If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Stars and Stripes)   Enterprise vs Enterprise hard core Stars and Stripes journalist asks: "A 23rd-century starship obviously has far more advanced technology than a 21st-century aircraft carrier. But in what other ways are the vessels dissimilar?"   (stripes.com) divider line 90
    More: Amusing, USS Enterprise, Enterprise, U.S. Naval War College, patrol boats, Benedict Arnold, particle displacement, fueling station, space shuttle program  
•       •       •

3491 clicks; posted to Geek » on 28 Dec 2012 at 1:05 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



90 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread
 
2012-12-28 12:10:40 AM  
"Q. Other than the fact that a starship has phasers and an aircraft carrier doesn't, how would you characterize the differences in their combat capabilities?"
 
2012-12-28 12:13:40 AM  
209.160.41.119
 
2012-12-28 12:18:09 AM  
Starship Enterprise has better looking doctors and ship's counselors.
 
2012-12-28 12:26:24 AM  

some_beer_drinker: 209.160.41.119


Wow. I love that image. Time for a TNG marathon this weekend.
 
2012-12-28 01:50:32 AM  
Well, since one is cgi and props/sets, and the other was a great damn flattop- I have to go with the big E.
 
2012-12-28 03:23:29 AM  

NewportBarGuy: some_beer_drinker: 209.160.41.119

Wow. I love that image. Time for a TNG marathon this weekend.


Those spheres on top of the Star Destroyer's bridge are its shield generators.
 
2012-12-28 03:31:48 AM  

Sgt Otter: Those spheres on top of the Star Destroyer's bridge are its shield generators.


Ladies and Gentlemen- we have found the biggest Nerd on Fark. : )
 
2012-12-28 04:20:19 AM  
space one has better looking communication ladies too, in snazzy outfits - it's fab, baby
 
2012-12-28 04:20:42 AM  

teto85: Starship Enterprise has better looking doctors and ship's counselors.


Yeah, Doctor Pulaski was hittable in a cougarish way.
 
2012-12-28 05:08:15 AM  
Navy nerds. Please let this go green.
 
2012-12-28 06:31:52 AM  

fusillade762: Navy nerds. Please let this go green.


only you can also vote plus one.
 
2012-12-28 07:21:23 AM  
Where are your nuclear wessels?
 
2012-12-28 08:20:12 AM  

stratagos: Where are your nuclear wessels?


I got your nukes... right here.

dvice.com
 
2012-12-28 09:05:20 AM  

alienated: Sgt Otter: Those spheres on top of the Star Destroyer's bridge are its shield generators.

Ladies and Gentlemen- we have found the biggest Nerd on Fark. : )


everyone new that...but still...
 
2012-12-28 09:06:03 AM  
farking k on my keyboard is farked.kkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkk
 
2012-12-28 09:51:56 AM  

some_beer_drinker: [209.160.41.119 image 378x480]


Do those look like laser beams to you? Could a laser destroy a planet?

/oh God, this again
 
2012-12-28 10:11:09 AM  

some_beer_drinker: farking k on my keyboard is farked.kkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkk


You need to upgrade to a non stick keyboard or work on your aim.
 
2012-12-28 10:14:52 AM  

NewportBarGuy: some_beer_drinker: 209.160.41.119

Wow. I love that image. Time for a TNG marathon this weekend.


Just watched Wrath of Khan on Netflix last night after watching TOS Khan episode. It was really good to watch it that way so it was fresh. So then I was curious. Maybe that will help me watch Star Trek III since it's just a continuation. I had completely blocked out Star Trek III. Couldn't remember the plot at all even though it is obvious from the title. Yeah that was a huge waste of time. Horrible. I remember IV because that's pretty good too. V of course is awful and VI is good. Yes yes, I know....only do even numbered ones. But we didn't know that in the 80s when they were coming out. I had seen them all at one point and didn't realize how thoroughly I had blocked the odd numbered ones from my memory. I thought maybe watching them in order would help all that. It did not.
 
2012-12-28 10:25:59 AM  

brandent: I had completely blocked out Star Trek III. Couldn't remember the plot at all even though it is obvious from the title. Yeah that was a huge waste of time. Horrible.


I think Trek 3 is highly maligned. You have to get past the obvious goofiness of bringing Spock back but that was unavoidable  After that, you have the first appearance of the modern Klingon, which will be used throughout  the series, the first appearance of the Bird of Prey, which will be used throughout the series, that big breasted Klingon girl, Kirk's pussy son finally getting stabbed to death, Doc Brown as a Klingon, Sulu as a faaabulous James Bond bad ass, Kirk stealing the Enterprise, Kirk destroying the Enterprise, some decent dramatic acting, I thought it was decent. Trek 4 was just a fish out of water story on earth because they wanted to save on the budget.

Trek 5 had some decent Kirk/McCoy/Spock scenes. I think it could have been a passable film with a few re-writes and better FX.
 
2012-12-28 10:38:01 AM  

alienated: Sgt Otter: Those spheres on top of the Star Destroyer's bridge are its shield generators.

Ladies and Gentlemen- we have found the biggest Nerd on Fark. : )


Not really, all this knowledge requires is that you pay attention. During the Battle of Endor, the Rebels destroy one of these towers on the Super Star Destroyer, an Imperial Officer says that they have lost bridge deflector shields.
 
