they did in TMP, and again in TWoK, then for TNG, then for DS9 and VOY, and finally for ENT.
Yes, except TNG, DS-9, VOY and ENT were then more consistent in their effects, compared to the TOS movies... Also, while those movies showed a different warp effect, they did not show the nacelles behaving any differently...
That's because ships of those eras didn't have thrusters on their nacelles.
Norway and Yeager dammit... I still want my Typhoon and Jupiter though. JJ Trek The Kelvin Timeline is just Trek and it's fully canon... get over it. But I still prefer TAR.
#TASforSTO
'...I can tell you that we're not in the military and that we intend no harm to the whales.' Kirk: The Voyage Home
'Starfleet is not a military organisation. Its purpose is exploration.' Picard: Peak Performance
'This is clearly a military operation. Is that what we are now? Because I thought we were explorers!' Scotty: Into Darkness
'...The Federation. Starfleet. We're not a military agency.' Scotty: Beyond
'I'm not a soldier anymore. I'm an engineer.' Miles O'Brien: Empok Nor
'...Starfleet could use you... It's a peacekeeping and humanitarian armada...' Admiral Pike: Star Trek
@artan42 Your attempts to invalidate the arguments presented by exaggerating them (I'm not sure, but I think that's called 'reductio ad absurdum' in formal circles) pretty much make further discussion pointless.
It's really not. So far the only arguments presented have been that different special effects in the three AR films prove some sort of special point that all the different special effects in other films or TV series don't. I'm not exaggerating anything, I'm pointing it out.
Actually, all I was trying to point out, is that the effects guys on the JJ Films took their own approach to the effects (regardless of anything previously established or seen in Trek)
In exactly the same way they did in TMP, and again in TWoK, then for TNG, then for DS9 and VOY, and finally for ENT.
Yes, except TNG, DS-9, VOY and ENT were then more consistent in their effects, compared to the TOS movies... Also, while those movies showed a different warp effect, they did not show the nacelles behaving any differently...
That's because ships of those eras didn't have thrusters on their nacelles.
Bwahahahahahahahahahahaha
The Enterprise-D has RCS thrusters on the rear 'corners' of its nacelles.....
The Enterprise-E also has structures which look suspiciously like RCS thrusters (but are unidentified) on the tips of its nacelles...
Voyager RCS thrusters, on the othe hand, are located on the primary hull, not the nacelles...
The RCS thrusters of the Enterprise-D, however never fired in the same way as the massive 'drive thrust' of the Kelvin...
@artan42 Your attempts to invalidate the arguments presented by exaggerating them (I'm not sure, but I think that's called 'reductio ad absurdum' in formal circles) pretty much make further discussion pointless.
It's really not. So far the only arguments presented have been that different special effects in the three AR films prove some sort of special point that all the different special effects in other films or TV series don't. I'm not exaggerating anything, I'm pointing it out.
Actually, all I was trying to point out, is that the effects guys on the JJ Films took their own approach to the effects (regardless of anything previously established or seen in Trek)
In exactly the same way they did in TMP, and again in TWoK, then for TNG, then for DS9 and VOY, and finally for ENT.
Yes, except TNG, DS-9, VOY and ENT were then more consistent in their effects, compared to the TOS movies... Also, while those movies showed a different warp effect, they did not show the nacelles behaving any differently...
That's because ships of those eras didn't have thrusters on their nacelles.
Bwahahahahahahahahahahaha
The Enterprise-D has RCS thrusters on the rear 'corners' of its nacelles.....
The Enterprise-E also has structures which look suspiciously like RCS thrusters (but are unidentified) on the tips of its nacelles...
Voyager RCS thrusters, on the othe hand, are located on the primary hull, not the nacelles...
The RCS thrusters of the Enterprise-D, however never fired in the same way as the massive 'drive thrust' of the Kelvin...
So, they had thrusters as well. That's even less of a problem. The Kelvin simply diverted warp power to them for it's suicide run. Seriously, these thrusters become less of an issue each time somebody tries to prove otherwise.
Norway and Yeager dammit... I still want my Typhoon and Jupiter though. JJ Trek The Kelvin Timeline is just Trek and it's fully canon... get over it. But I still prefer TAR.
#TASforSTO
'...I can tell you that we're not in the military and that we intend no harm to the whales.' Kirk: The Voyage Home
'Starfleet is not a military organisation. Its purpose is exploration.' Picard: Peak Performance
'This is clearly a military operation. Is that what we are now? Because I thought we were explorers!' Scotty: Into Darkness
'...The Federation. Starfleet. We're not a military agency.' Scotty: Beyond
'I'm not a soldier anymore. I'm an engineer.' Miles O'Brien: Empok Nor
'...Starfleet could use you... It's a peacekeeping and humanitarian armada...' Admiral Pike: Star Trek
@artan42 Your attempts to invalidate the arguments presented by exaggerating them (I'm not sure, but I think that's called 'reductio ad absurdum' in formal circles) pretty much make further discussion pointless.
It's really not. So far the only arguments presented have been that different special effects in the three AR films prove some sort of special point that all the different special effects in other films or TV series don't. I'm not exaggerating anything, I'm pointing it out.
Actually, all I was trying to point out, is that the effects guys on the JJ Films took their own approach to the effects (regardless of anything previously established or seen in Trek)
In exactly the same way they did in TMP, and again in TWoK, then for TNG, then for DS9 and VOY, and finally for ENT.
Yes, except TNG, DS-9, VOY and ENT were then more consistent in their effects, compared to the TOS movies... Also, while those movies showed a different warp effect, they did not show the nacelles behaving any differently...
That's because ships of those eras didn't have thrusters on their nacelles.
Bwahahahahahahahahahahaha
The Enterprise-D has RCS thrusters on the rear 'corners' of its nacelles.....
The Enterprise-E also has structures which look suspiciously like RCS thrusters (but are unidentified) on the tips of its nacelles...
Voyager RCS thrusters, on the othe hand, are located on the primary hull, not the nacelles...
The RCS thrusters of the Enterprise-D, however never fired in the same way as the massive 'drive thrust' of the Kelvin...
So, they had thrusters as well. That's even less of a problem. The Kelvin simply diverted warp power to them for it's suicide run. Seriously, these thrusters become less of an issue each time somebody tries to prove otherwise.
Which you just firmly stated that they did not... And again, they did not function in the same way... They would have the kind of thrust seen in Into Darkness when they aligned the Enterprise with the Vengeance for the space-dive, not enough to generate the momentum needed for a suicide run
Ayel: Lord Nero! The Federation ship is drifting towards us!
Nero: Aaaaaaaaaarrrrrrrgh!
@artan42 Your attempts to invalidate the arguments presented by exaggerating them (I'm not sure, but I think that's called 'reductio ad absurdum' in formal circles) pretty much make further discussion pointless.
