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 7
    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»



Voting Results (Smartest)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


Archived thread
2012-12-28 02:28:34 PM  
1 votes:

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 02:11:33 PM  
1 votes:
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 02:00:10 PM  
1 votes:
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 11:13:20 AM  
1 votes:

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 11:05:28 AM  
1 votes:
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 10:38:01 AM  
1 votes:

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 10:25:59 AM  
1 votes:

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.
 
Displayed 7 of 7 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report