2012-12-28 11:05:28 AM  
FTFAthe U.S. Navy retired the aircraft carrier USS Enterprise (CVN-65)...[and]...the third Ford-class supercarrier (CVN-80), due to be completed around 2025, will be named Enterprise.

Am I the only one who thinks they should have designated the new Enterprise as CVN-65-B?
 
2012-12-28 11:13:20 AM  

eraser8: FTFA:  the U.S. Navy retired the aircraft carrier USS Enterprise (CVN-65)...[and]...the third Ford-class supercarrier (CVN-80), due to be completed around 2025, will be named Enterprise.

Am I the only one who thinks they should have designated the new Enterprise as CVN-65-B?


CVN-65-A, DAMMIT!

No one wants a B! That was Captain Cameron's ship! And odds are, on its maiden voyage, he'll wind up killing the most important dignitary on the ship and pissing off everyone like he took his Dad's Ferrari out!
 
2012-12-28 11:23:12 AM  
i128.photobucket.com
 
2012-12-28 11:30:38 AM  
People actually pooped on CVN-65?

/not "on" CVN-65.  You know what I mean.
 
2012-12-28 11:39:45 AM  

ArkAngel: alienated: Sgt Otter: Those spheres on top of the Star Destroyer's bridge are its shield generators.

Ladies and Gentlemen- we have found the biggest Nerd on Fark. : )

Not really, all this knowledge requires is that you pay attention. During the Battle of Endor, the Rebels destroy one of these towers on the Super Star Destroyer, an Imperial Officer says that they have lost bridge deflector shields.


Well there's at least one bigger one apparently. I think there was simply a misunderstanding of what a huge bunch of nerds there are on fark.
 
2012-12-28 11:56:08 AM  

Rusty Shackleford: People actually pooped on CVN-65?

/not "on" CVN-65.  You know what I mean.


I know a guy that allegedly pooped in one of the reactor compartments.

That has to be the most exclusive club ever.
 
2012-12-28 01:18:34 PM  

One Bad Apple: Rusty Shackleford: People actually pooped on CVN-65?

/not "on" CVN-65.  You know what I mean.

I know a guy that allegedly pooped in one of the reactor compartments.

That has to be the most exclusive club ever.


I almost did that on the Theodore Roosevelt when I realized what I had wandered into.
 
2012-12-28 01:29:19 PM  

Rusty Shackleford: People actually pooped on CVN-65?

/not "on" CVN-65.  You know what I mean.


Off the flight deck and into the water?
 
2012-12-28 01:37:02 PM  
Off the top of my head, without even leaving existing naval nomenclature:

CVN-Enterprise: An aircraft carrier. Designed to be a force-projection platform that always travels as part of a battle group, but really can't do much alone. When it does move, however, it has one job: destroy.
NCC-Enterprise: A cruiser. Designed for long term independent operation. Happens to also mount exceptional sensors (as befits its mission of
'seek out, go where no man has gone before'...it's a SCOUT!) and a powerful suite of point defense and direct-firing weapons (it took em HOW long to come up with a heat-seeking torpedo?). If you see it in a pitched battle, something has gone terribly wrong-but there you go.

Book it, done.
 
2012-12-28 01:43:35 PM  

alienated: Sgt Otter: Those spheres on top of the Star Destroyer's bridge are its shield generators.

Ladies and Gentlemen- we have found the biggest Nerd on Fark. : )


The idea that a Star Destroyer does not have shields is just silly, besides you think those Phasers or photon torpedoes really deliver more destructive power then Turbo Lasers? The lasers on the Death Star were only slightly larger then Turbo Lasers and they could destroy a whole planet.

The Millenium Falcon stole it's shields and upgraded armor from a Star Destroyer, along with it's incredibly advanced hyper drive, and multiple droid brain foul mouthed primary computer made it a very hard ship to maintain.
 
2012-12-28 01:43:46 PM  
Powerlevel thread? What are accepting as Canon? All published materials or just original media?

Star wars wins handily if we go just with original media.
 
2012-12-28 01:58:19 PM  
I highly doubt the real Enterprise can operate in the vacuum of space.

Also, Kirk can bang the blonde hottie assistant to the alien team trying to hijack the Enterprise and nothing happens to him (TOS: Wink of an Eye). The Captain of the aircraft carrier Enterprise bangs the female hottie assistant of the terrorists trying to hijack the ship and I'm sure he'll be in explaining in great detail what he thought he was doing during his court martial.

tos.trekcore.com
 
2012-12-28 02:00:10 PM  
Let's be honest here, geeks and nerds of Fark: the Big E was no "21st Century" anything. She was commissioned in the mid-20th century with a 1st-generation shipboard nuclear propulsion system that was a nightmare of cores, pumps, plants, valves and CRUD. She made history just being launched and served us well for 50 years, but that was an OLD boat. The movie library was designed for reel-to-reels.

It would have been nice if the new class of CVNs could have been ENTERPRISE instead of Gerald Ford. A president that was never elected by anyone outside of a single congressional district? Seriously? And people sh*t their pants over an LCS being named for Gabrielle Giffords.
 
2012-12-28 02:06:12 PM  

alienated: Well, since one is cgi and props/sets, and the other was a great damn flattop- I have to go with the big E.


TNG barely used any CGI, except for a couple of shots.
 