It's really not. So far the only arguments presented have been that different special effects in the three AR films prove some sort of special point that all the different special effects in other films or TV series don't. I'm not exaggerating anything, I'm pointing it out.
Actually, all I was trying to point out, is that the effects guys on the JJ Films took their own approach to the effects (regardless of anything previously established or seen in Trek)
In exactly the same way they did in TMP, and again in TWoK, then for TNG, then for DS9 and VOY, and finally for ENT.
Yes, except TNG, DS-9, VOY and ENT were then more consistent in their effects, compared to the TOS movies... Also, while those movies showed a different warp effect, they did not show the nacelles behaving any differently...
That's because ships of those eras didn't have thrusters on their nacelles.
Bwahahahahahahahahahahaha
The Enterprise-D has RCS thrusters on the rear 'corners' of its nacelles.....
The Enterprise-E also has structures which look suspiciously like RCS thrusters (but are unidentified) on the tips of its nacelles...
Voyager RCS thrusters, on the othe hand, are located on the primary hull, not the nacelles...
The RCS thrusters of the Enterprise-D, however never fired in the same way as the massive 'drive thrust' of the Kelvin...
So, they had thrusters as well. That's even less of a problem. The Kelvin simply diverted warp power to them for it's suicide run. Seriously, these thrusters become less of an issue each time somebody tries to prove otherwise.
Which you just firmly stated that they did not... And again, they did not function in the same way... They would have the kind of thrust seen in Into Darkness when they aligned the Enterprise with the Vengeance for the space-dive, not enough to generate the momentum needed for a suicide run
Ayel: Lord Nero! The Federation ship is drifting towards us!
Nero: Aaaaaaaaaarrrrrrrgh!
Actually, any thruster can propel a ship fast enough to ram another ship.
It may take 100 years for it to accelerate to that speed, but it'll get there eventually!
On a serious note, don't you think it's possible that the Kelvin happened to have an impulse engine built into the aft of the warp nacelle?
if an RCS thruster can propel a space station, which is far LARGER than a TOS era ship, from orbit around a planet to a position deep in an asteroid belt thousands of kilometers away in a matter of minutes, they can certainly propel a ship to ramming speed in far less time
A normie goes "Oh, what's this?"
An otaku goes "UwU, what's this?"
A furry goes "OwO, what's this?"
A werewolf goes "Awoo, what's this?"
"It's nothing personal, I just don't feel like I've gotten to know a person until I've sniffed their crotch." "We said 'no' to Mr. Curiosity. We're not home. Curiosity is not welcome, it is not to be invited in. Curiosity...is bad. It gets you in trouble, it gets you killed, and more importantly...it makes you poor!"
Passion and Serenity are one.
I gain power by understanding both.
In the chaos of their battle, I bring order.
I am a shadow, darkness born from light.
The Force is united within me.
@artan42 Your attempts to invalidate the arguments presented by exaggerating them (I'm not sure, but I think that's called 'reductio ad absurdum' in formal circles) pretty much make further discussion pointless.
It's really not. So far the only arguments presented have been that different special effects in the three AR films prove some sort of special point that all the different special effects in other films or TV series don't. I'm not exaggerating anything, I'm pointing it out.
Actually, all I was trying to point out, is that the effects guys on the JJ Films took their own approach to the effects (regardless of anything previously established or seen in Trek)
In exactly the same way they did in TMP, and again in TWoK, then for TNG, then for DS9 and VOY, and finally for ENT.
Yes, except TNG, DS-9, VOY and ENT were then more consistent in their effects, compared to the TOS movies... Also, while those movies showed a different warp effect, they did not show the nacelles behaving any differently...
That's because ships of those eras didn't have thrusters on their nacelles.
Bwahahahahahahahahahahaha
The Enterprise-D has RCS thrusters on the rear 'corners' of its nacelles.....
The Enterprise-E also has structures which look suspiciously like RCS thrusters (but are unidentified) on the tips of its nacelles...
Voyager RCS thrusters, on the othe hand, are located on the primary hull, not the nacelles...
The RCS thrusters of the Enterprise-D, however never fired in the same way as the massive 'drive thrust' of the Kelvin...
So, they had thrusters as well. That's even less of a problem. The Kelvin simply diverted warp power to them for it's suicide run. Seriously, these thrusters become less of an issue each time somebody tries to prove otherwise.
Which you just firmly stated that they did not... And again, they did not function in the same way... They would have the kind of thrust seen in Into Darkness when they aligned the Enterprise with the Vengeance for the space-dive, not enough to generate the momentum needed for a suicide run
Ayel: Lord Nero! The Federation ship is drifting towards us!
Nero: Aaaaaaaaaarrrrrrrgh!
Actually, any thruster can propel a ship fast enough to ram another ship.
It may take 100 years for it to accelerate to that speed, but it'll get there eventually!
On a serious note, don't you think it's possible that the Kelvin happened to have an impulse engine built into the aft of the warp nacelle?
That would make sense... Although from what I remember, the Kelvin impulse block was on the back edge of the saucer...
@artan42 Your attempts to invalidate the arguments presented by exaggerating them (I'm not sure, but I think that's called 'reductio ad absurdum' in formal circles) pretty much make further discussion pointless.
It's really not. So far the only arguments presented have been that different special effects in the three AR films prove some sort of special point that all the different special effects in other films or TV series don't. I'm not exaggerating anything, I'm pointing it out.
Actually, all I was trying to point out, is that the effects guys on the JJ Films took their own approach to the effects (regardless of anything previously established or seen in Trek)
In exactly the same way they did in TMP, and again in TWoK, then for TNG, then for DS9 and VOY, and finally for ENT.
Yes, except TNG, DS-9, VOY and ENT were then more consistent in their effects, compared to the TOS movies... Also, while those movies showed a different warp effect, they did not show the nacelles behaving any differently...
That's because ships of those eras didn't have thrusters on their nacelles.
Bwahahahahahahahahahahaha
The Enterprise-D has RCS thrusters on the rear 'corners' of its nacelles.....
The Enterprise-E also has structures which look suspiciously like RCS thrusters (but are unidentified) on the tips of its nacelles...
Voyager RCS thrusters, on the othe hand, are located on the primary hull, not the nacelles...
The RCS thrusters of the Enterprise-D, however never fired in the same way as the massive 'drive thrust' of the Kelvin...
So, they had thrusters as well. That's even less of a problem. The Kelvin simply diverted warp power to them for it's suicide run. Seriously, these thrusters become less of an issue each time somebody tries to prove otherwise.
Which you just firmly stated that they did not... And again, they did not function in the same way... They would have the kind of thrust seen in Into Darkness when they aligned the Enterprise with the Vengeance for the space-dive, not enough to generate the momentum needed for a suicide run
Ayel: Lord Nero! The Federation ship is drifting towards us!