2012-12-28 02:08:51 PM  

factoryconnection: It would have been nice if the new class of CVNs could have been ENTERPRISE instead of Gerald Ford. A president that was never elected by anyone outside of a single congressional district? Seriously? And people sh*t their pants over an LCS being named for Gabrielle Giffords.


Can't wait for the William J. Clinton. Slogan - "Loaded with seamen and ready for action!"
 
2012-12-28 02:11:33 PM  
Star Trek wins because they have time travel.

If they lose a fight, any ship in the federation can just go back in time and change history so they win.
 
2012-12-28 02:15:27 PM  
About the only thing those two ships have in common is the name and the fact they both have humans on board.

But it can be fun to speculate.
 
2012-12-28 02:17:41 PM  
Does the new CVN have a bowling alley? 'Cause the starship did.
 
2012-12-28 02:19:37 PM  

studebaker hoch: Star Trek wins because they have time travel.

If they lose a fight, any ship in the federation can just go back in time and change history so they win.


That is something I wondered about a few times. They can go back in time simply by flying around the sun at warp speeds. So, during the Dominion War, when the Federation was losing, why didn't someone ever suggest "Let's sling shot around the Bajoran sun to when Sisko first made contact with the Dominion and the Odyssey was destroyed and say "Okay, here's what's about to happen. Kill Gul Dukat. Here is a list of really good chances to do so. Also, here is a way of collapsing the wormhole without killing the Prophets."

/I know, dramatic purposes and all that.
 
2012-12-28 02:27:10 PM  

alienated: Sgt Otter: Those spheres on top of the Star Destroyer's bridge are its shield generators.

Ladies and Gentlemen- we have found the biggest Nerd on Fark. : )


Honestly, if you didn't know that then you probably should be permanently banned from the Geek tab.
 
2012-12-28 02:28:34 PM  

factoryconnection: Let's be honest here, geeks and nerds of Fark: the Big E was no "21st Century" anything.


Right, which is why the article was not talking about CVN-65. You might want to actually read it.
 
2012-12-28 02:29:05 PM  

studebaker hoch: Star Trek wins because they have time travel.

If they lose a fight, any ship in the federation can just go back in time and change history so they win.



Nimitz can do that. Should have retrofitted CVN65 to do it too.
5wordmoviereviews.files.wordpress.com
 
2012-12-28 02:41:54 PM  

factoryconnection: Let's be honest here, geeks and nerds of Fark: the Big E was no "21st Century" anything


Know how I know you didn't RTFA?

FTFA So how will the new supercarrier Enterprise (CVN-80) compare to the starship Enterprise (NCC- 1701)?
 
2012-12-28 02:52:19 PM  
One thing superior about the USS Enterprise carrier. It has bathrooms. Never seen one on the starship Enterprise.
 
2012-12-28 03:00:20 PM  

mrlewish: One thing superior about the USS Enterprise carrier. It has bathrooms. Never seen one on the starship Enterprise.


But they talked about the "Captain's log" in just about every episode
 
2012-12-28 03:00:27 PM  
It's the elevator, right?  Must be the elevator
 
2012-12-28 03:00:56 PM  

mrlewish: One thing superior about the USS Enterprise carrier. It has bathrooms. Never seen one on the starship Enterprise.


There was one on the Enterprise.

ONE.

/of course, wouldn't they just have devices to beam the shiat out of you by that point?
//But how could they take the pleasure of a nice, hearty dump away from you?
 
2012-12-28 03:01:11 PM  

mrlewish: One thing superior about the USS Enterprise carrier. It has bathrooms. Never seen one on the starship Enterprise.


It's clear that there were restrooms in the individual quarters. I mean there is a small alcove on one side of the room behind an open door with a sink and running water. Clearly there's a shower and toilet back there as well (TNG crew quarters)

There is even one on the Bridge. One TNG, look in the rear section of the Bridge. You'll see a small alcove. In that alcove are two doors. One door leads to the Observation Deck, the other door faces that door (okay, it's not easily seen, but from some angles you can see it, sometimes crew members walk out of it), that door leads to the Bridge restroom. There is even another one in the Captain's Ready Room. In the Ready Room there is the replicator and what looks like a small hallway. That leads to the Captain's private restroom.
 
2012-12-28 03:03:59 PM  

Great Janitor: mrlewish: One thing superior about the USS Enterprise carrier. It has bathrooms. Never seen one on the starship Enterprise.

It's clear that there were restrooms in the individual quarters. I mean there is a small alcove on one side of the room behind an open door with a sink and running water. Clearly there's a shower and toilet back there as well (TNG crew quarters)

There is even one on the Bridge. One TNG, look in the rear section of the Bridge. You'll see a small alcove. In that alcove are two doors. One door leads to the Observation Deck, the other door faces that door (okay, it's not easily seen, but from some angles you can see it, sometimes crew members walk out of it), that door leads to the Bridge restroom. There is even another one in the Captain's Ready Room. In the Ready Room there is the replicator and what looks like a small hallway. That leads to the Captain's private restroom.


Do they have to evacuate the bridge after Worf goes on a prune juice bender and blows up the bathroom?

"Captain! Come quick! You've got to see this! It looks like live gagh!"
 
2012-12-28 03:20:19 PM  

Great Janitor: mrlewish: One thing superior about the USS Enterprise carrier. It has bathrooms. Never seen one on the starship Enterprise.

It's clear that there were restrooms in the individual quarters. I mean there is a small alcove on one side of the room behind an open door with a sink and running water. Clearly there's a shower and toilet back there as well (TNG crew quarters)

There is even one on the Bridge. One TNG, look in the rear section of the Bridge. You'll see a small alcove. In that alcove are two doors. One door leads to the Observation Deck, the other door faces that door (okay, it's not easily seen, but from some angles you can see it, sometimes crew members walk out of it), that door leads to the Bridge restroom. There is even another one in the Captain's Ready Room. In the Ready Room there is the replicator and what looks like a small hallway. That leads to the Captain's private restroom.


But, do they use the three clamshells?
 
2012-12-28 03:22:35 PM  

FirstNationalBastard: Great Janitor: mrlewish: One thing superior about the USS Enterprise carrier. It has bathrooms. Never seen one on the starship Enterprise.

It's clear that there were restrooms in the individual quarters. I mean there is a small alcove on one side of the room behind an open door with a sink and running water. Clearly there's a shower and toilet back there as well (TNG crew quarters)

There is even one on the Bridge. One TNG, look in the rear section of the Bridge. You'll see a small alcove. In that alcove are two doors. One door leads to the Observation Deck, the other door faces that door (okay, it's not easily seen, but from some angles you can see it, sometimes crew members walk out of it), that door leads to the Bridge restroom. There is even another one in the Captain's Ready Room. In the Ready Room there is the replicator and what looks like a small hallway. That leads to the Captain's private restroom.

Do they have to evacuate the bridge after Worf goes on a prune juice bender and blows up the bathroom?

"Captain! Come quick! You've got to see this! It looks like live gagh!"


Ok, I laughed way too hard at that. Does that mean that for some reason it's squirming even after being evacuated?
 
2012-12-28 03:25:00 PM  

Slaves2Darkness: alienated: Sgt Otter: Those spheres on top of the Star Destroyer's bridge are its shield generators.

Ladies and Gentlemen- we have found the biggest Nerd on Fark. : )

The idea that a Star Destroyer does not have shields is just silly, besides you think those Phasers or photon torpedoes really deliver more destructive power then Turbo Lasers? The lasers on the Death Star were only slightly larger then Turbo Lasers and they could destroy a whole planet.

The Millenium Falcon stole it's shields and upgraded armor from a Star Destroyer, along with it's incredibly advanced hyper drive, and multiple droid brain foul mouthed primary computer made it a very hard ship to maintain.


Star trek technobably makes absolutely no sense. they just picked big numbers and ran with it, not knowing anything about what those number mean.
 
2012-12-28 03:37:49 PM  

Slaves2Darkness: alienated: Sgt Otter: Those spheres on top of the Star Destroyer's bridge are its shield generators.

Ladies and Gentlemen- we have found the biggest Nerd on Fark. : )

The idea that a Star Destroyer does not have shields is just silly, besides you think those Phasers or photon torpedoes really deliver more destructive power then Turbo Lasers? The lasers on the Death Star were only slightly larger then Turbo Lasers and they could destroy a whole planet.

The Millenium Falcon stole it's shields and upgraded armor from a Star Destroyer, along with it's incredibly advanced hyper drive, and multiple droid brain foul mouthed primary computer made it a very hard ship to maintain.


One, they supposedly had shields but even little ships like X-wings were routinely shown blowing up stuff on the surface of ships. Either the shields only covered specific areas of the ship or they were VERY weak,

Two, The Death star was essentially a huge power plant to focus everything into a series of beams that were collimated into one big beam weapon. It takes time to charge and fire. Meanwhile on Star Trek they had several episodes where they carefully turned *down* the power on the phasers AND widened the beam to distribute power evenly and drilled into planets with just one beam.

Three. As was pointed out earlier the shield technology on Star Trek had advanced to the point where even the most powerful lasers weren't even a bother to their basic navigational deflector shield let alone the shields they used when they were in a fight.
 
2012-12-28 03:40:21 PM  

FirstNationalBastard: Great Janitor: mrlewish: One thing superior about the USS Enterprise carrier. It has bathrooms. Never seen one on the starship Enterprise.

It's clear that there were restrooms in the individual quarters. I mean there is a small alcove on one side of the room behind an open door with a sink and running water. Clearly there's a shower and toilet back there as well (TNG crew quarters)

There is even one on the Bridge. One TNG, look in the rear section of the Bridge. You'll see a small alcove. In that alcove are two doors. One door leads to the Observation Deck, the other door faces that door (okay, it's not easily seen, but from some angles you can see it, sometimes crew members walk out of it), that door leads to the Bridge restroom. There is even another one in the Captain's Ready Room. In the Ready Room there is the replicator and what looks like a small hallway. That leads to the Captain's private restroom.

Do they have to evacuate the bridge after Worf goes on a prune juice bender and blows up the bathroom?

"Captain! Come quick! You've got to see this! It looks like live gagh!"


I honestly don't know.

But there was once or twice Picard was seen walking out of that room, tugging on his uniform. I would love it if there was a scene where you have like O'Brian and Geordie talking, and O'Brian says "Yeah, I walked into the restroom on the bridge after the Captain was finished using it. How the hell can the man command the flag ship of the Federation and not know to lift the seat when you pee?"
 
2012-12-28 04:15:41 PM  
This is actually a Foreign Policy article reprinted in Stars & Stripes.  And it's a follow-up to the  http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2012/09/28/aircraft_carriers_in _ space article.
 