Nero: Aaaaaaaaaarrrrrrrgh!
Because I thought they didn't. Now I know they do. Since when has changing an argument based upon incoming evidence been a bad thing?
It's a thruster directly attached to the nacelle, why wouldn't it generate so much power? It's being fed directly from the warp drive.
Besides, just watching it from the video it's not even a thruster. The ship's simply charging the nacelles as if it were going to warp but without actually going to warp. Whether they can function as warp nacelles or not they can still power the ship. It's no different from the nacelles of the excelsior glowing blue before it fails to go to warp in III. Nacelles can still be used to propel the ship even at sublight.
Also, the impulse engines flare at the same time so it might not even be the warp drive, the nacelles may just be flaring to show that warp power is being diverted into the impulse engines.
Norway and Yeager dammit... I still want my Typhoon and Jupiter though. JJ Trek The Kelvin Timeline is just Trek and it's fully canon... get over it. But I still prefer TAR.
#TASforSTO
'...I can tell you that we're not in the military and that we intend no harm to the whales.' Kirk: The Voyage Home
'Starfleet is not a military organisation. Its purpose is exploration.' Picard: Peak Performance
'This is clearly a military operation. Is that what we are now? Because I thought we were explorers!' Scotty: Into Darkness
'...The Federation. Starfleet. We're not a military agency.' Scotty: Beyond
'I'm not a soldier anymore. I'm an engineer.' Miles O'Brien: Empok Nor
'...Starfleet could use you... It's a peacekeeping and humanitarian armada...' Admiral Pike: Star Trek
if an RCS thruster can propel a space station, which is far LARGER than a TOS era ship, from orbit around a planet to a position deep in an asteroid belt thousands of kilometers away in a matter of minutes, they can certainly propel a ship to ramming speed in far less time
Because they used the stations shields to form a low-level field around the station to lower its inertial mass... I doubt the Kelvin was in any condition to do such engineering shenanigans
@artan42 Your attempts to invalidate the arguments presented by exaggerating them (I'm not sure, but I think that's called 'reductio ad absurdum' in formal circles) pretty much make further discussion pointless.
It's really not. So far the only arguments presented have been that different special effects in the three AR films prove some sort of special point that all the different special effects in other films or TV series don't. I'm not exaggerating anything, I'm pointing it out.
Actually, all I was trying to point out, is that the effects guys on the JJ Films took their own approach to the effects (regardless of anything previously established or seen in Trek)
In exactly the same way they did in TMP, and again in TWoK, then for TNG, then for DS9 and VOY, and finally for ENT.
Yes, except TNG, DS-9, VOY and ENT were then more consistent in their effects, compared to the TOS movies... Also, while those movies showed a different warp effect, they did not show the nacelles behaving any differently...
That's because ships of those eras didn't have thrusters on their nacelles.
Bwahahahahahahahahahahaha
The Enterprise-D has RCS thrusters on the rear 'corners' of its nacelles.....
The Enterprise-E also has structures which look suspiciously like RCS thrusters (but are unidentified) on the tips of its nacelles...
Voyager RCS thrusters, on the othe hand, are located on the primary hull, not the nacelles...
The RCS thrusters of the Enterprise-D, however never fired in the same way as the massive 'drive thrust' of the Kelvin...
So, they had thrusters as well. That's even less of a problem. The Kelvin simply diverted warp power to them for it's suicide run. Seriously, these thrusters become less of an issue each time somebody tries to prove otherwise.
Which you just firmly stated that they did not... And again, they did not function in the same way... They would have the kind of thrust seen in Into Darkness when they aligned the Enterprise with the Vengeance for the space-dive, not enough to generate the momentum needed for a suicide run
Ayel: Lord Nero! The Federation ship is drifting towards us!
Nero: Aaaaaaaaaarrrrrrrgh!
Because I thought they didn't. Now I know they do. Since when has changing an argument based upon incoming evidence been a bad thing?
Since forever, because it shows that someone is arguing a point which i) they didn't have all the facts they're basing their own stance on, so ii) aren't speaking from any kind of position of understanding on the subject, but are just winging it in the hope that the other person knows less than they do... By all means, someone can change their opinion, but to argue something (which is clearly wrong) as a defence of a point, and then say 'oh well, it doesn't matter...' when proven wrong... I'm sorry, but that's just embarrassing... :-\
It's a thruster directly attached to the nacelle, why wouldn't it generate so much power? It's being fed directly from the warp drive.
Besides, just watching it from the video it's not even a thruster. The ship's simply charging the nacelles as if it were going to warp but without actually going to warp. Whether they can function as warp nacelles or not they can still power the ship. It's no different from the nacelles of the excelsior glowing blue before it fails to go to warp in III. Nacelles can still be used to propel the ship even at sublight.
Also, the impulse engines flare at the same time so it might not even be the warp drive, the nacelles may just be flaring to show that warp power is being diverted into the impulse engines.
Why would it even be there (as a function of the drive)? The impulse engines, which move the ship at sub-light, are clearly visible in the photo I linked above. I believe, that this just shows that the guys who did the design/effects of the Kelvin either i) didn't know, or ii) didn't give a sh*t about the drives used aboard Starfleet ships and how they operate... They clearly just thought: "Engine! Engine makes go!" That might be okay in a Pakled engineering class, but not in Starfleet...
You can speculate all you like on what the engine flares may signify, I'll just satisfy myself with the idea that the effects guys either didn't know, or didn't care, and just went with 'Engines make go! as their rationale...
It was stated to be an alternate timeline due to Nero's arrival, which implies branching off during the Narada event - Cryptic on the other hand used 'alternate quantum reality' or something along those lines, which implies the possibility of branching off before the Narada event. It doesn't explicitly say 'this was always different', but it does throw a hammer at any discrepancies that do exist.
And yes, how Hobus could destroy star systems light years away. Cryptic does seem to be in the habit of patching up loose ends and anomalies in the source material (often by stitching together half a dozen seemingly unrelated things, like the Kuvah'magh or the Tox Uthat), huh?
Yes, I did the mission from STO. They didn't mention a time line. It just said alternative reality. Which means possible a different Universe. This is one reason why I like STO's story telling. They are doing a good job patching up all the loose ends.
And 2009 had a lot of stuff that didn't make sense. This is why I gave it a low rating on Star Trek base.. As usually they explain it in better details and make it believable. Its like they was more focused on the action. I'm sure it will be the same with the other 2 as I watch them. The same red matter destroys stuff, but yet they went back in time with it. That was a poor plot device, is just examples.
USS Casinghead NCC 92047 launched 2350
Fleet Admiral Stowe - Dominion War Vet.
Btw Farm, I appologize for my tone before, I was irritated that day.