2012-12-28 04:33:20 PM  

FirstNationalBastard: mrlewish: One thing superior about the USS Enterprise carrier. It has bathrooms. Never seen one on the starship Enterprise.

There was one on the Enterprise.

ONE.

/of course, wouldn't they just have devices to beam the shiat out of you by that point?
//But how could they take the pleasure of a nice, hearty dump away from you?


Nobody ever had a hearty dump on the starship. Replicated corn just doesn't have the same effect.
 
2012-12-28 04:46:37 PM  
My wife's Uncle died on the USS Enterprise, I don't know anyone who has died on a Science Fiction Enterprise
 
2012-12-28 05:13:35 PM  
I'll just drop these here...

download-stargate-episodes.edogo.com
www.scifishy.com
img4.imageshack.us
 
2012-12-28 05:19:29 PM  

Just Another OC Homeless Guy: I'll just drop these here...

[download-stargate-episodes.edogo.com image 850x475]
[www.scifishy.com image 850x474]
[img4.imageshack.us image 850x360]


I loved those designs. sucks there won't be anymore stargate.
 
2012-12-28 06:06:38 PM  
i280.photobucket.com
 
2012-12-28 06:38:30 PM  

brandent: NewportBarGuy: some_beer_drinker: 209.160.41.119

Wow. I love that image. Time for a TNG marathon this weekend.

Just watched Wrath of Khan on Netflix last night after watching TOS Khan episode. It was really good to watch it that way so it was fresh. So then I was curious. Maybe that will help me watch Star Trek III since it's just a continuation. I had completely blocked out Star Trek III. Couldn't remember the plot at all even though it is obvious from the title. Yeah that was a huge waste of time. Horrible. I remember IV because that's pretty good too. V of course is awful and VI is good. Yes yes, I know....only do even numbered ones. But we didn't know that in the 80s when they were coming out. I had seen them all at one point and didn't realize how thoroughly I had blocked the odd numbered ones from my memory. I thought maybe watching them in order would help all that. It did not.


The common thread between II, IV and VI is one man: Nicholas Meyer.

Again I'd like to recommend this book to all Trek fans:

img.trekmovie.com
 
2012-12-28 06:45:36 PM  
One exists, the other can not. That would be one way they are "dissimilar".
 
2012-12-28 07:11:43 PM  

Great Janitor: studebaker hoch: Star Trek wins because they have time travel.

If they lose a fight, any ship in the federation can just go back in time and change history so they win.

That is something I wondered about a few times. They can go back in time simply by flying around the sun at warp speeds. So, during the Dominion War, when the Federation was losing, why didn't someone ever suggest "Let's sling shot around the Bajoran sun to when Sisko first made contact with the Dominion and the Odyssey was destroyed and say "Okay, here's what's about to happen. Kill Gul Dukat. Here is a list of really good chances to do so. Also, here is a way of collapsing the wormhole without killing the Prophets."

/I know, dramatic purposes and all that.


But then, what reason would they have to go back and kill Dukat? Oh dear, I think I've gone cross eyed.

NeoCortex42: alienated: Well, since one is cgi and props/sets, and the other was a great damn flattop- I have to go with the big E.

TNG barely used any CGI, except for a couple of shots.


tng.trekcore.com

This was probably just an optical effect, but let's hope they fix this one up for the bluray. Fifth(!) season, the phaser coming out of the torpedo tube.
 
FNG [TotalFark]
2012-12-28 07:25:41 PM  
Only one of them can fly through space and beam stuff around, but they're both really cool.
 
2012-12-28 07:29:17 PM  
Curious thing, the article mentions that the NCC has no fighters and looks after itself all the time. The large shuttle craft (although more so the Runabouts) are actually quite heavily armed and shielded, even having torpedo launchers on them.

The Federation ships, irrespective of them only being 'Cruisers' or 'Destroyers' are actually Carriers in their own right.

The actual difference between the two is that the fictional Enterprise assumes you're friendly and doesn't run patrols with it's fighters, the real Enterprise assumes you aren't and does.
 
2012-12-28 07:47:12 PM  

Great Janitor: mrlewish: One thing superior about the USS Enterprise carrier. It has bathrooms. Never seen one on the starship Enterprise.

It's clear that there were restrooms in the individual quarters. I mean there is a small alcove on one side of the room behind an open door with a sink and running water. Clearly there's a shower and toilet back there as well (TNG crew quarters)

There is even one on the Bridge. One TNG, look in the rear section of the Bridge. You'll see a small alcove. In that alcove are two doors. One door leads to the Observation Deck, the other door faces that door (okay, it's not easily seen, but from some angles you can see it, sometimes crew members walk out of it), that door leads to the Bridge restroom. There is even another one in the Captain's Ready Room. In the Ready Room there is the replicator and what looks like a small hallway. That leads to the Captain's private restroom.


They use miniature teleporters stuck up your anus in the future
 
2012-12-28 07:51:20 PM  

Princess Ryans Knickers: They use miniature teleporters stuck up your anus in the future



I'm ready, man, check it out. I am the ultimate badass! State of the badass art! You do NOT wanna fark with me. Check it out! Hey Pricess Ryans Knickers, don't worry. Me and my squad of ultimate badasses will protect you! Check it out! Independently targeting particle beam phalanx. Vwap! Fry half a city with this puppy. We got tactical smart missiles, phase-plasma pulse rifles, RPGs, we got sonic electronic buttplugs!

I'll take 2 actually.
 
2012-12-28 08:40:41 PM  
No one in their right mind would let a dorky little punkass onto the bridge, not even if he IS the son of the ship's doctor?
 
2012-12-28 08:50:37 PM  
Obvious Red Shirt.
 
2012-12-28 10:27:54 PM  
The best-to-worst designs of the Enterprise, in my humble opinion:

Enterprise-A (movie refit)
Enterprise-E
2009 Enterprise
TOS Enterprise
Enterprise-B
Enterprise-C
Enterprise-D
"Enterprise" Enterprise
 
2012-12-28 10:37:19 PM  

TV's Vinnie: No one in their right mind would let a dorky little punkass onto the bridge, not even if he IS the son of the ship's doctor?


If you wanted to put your other bald head into the Redheaded Doctor, you might let her punkass kid onto the bridge.
 
2012-12-28 10:50:14 PM  

Keizer_Ghidorah: The best-to-worst designs of the Enterprise, in my humble opinion:

Enterprise-A (movie refit)
Enterprise-E
2009 Enterprise
TOS Enterprise
Enterprise-B
Enterprise-C
Enterprise-D
"Enterprise" Enterprise


I think the refit Enterprise from the movies is a great looking ship, they certainly thought so with all those loving, long shots of it in TMP.
I think I'd rate them:

refit Enterprise/Enterprise A
Enterprise E
Enterprise D (didn't like at first, grew on me)
Enterprise C
Enterprise B
Enterprise NX
reboot Enterprise( might grow on me like D did)
 
2012-12-28 11:02:44 PM  
Some concepts of what the Enterprise Refit (the one between TOS Connie and the A) could have looked like, by Ralph McQuarrie:
geektyrant.com
geektyrant.com
geektyrant.com
 
2012-12-28 11:04:01 PM  

Your_Huckleberry: Keizer_Ghidorah: The best-to-worst designs of the Enterprise, in my humble opinion:

Enterprise-A (movie refit)
Enterprise-E
2009 Enterprise
TOS Enterprise
Enterprise-B
Enterprise-C
Enterprise-D
"Enterprise" Enterprise

I think the refit Enterprise from the movies is a great looking ship, they certainly thought so with all those loving, long shots of it in TMP.
I think I'd rate them:

refit Enterprise/Enterprise A
Enterprise E
Enterprise D (didn't like at first, grew on me)
Enterprise C
Enterprise B
Enterprise NX
reboot Enterprise( might grow on me like D did)


I've always felt the movie version was the most majestic and well-designed. The swept-back diagonal warp nacelle pylons especially.

The one design I will NEVER like is the NX-Enterprise. All they did was take an Akira-class (one of my all-time favorite Federation starship designs) and flipped it upside-down, then tried to pass it off as primitive. Blech.
 
2012-12-28 11:05:56 PM  

TV's Vinnie: Some concepts of what the Enterprise Refit (the one between TOS Connie and the A) could have looked like, by Ralph McQuarrie:
[geektyrant.com image 800x378]
[geektyrant.com image 760x346]
[geektyrant.com image 550x300]


Wow. The first two are, like, bizarre. But they'd make a good carrier-type ship for a squad of fighters, if the front was open so they could fly in from one side and out the other.

The third one looks a lot like the 2009 Enterprise.
 
2012-12-28 11:12:54 PM  

TV's Vinnie: Some concepts of what the Enterprise Refit (the one between TOS Connie and the A) could have looked like, by Ralph McQuarrie:
[geektyrant.com image 800x378]
[geektyrant.com image 760x346]
[geektyrant.com image 550x300]


Yeah, but since Enterprise-A was just a re-use of the refit model, this would have turned out to be the Enterprise-A as well as the Motion Picture refit.
 
2012-12-28 11:53:04 PM  

FirstNationalBastard: TV's Vinnie: Some concepts of what the Enterprise Refit (the one between TOS Connie and the A) could have looked like, by Ralph McQuarrie:
[geektyrant.com image 800x378]
[geektyrant.com image 760x346]
[geektyrant.com image 550x300]

Yeah, but since Enterprise-A was just a re-use of the refit model, this would have turned out to be the Enterprise-A as well as the Motion Picture refit.


These were concept drawings for ST: The Motion Picture (ergo, the one between TOS and the A model).

Keizer_Ghidorah: The third one looks a lot like the 2009 Enterprise.


Paramount was tossing around the idea of a "Prequel" Trek since 1970 (something that Walter Koenig thought wouldn't work, cuz if Kirk/Spock/McCoy would be young officers, that would have made Chekov & Sulu gradeschoolers). All JJ did was take that concept and just do it as a total reboot.
 
2012-12-28 11:56:11 PM  

Keizer_Ghidorah: Your_Huckleberry: Keizer_Ghidorah: The best-to-worst designs of the Enterprise, in my humble opinion:

Enterprise-A (movie refit)
Enterprise-E
2009 Enterprise
TOS Enterprise
Enterprise-B
Enterprise-C
Enterprise-D
"Enterprise" Enterprise

I think the refit Enterprise from the movies is a great looking ship, they certainly thought so with all those loving, long shots of it in TMP.
I think I'd rate them:

refit Enterprise/Enterprise A
Enterprise E
Enterprise D (didn't like at first, grew on me)
Enterprise C
Enterprise B
Enterprise NX
reboot Enterprise( might grow on me like D did)

I've always felt the movie version was the most majestic and well-designed. The swept-back diagonal warp nacelle pylons especially.