I can understand. Plus I was being rough about the whole thing. So I figured I would get some backlash in my attempts to watch it. In hopes to get a better understanding of the new movie series. And heal any wounds that opened from it. As a Trek fan I came to my senses and be a fan as one should be. And more than happy to debate different thoughts on it, as long we can be civil about it.
USS Casinghead NCC 92047 launched 2350
Fleet Admiral Stowe - Dominion War Vet.
Oh the quantum reality line, thats just Cryptic doing their usual incorporation of existing canon, in this case TNG Parallels, along with the official word from CBS & what the Okudas used for their article on the KT in the revised Star Trek Encyclopedia, and it's accurate to the theory of quantum reality as well, since that theory is about branching realities. Heck accirding to that theory each and every one if us creates a new reality every time we make a choice, in every currently existing reality, think about that, billions of new worlds created every moment.
And since there are an infinite number of potential choices, there's an infinite number of alternative realities.
@artan42 Your attempts to invalidate the arguments presented by exaggerating them (I'm not sure, but I think that's called 'reductio ad absurdum' in formal circles) pretty much make further discussion pointless.
It's really not. So far the only arguments presented have been that different special effects in the three AR films prove some sort of special point that all the different special effects in other films or TV series don't. I'm not exaggerating anything, I'm pointing it out.
Actually, all I was trying to point out, is that the effects guys on the JJ Films took their own approach to the effects (regardless of anything previously established or seen in Trek)
This ethos was actually explained by the man himself in a Yahoo interview...
Abrams, who has updated almost every other aspect of ‘Trek’ in his two reboot movies, justified the overhaul, saying:
“It also shows that this ‘Star Trek’ was not trying to copy what was done nearly 50 years ago, but find its own rhythm, its own universe. It just felt like the right choice.”
So that somewhat explains the 'why', but not really...
If it is indeed about finding its own rhythm, why bother re-visiting Star Trek at all? Why bother doing 'same but different'? Why not just do a generic sci-fi film which could have been imagined anyway they saw fit, with complete creative freedom, and would have brought in viewers (although arguably not quite so many as with such an established franchise) The same as with TRIBBLE: It's using the franchise as a fish-hook to do a cashgrab from an established fanbase. It's executed in a devil may care attitude to what could be considered established details, with 'alternate universe'/'divergent timeline' being used as a blanket answer to question about why anything has been done differently wrongly, while pointing fingers to anything which was on the right lines, as their way of saying 'Look, see, it's still Star Trek!'
Very true, well said.
USS Casinghead NCC 92047 launched 2350
Fleet Admiral Stowe - Dominion War Vet.
@artan42 Your attempts to invalidate the arguments presented by exaggerating them (I'm not sure, but I think that's called 'reductio ad absurdum' in formal circles) pretty much make further discussion pointless.
It's really not. So far the only arguments presented have been that different special effects in the three AR films prove some sort of special point that all the different special effects in other films or TV series don't. I'm not exaggerating anything, I'm pointing it out.
Actually, all I was trying to point out, is that the effects guys on the JJ Films took their own approach to the effects (regardless of anything previously established or seen in Trek)
This ethos was actually explained by the man himself in a Yahoo interview...
Abrams, who has updated almost every other aspect of ‘Trek’ in his two reboot movies, justified the overhaul, saying:
“It also shows that this ‘Star Trek’ was not trying to copy what was done nearly 50 years ago, but find its own rhythm, its own universe. It just felt like the right choice.”
So that somewhat explains the 'why', but not really...
If it is indeed about finding its own rhythm, why bother re-visiting Star Trek at all? Why bother doing 'same but different'? Why not just do a generic sci-fi film which could have been imagined anyway they saw fit, with complete creative freedom, and would have brought in viewers (although arguably not quite so many as with such an established franchise) The same as with TRIBBLE: It's using the franchise as a fish-hook to do a cashgrab from an established fanbase. It's executed in a devil may care attitude to what could be considered established details, with 'alternate universe'/'divergent timeline' being used as a blanket answer to question about why anything has been done differently wrongly, while pointing fingers to anything which was on the right lines, as their way of saying 'Look, see, it's still Star Trek!'
It was stated to be an alternate timeline due to Nero's arrival, which implies branching off during the Narada event - Cryptic on the other hand used 'alternate quantum reality' or something along those lines, which implies the possibility of branching off before the Narada event. It doesn't explicitly say 'this was always different', but it does throw a hammer at any discrepancies that do exist.
And yes, how Hobus could destroy star systems light years away. Cryptic does seem to be in the habit of patching up loose ends and anomalies in the source material (often by stitching together half a dozen seemingly unrelated things, like the Kuvah'magh or the Tox Uthat), huh?
Yes, I did the mission from STO. They didn't mention a time line. It just said alternative reality. Which means possible a different Universe. This is one reason why I like STO's story telling. They are doing a good job patching up all the loose ends.
And 2009 had a lot of stuff that didn't make sense. This is why I gave it a low rating on Star Trek base.. As usually they explain it in better details and make it believable. Its like they was more focused on the action. I'm sure it will be the same with the other 2 as I watch them. The same red matter destroys stuff, but yet they went back in time with it. That was a poor plot device, is just examples.
@artan42 Your attempts to invalidate the arguments presented by exaggerating them (I'm not sure, but I think that's called 'reductio ad absurdum' in formal circles) pretty much make further discussion pointless.
It's really not. So far the only arguments presented have been that different special effects in the three AR films prove some sort of special point that all the different special effects in other films or TV series don't. I'm not exaggerating anything, I'm pointing it out.
Actually, all I was trying to point out, is that the effects guys on the JJ Films took their own approach to the effects (regardless of anything previously established or seen in Trek)
This ethos was actually explained by the man himself in a Yahoo interview...
Abrams, who has updated almost every other aspect of ‘Trek’ in his two reboot movies, justified the overhaul, saying:
“It also shows that this ‘Star Trek’ was not trying to copy what was done nearly 50 years ago, but find its own rhythm, its own universe. It just felt like the right choice.”
So that somewhat explains the 'why', but not really...
If it is indeed about finding its own rhythm, why bother re-visiting Star Trek at all? Why bother doing 'same but different'? Why not just do a generic sci-fi film which could have been imagined anyway they saw fit, with complete creative freedom, and would have brought in viewers (although arguably not quite so many as with such an established franchise) The same as with TRIBBLE: It's using the franchise as a fish-hook to do a cashgrab from an established fanbase. It's executed in a devil may care attitude to what could be considered established details, with 'alternate universe'/'divergent timeline' being used as a blanket answer to question about why anything has been done differently wrongly, while pointing fingers to anything which was on the right lines, as their way of saying 'Look, see, it's still Star Trek!'
Very true, well said.
I'm in full agreement on both counts.
Infinite possibilities have implications that could not be completely understood if you turned this entire universe into a giant supercomputer.
@artan42 Your attempts to invalidate the arguments presented by exaggerating them (I'm not sure, but I think that's called 'reductio ad absurdum' in formal circles) pretty much make further discussion pointless.
It's really not. So far the only arguments presented have been that different special effects in the three AR films prove some sort of special point that all the different special effects in other films or TV series don't. I'm not exaggerating anything, I'm pointing it out.
Actually, all I was trying to point out, is that the effects guys on the JJ Films took their own approach to the effects (regardless of anything previously established or seen in Trek)
This ethos was actually explained by the man himself in a Yahoo interview...
Abrams, who has updated almost every other aspect of ‘Trek’ in his two reboot movies, justified the overhaul, saying:
“It also shows that this ‘Star Trek’ was not trying to copy what was done nearly 50 years ago, but find its own rhythm, its own universe. It just felt like the right choice.”
So that somewhat explains the 'why', but not really...
If it is indeed about finding its own rhythm, why bother re-visiting Star Trek at all? Why bother doing 'same but different'? Why not just do a generic sci-fi film which could have been imagined anyway they saw fit, with complete creative freedom, and would have brought in viewers (although arguably not quite so many as with such an established franchise) The same as with TRIBBLE: It's using the franchise as a fish-hook to do a cashgrab from an established fanbase. It's executed in a devil may care attitude to what could be considered established details, with 'alternate universe'/'divergent timeline' being used as a blanket answer to question about why anything has been done differently wrongly, while pointing fingers to anything which was on the right lines, as their way of saying 'Look, see, it's still Star Trek!'
Very true, well said.
Thank you
Any time, that alone explains the direction of how they wanted the movies be. And it shows it. This is what caused a rift between the fans of Trek. Cause of this direction change.
I talked to one fellow movie goer, he thought it was an "Origin" story of Kirk and crew. Explaining how they got together. Another liked it cause of the action alone. This is the response I got from regular movie fans.
USS Casinghead NCC 92047 launched 2350
Fleet Admiral Stowe - Dominion War Vet.
@artan42 Your attempts to invalidate the arguments presented by exaggerating them (I'm not sure, but I think that's called 'reductio ad absurdum' in formal circles) pretty much make further discussion pointless.
It's really not. So far the only arguments presented have been that different special effects in the three AR films prove some sort of special point that all the different special effects in other films or TV series don't. I'm not exaggerating anything, I'm pointing it out.
Actually, all I was trying to point out, is that the effects guys on the JJ Films took their own approach to the effects (regardless of anything previously established or seen in Trek)
This ethos was actually explained by the man himself in a Yahoo interview...
Abrams, who has updated almost every other aspect of ‘Trek’ in his two reboot movies, justified the overhaul, saying:
“It also shows that this ‘Star Trek’ was not trying to copy what was done nearly 50 years ago, but find its own rhythm, its own universe. It just felt like the right choice.”
So that somewhat explains the 'why', but not really...
If it is indeed about finding its own rhythm, why bother re-visiting Star Trek at all? Why bother doing 'same but different'? Why not just do a generic sci-fi film which could have been imagined anyway they saw fit, with complete creative freedom, and would have brought in viewers (although arguably not quite so many as with such an established franchise) The same as with TRIBBLE: It's using the franchise as a fish-hook to do a cashgrab from an established fanbase. It's executed in a devil may care attitude to what could be considered established details, with 'alternate universe'/'divergent timeline' being used as a blanket answer to question about why anything has been done differently wrongly, while pointing fingers to anything which was on the right lines, as their way of saying 'Look, see, it's still Star Trek!'
Very true, well said.
Thank you
Any time, that alone explains the direction of how they wanted the movies be. And it shows it. This is what caused a rift between the fans of Trek. Cause of this direction change.
Absolutely, JJ calls it 'its own rhythm', I call it being sloppy on the fine-details, and then using handwavium to dismiss criticism
I talked to one fellow movie goer, he thought it was an "Origin" story of Kirk and crew. Explaining how they got together. Another liked it cause of the action alone. This is the response I got from regular movie fans.
This is the thing, 'as a film' it's quite watchable*, but as part of an existing franchise, it's little more than at the most generous, a pastiche; at the least, a rip-off...
*If one is prepared to overlook inconsistencies and contrivances and use a large dose of headcanon to make things plausible/make sense (ie Nero's speech patterns, I attribute to, being a miner, his education may have come from Federation pop culture, rather than classic Imperial education, so less polished, rather than just thinking that the writers couldn't write in the same precice and multi-faceted manner as other Romulans... )
Absolutely, JJ calls it 'its own rhythm', I call it being sloppy on the fine-details, and then using handwavium to dismiss criticism
I noticed that a lot lately when they are asked. Why the movies didn't do so well in the earnings. They have all kinds of excuses. I'm sure they will blame it on the weather for that opening weekend next.
USS Casinghead NCC 92047 launched 2350
Fleet Admiral Stowe - Dominion War Vet.
0
Options
rattler2Member, Star Trek Online ModeratorPosts: 58,070Community Moderator
This! 1000 times this! If the Kelvin had NOT beed destroyed, the timeline would have proceeded as usual and we'd get everything up through Nemesis. But with the destruction of the Kelvin, a whole new series of events unfolds from that point on. But it also shows that one particular ship with one particular crew was meant to come together. Perhaps it is Time's way of trying to at least patch up the damage caused by bringing the crew of the Enterprise together.
And the theory that the "thrust exhaust" from the Kelvin's nacelle was an indication of transferring power to the impulse engines is an interesting one. Also... it could be forcefully expelling some Warp Plasma in an attempt to increase speed as well. Anything to get the Kelvin up to ramming speed quickly, even brute force rocket thrust. And don't forget the Kelvin was damaged in the initial attack so that could have played a part as well. Get that initial burst of speed, let the impulse engines do the rest.
Since forever, because it shows that someone is arguing a point which i) they didn't have all the facts they're basing their own stance on, so ii) aren't speaking from any kind of position of understanding on the subject, but are just winging it in the hope that the other person knows less than they do... By all means, someone can change their opinion, but to argue something (which is clearly wrong) as a defence of a point, and then say 'oh well, it doesn't matter...' when proven wrong... I'm sorry, but that's just embarrassing... :-\
Incorrect. That's anti-intellectualism of the highest order. People who stick stubbornly to their argument after all evidence has proven them wrong are embarrassments. People who like to pretend their headcanon is canon for example, people claiming changes in 50 years of special effects are proof of anything for one series but not for others.
If people do not change their opinions based on new evidence they are idiots and to sudgest that a debate can only be started when both sides have all the evidence is laughably childish.