The one design I will NEVER like is the NX-Enterprise. All they did was take an Akira-class (one of my all-time favorite Federation starship designs) and flipped it upside-down, then tried to pass it off as primitive. Blech.


Yeah, they probably should have gone with something closer to the Daedalus class or that odd 'stick in a hoop' thing, but from what I've read, they got caught up with making the Enterprise 'souped' up looking and couldn'tbring themselves to do the less streamlined stuff that had been shown to be ships of that era. Plus, it's got to be hard to make a prequel that takes place a century before a show that was filmed half a century ago. Even by accident, the newer show is going to look more advanced.
The Motion Picture gets mocked for the glory shots of the new Enterprise, but they built an fantastic new ship and a fantastic model, of course they were going to go overboard in showing it off. And, it was maybe the only Trek movie that really captured the feeling that this was a pretty damn big ship. They got some of that back,IMO, in both First Contact and the reboot, but not quite to the same degree. I know the scene where McCoy and Kirk see the Enterprise in orbit in the reboot is supposed to convey the same feeling as when Scotty shows off the refit Enterprise to Kirk in TMP, but it's a little too fast, and I don't think the rebooted Enterprise is as majestic looking as the refitted original.
 
2012-12-29 12:32:43 AM  

Hardy-r-r: [i280.photobucket.com image 850x643]


I remember seeing the underside of the Golden Gate from her deck....
 
2012-12-29 02:22:43 AM  

Vaneshi: Princess Ryans Knickers: They use miniature teleporters stuck up your anus in the future


I'm ready, man, check it out. I am the ultimate badass! State of the badass art! You do NOT wanna fark with me. Check it out! Hey Pricess Ryans Knickers, don't worry. Me and my squad of ultimate badasses will protect you! Check it out! Independently targeting particle beam phalanx. Vwap! Fry half a city with this puppy. We got tactical smart missiles, phase-plasma pulse rifles, RPGs, we got sonic electronic buttplugs!

I'll take 2 actually.


All right knock it off.
/Apone
 
2012-12-29 03:20:49 AM  
I'm going to guess that when something goes wrong with the computers on Enterprise the aircraft carrier, they don't spark, smoke, fizzle and CATCH FIRE.
 
2012-12-29 04:54:25 AM  

Ishidan: Off the top of my head, without even leaving existing naval nomenclature:

CVN-Enterprise: An aircraft carrier. Designed to be a force-projection platform that always travels as part of a battle group, but really can't do much alone. When it does move, however, it has one job: destroy.
NCC-Enterprise: A cruiser. Designed for long term independent operation. Happens to also mount exceptional sensors (as befits its mission of
'seek out, go where no man has gone before'...it's a SCOUT!) and a powerful suite of point defense and direct-firing weapons (it took em HOW long to come up with a heat-seeking torpedo?). If you see it in a pitched battle, something has gone terribly wrong-but there you go.

Book it, done.


not to be nerd pedantic...but they had to configure a photon torpedo (which already has its own guidance systems) to accept and parse telemetry data from an instrument pack that was designed to detect trace gases in a nebula. It was not heat seeking at all.


Or, as an analogy, they had to take the instrument pack from a weather balloon, find a way to attach the right sensors to a jet-mounted anti-radiation missile (the kind we use to destroy enemy radar sites) and configure it to home in on trace amounts of methane coming from the flatulence of an invisible bad guy hiding 20 miles away, and use that data to kill him.
 
2012-12-29 09:16:53 AM  

Vaneshi: Curious thing, the article mentions that the NCC has no fighters and looks after itself all the time. The large shuttle craft (although more so the Runabouts) are actually quite heavily armed and shielded, even having torpedo launchers on them.

The Federation ships, irrespective of them only being 'Cruisers' or 'Destroyers' are actually Carriers in their own right.

The actual difference between the two is that the fictional Enterprise assumes you're friendly and doesn't run patrols with it's fighters, the real Enterprise assumes you aren't and does.


We never see anything in Star Trek alluding to a starfighter/light craft doctrine like we do in wet naval or Star Wars/Babylon 5/Battlestar Galactica/Macross/Space: Above & Beyond. There's plenty of it in some non-canonical sources (Star Fleet Battles is the most glaring example).
 
2012-12-29 09:28:14 AM  

Keizer_Ghidorah: Your_Huckleberry: Keizer_Ghidorah: The best-to-worst designs of the Enterprise, in my humble opinion:

Enterprise-A (movie refit)
Enterprise-E
2009 Enterprise
TOS Enterprise
Enterprise-B
Enterprise-C
Enterprise-D
"Enterprise" Enterprise

I think the refit Enterprise from the movies is a great looking ship, they certainly thought so with all those loving, long shots of it in TMP.
I think I'd rate them:

refit Enterprise/Enterprise A
Enterprise E
Enterprise D (didn't like at first, grew on me)
Enterprise C
Enterprise B
Enterprise NX
reboot Enterprise( might grow on me like D did)

I've always felt the movie version was the most majestic and well-designed. The swept-back diagonal warp nacelle pylons especially.