I had thought that the bollocks about nacelle thrusters was the highlight or moronic simple-mindedness in this thread but now you've gone and raised the bar exponentially.
Any and all conclusions are, and have to be, based upon moving evidence, not dogma, if that means admitting mistakes, then so be it. But if you're creating a dogmatic conclusion then by all means, stick to it, it's certainly not correct or dependent on the evidence, but by golly, you stuck to it.
Norway and Yeager dammit... I still want my Typhoon and Jupiter though. JJ Trek The Kelvin Timeline is just Trek and it's fully canon... get over it. But I still prefer TAR.
#TASforSTO
'...I can tell you that we're not in the military and that we intend no harm to the whales.' Kirk: The Voyage Home
'Starfleet is not a military organisation. Its purpose is exploration.' Picard: Peak Performance
'This is clearly a military operation. Is that what we are now? Because I thought we were explorers!' Scotty: Into Darkness
'...The Federation. Starfleet. We're not a military agency.' Scotty: Beyond
'I'm not a soldier anymore. I'm an engineer.' Miles O'Brien: Empok Nor
'...Starfleet could use you... It's a peacekeeping and humanitarian armada...' Admiral Pike: Star Trek
Absolutely, JJ calls it 'its own rhythm', I call it being sloppy on the fine-details, and then using handwavium to dismiss criticism
I noticed that a lot lately when they are asked. Why the movies didn't do so well in the earnings. They have all kinds of excuses. I'm sure they will blame it on the weather for that opening weekend next.
This! 1000 times this! If the Kelvin had NOT beed destroyed, the timeline would have proceeded as usual and we'd get everything up through Nemesis. But with the destruction of the Kelvin, a whole new series of events unfolds from that point on. But it also shows that one particular ship with one particular crew was meant to come together. Perhaps it is Time's way of trying to at least patch up the damage caused by bringing the crew of the Enterprise together.
And the theory that the "thrust exhaust" from the Kelvin's nacelle was an indication of transferring power to the impulse engines is an interesting one. Also... it could be forcefully expelling some Warp Plasma in an attempt to increase speed as well. Anything to get the Kelvin up to ramming speed quickly, even brute force rocket thrust. And don't forget the Kelvin was damaged in the initial attack so that could have played a part as well. Get that initial burst of speed, let the impulse engines do the rest.
Absolutely, it could be... Giving the writers credit that they even thought of that option, rather than the 'engine makes go!' Pakled engineering which I suspect it to be...
0
Options
rattler2Member, Star Trek Online ModeratorPosts: 58,070Community Moderator
Did I just win the debate with my Warp Plasma Rocket theory?
Since forever, because it shows that someone is arguing a point which i) they didn't have all the facts they're basing their own stance on, so ii) aren't speaking from any kind of position of understanding on the subject, but are just winging it in the hope that the other person knows less than they do... By all means, someone can change their opinion, but to argue something (which is clearly wrong) as a defence of a point, and then say 'oh well, it doesn't matter...' when proven wrong... I'm sorry, but that's just embarrassing... :-\
Incorrect. That's anti-intellectualism of the highest order. People who stick stubbornly to their argument after all evidence has proven them wrong are embarrassments. People who like to pretend their headcanon is canon for example, people claiming changes in 50 years of special effects are proof of anything for one series but not for others.
If people do not change their opinions based on new evidence they are idiots and to sudgest that a debate can only be started when both sides have all the evidence is laughably childish.
I had thought that the bollocks about nacelle thrusters was the highlight or moronic simple-mindedness in this thread but now you've gone and raised the bar exponentially.
Any and all conclusions are, and have to be, based upon moving evidence, not dogma, if that means admitting mistakes, then so be it. But if you're creating a dogmatic conclusion then by all means, stick to it, it's certainly not correct or dependent on the evidence, but by golly, you stuck to it.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but you did say these things, did you not?
@artan42 Your attempts to invalidate the arguments presented by exaggerating them (I'm not sure, but I think that's called 'reductio ad absurdum' in formal circles) pretty much make further discussion pointless.
It's really not. So far the only arguments presented have been that different special effects in the three AR films prove some sort of special point that all the different special effects in other films or TV series don't. I'm not exaggerating anything, I'm pointing it out.
Actually, all I was trying to point out, is that the effects guys on the JJ Films took their own approach to the effects (regardless of anything previously established or seen in Trek)
In exactly the same way they did in TMP, and again in TWoK, then for TNG, then for DS9 and VOY, and finally for ENT.
@artan42 Your attempts to invalidate the arguments presented by exaggerating them (I'm not sure, but I think that's called 'reductio ad absurdum' in formal circles) pretty much make further discussion pointless.
It's really not. So far the only arguments presented have been that different special effects in the three AR films prove some sort of special point that all the different special effects in other films or TV series don't. I'm not exaggerating anything, I'm pointing it out.
Actually, all I was trying to point out, is that the effects guys on the JJ Films took their own approach to the effects (regardless of anything previously established or seen in Trek)
In exactly the same way they did in TMP, and again in TWoK, then for TNG, then for DS9 and VOY, and finally for ENT.
Yes, except TNG, DS-9, VOY and ENT were then more consistent in their effects, compared to the TOS movies... Also, while those movies showed a different warp effect, they did not show the nacelles behaving any differently...
That's because ships of those eras didn't have thrusters on their nacelles.
@artan42 Your attempts to invalidate the arguments presented by exaggerating them (I'm not sure, but I think that's called 'reductio ad absurdum' in formal circles) pretty much make further discussion pointless.
It's really not. So far the only arguments presented have been that different special effects in the three AR films prove some sort of special point that all the different special effects in other films or TV series don't. I'm not exaggerating anything, I'm pointing it out.
Actually, all I was trying to point out, is that the effects guys on the JJ Films took their own approach to the effects (regardless of anything previously established or seen in Trek)
In exactly the same way they did in TMP, and again in TWoK, then for TNG, then for DS9 and VOY, and finally for ENT.
Yes, except TNG, DS-9, VOY and ENT were then more consistent in their effects, compared to the TOS movies... Also, while those movies showed a different warp effect, they did not show the nacelles behaving any differently...
That's because ships of those eras didn't have thrusters on their nacelles.
Bwahahahahahahahahahahaha
The Enterprise-D has RCS thrusters on the rear 'corners' of its nacelles.....
The Enterprise-E also has structures which look suspiciously like RCS thrusters (but are unidentified) on the tips of its nacelles...
Voyager RCS thrusters, on the othe hand, are located on the primary hull, not the nacelles...
The RCS thrusters of the Enterprise-D, however never fired in the same way as the massive 'drive thrust' of the Kelvin...
So, they had thrusters as well. That's even less of a problem. The Kelvin simply diverted warp power to them for it's suicide run. Seriously, these thrusters become less of an issue each time somebody tries to prove otherwise.
Care to backpedal any harder? Yes, I have stuck to my point, because that point, is that warp nacelles do not emit thrust exhaust... They do have thrusters on (in some instances) but certainly not of the kind seen on the rear of the Kelvin nacelle... As I said, I'm willing to accept that the writers/effects guys were 'putting their own spin' on things, but that also brings the conclusion that they weren't concerned with the established functionality of Treknology, but just resorting to 'engine makes go!' understanding of the tech (so sloppy writing) I'm not arguing that it means alternate dimension from the rest of the pre-Nero PrimeVerse, just that it's an inconsistency, which JJ's handwavium almost-but-not-quite justifies...
Comments
In exactly the same way they did in TMP, and again in TWoK, then for TNG, then for DS9 and VOY, and finally for ENT.
Norway and Yeager dammit... I still want my Typhoon and Jupiter though.
JJ Trek The Kelvin Timeline is just Trek and it's fully canon... get over it. But I still prefer TAR.
#TASforSTO
'...I can tell you that we're not in the military and that we intend no harm to the whales.' Kirk: The Voyage Home
'Starfleet is not a military organisation. Its purpose is exploration.' Picard: Peak Performance
'This is clearly a military operation. Is that what we are now? Because I thought we were explorers!' Scotty: Into Darkness
'...The Federation. Starfleet. We're not a military agency.' Scotty: Beyond
'I'm not a soldier anymore. I'm an engineer.' Miles O'Brien: Empok Nor
'...Starfleet could use you... It's a peacekeeping and humanitarian armada...' Admiral Pike: Star Trek
Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!
That's because ships of those eras didn't have thrusters on their nacelles.
Norway and Yeager dammit... I still want my Typhoon and Jupiter though.
JJ Trek The Kelvin Timeline is just Trek and it's fully canon... get over it. But I still prefer TAR.
#TASforSTO
'...I can tell you that we're not in the military and that we intend no harm to the whales.' Kirk: The Voyage Home
'Starfleet is not a military organisation. Its purpose is exploration.' Picard: Peak Performance
'This is clearly a military operation. Is that what we are now? Because I thought we were explorers!' Scotty: Into Darkness
'...The Federation. Starfleet. We're not a military agency.' Scotty: Beyond
'I'm not a soldier anymore. I'm an engineer.' Miles O'Brien: Empok Nor
'...Starfleet could use you... It's a peacekeeping and humanitarian armada...' Admiral Pike: Star Trek
Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!
The Enterprise-D has RCS thrusters on the rear 'corners' of its nacelles.....
The Enterprise-E also has structures which look suspiciously like RCS thrusters (but are unidentified) on the tips of its nacelles...
Voyager RCS thrusters, on the othe hand, are located on the primary hull, not the nacelles...
The RCS thrusters of the Enterprise-D, however never fired in the same way as the massive 'drive thrust' of the Kelvin...
So, they had thrusters as well. That's even less of a problem. The Kelvin simply diverted warp power to them for it's suicide run. Seriously, these thrusters become less of an issue each time somebody tries to prove otherwise.
Norway and Yeager dammit... I still want my Typhoon and Jupiter though.
JJ Trek The Kelvin Timeline is just Trek and it's fully canon... get over it. But I still prefer TAR.
#TASforSTO
'...I can tell you that we're not in the military and that we intend no harm to the whales.' Kirk: The Voyage Home
'Starfleet is not a military organisation. Its purpose is exploration.' Picard: Peak Performance
'This is clearly a military operation. Is that what we are now? Because I thought we were explorers!' Scotty: Into Darkness
'...The Federation. Starfleet. We're not a military agency.' Scotty: Beyond
'I'm not a soldier anymore. I'm an engineer.' Miles O'Brien: Empok Nor
'...Starfleet could use you... It's a peacekeeping and humanitarian armada...' Admiral Pike: Star Trek
Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!
Ayel: Lord Nero! The Federation ship is drifting towards us!
Nero: Aaaaaaaaaarrrrrrrgh!
Actually, any thruster can propel a ship fast enough to ram another ship.
It may take 100 years for it to accelerate to that speed, but it'll get there eventually!
On a serious note, don't you think it's possible that the Kelvin happened to have an impulse engine built into the aft of the warp nacelle?
Trials of Blood and Fire
Moving On Parts 1-3 - Part 4
In Cold Blood
#LegalizeAwoo
A normie goes "Oh, what's this?"
An otaku goes "UwU, what's this?"
A furry goes "OwO, what's this?"
A werewolf goes "Awoo, what's this?"
"It's nothing personal, I just don't feel like I've gotten to know a person until I've sniffed their crotch."
"We said 'no' to Mr. Curiosity. We're not home. Curiosity is not welcome, it is not to be invited in. Curiosity...is bad. It gets you in trouble, it gets you killed, and more importantly...it makes you poor!"
[Edit to add]
Yup, there they are...
Because I thought they didn't. Now I know they do. Since when has changing an argument based upon incoming evidence been a bad thing?
It's a thruster directly attached to the nacelle, why wouldn't it generate so much power? It's being fed directly from the warp drive.
Besides, just watching it from the video it's not even a thruster. The ship's simply charging the nacelles as if it were going to warp but without actually going to warp. Whether they can function as warp nacelles or not they can still power the ship. It's no different from the nacelles of the excelsior glowing blue before it fails to go to warp in III. Nacelles can still be used to propel the ship even at sublight.
Also, the impulse engines flare at the same time so it might not even be the warp drive, the nacelles may just be flaring to show that warp power is being diverted into the impulse engines.
Norway and Yeager dammit... I still want my Typhoon and Jupiter though.
JJ Trek The Kelvin Timeline is just Trek and it's fully canon... get over it. But I still prefer TAR.
#TASforSTO
'...I can tell you that we're not in the military and that we intend no harm to the whales.' Kirk: The Voyage Home
'Starfleet is not a military organisation. Its purpose is exploration.' Picard: Peak Performance
'This is clearly a military operation. Is that what we are now? Because I thought we were explorers!' Scotty: Into Darkness
'...The Federation. Starfleet. We're not a military agency.' Scotty: Beyond
'I'm not a soldier anymore. I'm an engineer.' Miles O'Brien: Empok Nor
'...Starfleet could use you... It's a peacekeeping and humanitarian armada...' Admiral Pike: Star Trek
Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!