The one design I will NEVER like is the NX-Enterprise. All they did was take an Akira-class (one of my all-time favorite Federation starship designs) and flipped it upside-down, then tried to pass it off as primitive. Blech.


The refit for the non-existent next season looked to be a huge improvement:
img193.imageshack.us
images1.wikia.nocookie.net
 
2012-12-29 10:36:40 AM  
laughingsquid.com
 
2012-12-29 12:57:01 PM  

UNC_Samurai: Vaneshi: Curious thing, the article mentions that the NCC has no fighters and looks after itself all the time. The large shuttle craft (although more so the Runabouts) are actually quite heavily armed and shielded, even having torpedo launchers on them.

The Federation ships, irrespective of them only being 'Cruisers' or 'Destroyers' are actually Carriers in their own right.

The actual difference between the two is that the fictional Enterprise assumes you're friendly and doesn't run patrols with it's fighters, the real Enterprise assumes you aren't and does.

We never see anything in Star Trek alluding to a starfighter/light craft doctrine like we do in wet naval or Star Wars/Babylon 5/Battlestar Galactica/Macross/Space: Above & Beyond. There's plenty of it in some non-canonical sources (Star Fleet Battles is the most glaring example).


They had plenty of stuff dealing with small craft on DS9. For the first few season runabouts were all they had to launch to intercept anything. Later they had battles that involved dedicated fighter craft.

Federation fighters
 
2012-12-30 02:21:39 AM  

NeoCortex42: Keizer_Ghidorah: Your_Huckleberry: Keizer_Ghidorah: The best-to-worst designs of the Enterprise, in my humble opinion:

Enterprise-A (movie refit)
Enterprise-E
2009 Enterprise
TOS Enterprise
Enterprise-B
Enterprise-C
Enterprise-D
"Enterprise" Enterprise

I think the refit Enterprise from the movies is a great looking ship, they certainly thought so with all those loving, long shots of it in TMP.
I think I'd rate them:

refit Enterprise/Enterprise A
Enterprise E
Enterprise D (didn't like at first, grew on me)
Enterprise C
Enterprise B
Enterprise NX
reboot Enterprise( might grow on me like D did)

I've always felt the movie version was the most majestic and well-designed. The swept-back diagonal warp nacelle pylons especially.

The one design I will NEVER like is the NX-Enterprise. All they did was take an Akira-class (one of my all-time favorite Federation starship designs) and flipped it upside-down, then tried to pass it off as primitive. Blech.

The refit for the non-existent next season looked to be a huge improvement:
[img193.imageshack.us image 800x599]
[images1.wikia.nocookie.net image 591x351]


I don't know, somehow that looks even worse. It's like they thought "People hate this Enterprise because it looks nothing like the Enterprise, let's stick an engineering section to it and redo the nacelles! Now it looks a little more like the NCC-1701!". Like going from advanced-looking to primitive-looking and then to advanced-looking.

It's the same problem I had with the other races' ships in "Enterprise". The Klingon and Romulan ships were too damned advanced-looking and looked too much like the future ships (and don't get me started on the Romulans having cloaking technology and the "Balance of Terror"-design Bird-of-Prey BEFORE the Earth-Romulan War). Also the problem I had with the Star Wars prequels, everything's too advanced for being in the past and how everything has to be some kind of predecessor to something we saw in the original trilogy.
 
2012-12-30 05:19:52 AM  

Keizer_Ghidorah: Also the problem I had with the Star Wars prequels, everything's too advanced for being in the past and how everything has to be some kind of predecessor to something we saw in the original trilogy.


It's a typical prequel problem.  In X-Men, Magneto had trouble keeping a bunch of bullets in check.  But in Last Stand, he casually flings about flights of missiles.  (There's some retcon that can be used to explain it, but it's certainly not what was intended when X-Men came out.)  And it's all because subsequent movies, even prequels, have to prevent more difficult villains and situations or the audience will say to themselves, "Oh.  This isn't as hard as the last thing we saw them face.  No challenge here."  So they always make everything more and more impressive.  Even when going backwards in time.
 
2012-12-30 09:32:06 AM  

Keizer_Ghidorah: Also the problem I had with the Star Wars prequels, everything's too advanced for being in the past and how everything has to be some kind of predecessor to something we saw in the original trilogy.


I'm actually fine with things looking shinier and more advanced in the Star Wars prequels. I figure they were going from a golden age in the prequels to a dark age of oppression in the original trilogy. Everything was getting run down and the rebel forces had to make due with whatever tech they could scrape together.
 
2012-12-31 06:41:22 PM  

vygramul: Keizer_Ghidorah: Also the problem I had with the Star Wars prequels, everything's too advanced for being in the past and how everything has to be some kind of predecessor to something we saw in the original trilogy.

It's a typical prequel problem.  In X-Men, Magneto had trouble keeping a bunch of bullets in check.  But in Last Stand, he casually flings about flights of missiles.


Fridge brilliance: bullets are usually made of lead, which is not a metal that responds to magnetism. Small cross section, too-not much to grab onto. Missiles usually have a much higher content of metals that are affected by magnetism- copper in the guidance system, steel in the structural framework and fuel tanks, and so on. Sure, there was a million times more mass of missiles-but those missiles would be more vulnerable to being yanked around by magnetism.
 
Displayed 90 of 90 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report