Because they used the stations shields to form a low-level field around the station to lower its inertial mass... I doubt the Kelvin was in any condition to do such engineering shenanigans
Trials of Blood and Fire
Moving On Parts 1-3 - Part 4
In Cold Blood
Since forever, because it shows that someone is arguing a point which i) they didn't have all the facts they're basing their own stance on, so ii) aren't speaking from any kind of position of understanding on the subject, but are just winging it in the hope that the other person knows less than they do... By all means, someone can change their opinion, but to argue something (which is clearly wrong) as a defence of a point, and then say 'oh well, it doesn't matter...' when proven wrong... I'm sorry, but that's just embarrassing... :-\
Why would it even be there (as a function of the drive)? The impulse engines, which move the ship at sub-light, are clearly visible in the photo I linked above. I believe, that this just shows that the guys who did the design/effects of the Kelvin either i) didn't know, or ii) didn't give a sh*t about the drives used aboard Starfleet ships and how they operate... They clearly just thought: "Engine! Engine makes go!" That might be okay in a Pakled engineering class, but not in Starfleet...
You can speculate all you like on what the engine flares may signify, I'll just satisfy myself with the idea that the effects guys either didn't know, or didn't care, and just went with 'Engines make go! as their rationale...
I'm not sure if the maths would work out for that, but that's an interesting notion
Yes, I did the mission from STO. They didn't mention a time line. It just said alternative reality. Which means possible a different Universe. This is one reason why I like STO's story telling. They are doing a good job patching up all the loose ends.
And 2009 had a lot of stuff that didn't make sense. This is why I gave it a low rating on Star Trek base.. As usually they explain it in better details and make it believable. Its like they was more focused on the action. I'm sure it will be the same with the other 2 as I watch them. The same red matter destroys stuff, but yet they went back in time with it. That was a poor plot device, is just examples.
USS Casinghead NCC 92047 launched 2350
Fleet Admiral Stowe - Dominion War Vet.
I can understand. Plus I was being rough about the whole thing. So I figured I would get some backlash in my attempts to watch it. In hopes to get a better understanding of the new movie series. And heal any wounds that opened from it. As a Trek fan I came to my senses and be a fan as one should be. And more than happy to debate different thoughts on it, as long we can be civil about it.
USS Casinghead NCC 92047 launched 2350
Fleet Admiral Stowe - Dominion War Vet.
USS Casinghead NCC 92047 launched 2350
Fleet Admiral Stowe - Dominion War Vet.
Very true, well said.
USS Casinghead NCC 92047 launched 2350
Fleet Admiral Stowe - Dominion War Vet.
I'm in full agreement on both counts.
Infinite possibilities have implications that could not be completely understood if you turned this entire universe into a giant supercomputer.
Any time, that alone explains the direction of how they wanted the movies be. And it shows it. This is what caused a rift between the fans of Trek. Cause of this direction change.
I talked to one fellow movie goer, he thought it was an "Origin" story of Kirk and crew. Explaining how they got together. Another liked it cause of the action alone. This is the response I got from regular movie fans.
USS Casinghead NCC 92047 launched 2350
Fleet Admiral Stowe - Dominion War Vet.
Absolutely, JJ calls it 'its own rhythm', I call it being sloppy on the fine-details, and then using handwavium to dismiss criticism
*If one is prepared to overlook inconsistencies and contrivances and use a large dose of headcanon to make things plausible/make sense (ie Nero's speech patterns, I attribute to, being a miner, his education may have come from Federation pop culture, rather than classic Imperial education, so less polished, rather than just thinking that the writers couldn't write in the same precice and multi-faceted manner as other Romulans...
I noticed that a lot lately when they are asked. Why the movies didn't do so well in the earnings. They have all kinds of excuses. I'm sure they will blame it on the weather for that opening weekend next.
USS Casinghead NCC 92047 launched 2350
Fleet Admiral Stowe - Dominion War Vet.
This! 1000 times this! If the Kelvin had NOT beed destroyed, the timeline would have proceeded as usual and we'd get everything up through Nemesis. But with the destruction of the Kelvin, a whole new series of events unfolds from that point on. But it also shows that one particular ship with one particular crew was meant to come together. Perhaps it is Time's way of trying to at least patch up the damage caused by bringing the crew of the Enterprise together.
And the theory that the "thrust exhaust" from the Kelvin's nacelle was an indication of transferring power to the impulse engines is an interesting one. Also... it could be forcefully expelling some Warp Plasma in an attempt to increase speed as well. Anything to get the Kelvin up to ramming speed quickly, even brute force rocket thrust. And don't forget the Kelvin was damaged in the initial attack so that could have played a part as well. Get that initial burst of speed, let the impulse engines do the rest.
Incorrect. That's anti-intellectualism of the highest order. People who stick stubbornly to their argument after all evidence has proven them wrong are embarrassments. People who like to pretend their headcanon is canon for example, people claiming changes in 50 years of special effects are proof of anything for one series but not for others.
If people do not change their opinions based on new evidence they are idiots and to sudgest that a debate can only be started when both sides have all the evidence is laughably childish.
I had thought that the bollocks about nacelle thrusters was the highlight or moronic simple-mindedness in this thread but now you've gone and raised the bar exponentially.
Any and all conclusions are, and have to be, based upon moving evidence, not dogma, if that means admitting mistakes, then so be it. But if you're creating a dogmatic conclusion then by all means, stick to it, it's certainly not correct or dependent on the evidence, but by golly, you stuck to it.
Norway and Yeager dammit... I still want my Typhoon and Jupiter though.
JJ Trek The Kelvin Timeline is just Trek and it's fully canon... get over it. But I still prefer TAR.
#TASforSTO
'...I can tell you that we're not in the military and that we intend no harm to the whales.' Kirk: The Voyage Home
'Starfleet is not a military organisation. Its purpose is exploration.' Picard: Peak Performance
'This is clearly a military operation. Is that what we are now? Because I thought we were explorers!' Scotty: Into Darkness
'...The Federation. Starfleet. We're not a military agency.' Scotty: Beyond
'I'm not a soldier anymore. I'm an engineer.' Miles O'Brien: Empok Nor
'...Starfleet could use you... It's a peacekeeping and humanitarian armada...' Admiral Pike: Star Trek
Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!
Absolutely, it could be... Giving the writers credit that they even thought of that option, rather than the 'engine makes go!' Pakled engineering which I suspect it to be...
Did I just win the debate with my Warp Plasma Rocket theory?
Correct me if I'm wrong, but you did say these things, did you not?
Care to backpedal any harder? Yes, I have stuck to my point, because that point, is that warp nacelles do not emit thrust exhaust... They do have thrusters on (in some instances) but certainly not of the kind seen on the rear of the Kelvin nacelle... As I said, I'm willing to accept that the writers/effects guys were 'putting their own spin' on things, but that also brings the conclusion that they weren't concerned with the established functionality of Treknology, but just resorting to 'engine makes go!' understanding of the tech (so sloppy writing) I'm not arguing that it means alternate dimension from the rest of the pre-Nero PrimeVerse, just that it's an inconsistency, which JJ's handwavium almost-but-not-quite justifies...