Results 1 to 20 of 29
Thread: Star Trek Trailer
-
01-16-2009, 05:18 PM #1
Star Trek Trailer
Has anyone else seen the new Star Trek trailer? Wow, gave me chills and I wouldn't consider myself a trekkie (but I do like it)!
Are we there yet?
-
01-16-2009 05:18 PM # ADS
-
01-16-2009, 09:19 PM #2
I've only ever been an Next Gen fan (and a pretty serious one). This looks good, though. My wife and son are looking forward to it, for sure!
-
01-18-2009, 02:52 PM #3
OMG OMG OMG!
May is soo far away though. *sigh*Your safety is not my responsibility.
-
01-18-2009, 03:09 PM #4
-
01-18-2009, 03:12 PM #5Originally Posted by Don
Your safety is not my responsibility.
-
01-19-2009, 12:14 AM #6Originally Posted by deathcricket
You gotta work for it, this being the General Discussion page.
Really rather NSFW.
-
01-19-2009, 09:48 AM #7
Hehehe! Too funny cirrus.
Back on topic. Don't get me wrong I'm really really excited about this. But did anyone else get a little pissed on the scene where kirk is riding his motorcycle up to the enterprise being constructed? ON THE GROUND! WTF? I mean everyone knows that when your building a spaceship, you build it on a space station in zero gravity. I hope he wasn't trading factual detail for a good camera shot.Your safety is not my responsibility.
-
01-19-2009, 10:54 AM #8
-
01-19-2009, 11:25 AM #9
Hehe! ok ok bad choice of words. Factual according to the source material. Kinda the same thing as making Darth Vader a black man. maybe someone who didn't see the shot where he took his helmet off would assume based on the voice. Maybe not the same analogy, but you can at elast see where I'm coming from. Why the heck am I even arguing? LOL.
http://startrek.wikia.com/wiki/San_F...co_Fleet_Yards
San Francisco Fleet Yards
Memory Beta, the wiki for licensed Star Trek content.
Jump to: navigation, search
The San Francisco Fleet Yards (also known as the San Francisco Naval Yards or San Francisco Yards) was a shipyards located in orbit of Earth, and is operated by shore offices located in San Francisco. As well as containing several drydocks, there is also an orbital office complex that acts as a nexus for the yards. (TOS movie: Star Trek: The Motion Picture).
Among the Starfleet vessels to be constructed at the yards were the USS Constitution (NCC-1700), USS Enterprise (NCC-1701), USS Eagle (NCC-956), USS Excelsior (NCC-2000), USS Sutherland (NCC-72015), and the USS Enterprise (NCC-1701-E).
During the construction of the Enterprise-E in the 2360s and early 2370s, Sean Hawk served at the Yards. (TNG eBook: A Sea of Troubles)Your safety is not my responsibility.
-
01-20-2009, 05:52 AM #10
How exciting! Guess what I am going to go see for my birthday. I will have to make it an early celabration cuz I don't think I can wait an extra weekend.
Chere'
-
01-20-2009, 06:01 AM #11
youtube?
there are infinitely better trailers on apple's quicktime trailers site ... take a look at the 1080p
http://www.apple.com/trailers/paramount/startrek/
-
01-20-2009, 06:06 AM #12
-
01-20-2009, 07:02 AM #13Originally Posted by deathcricketChere'
-
01-20-2009, 08:52 AM #14
Oh fellow nerd talk, woohoo!
*I'm not a rocket scientist, so feel free to correct my data anytime. *
There are infinite advantages to building a spacecraft in space. For one, it's a sterile environment. There is no water vapor or sediment to introduce impurities into high end parts needed for intersteller travel. For 2, zero gravity is one of the only ways to form a "perfect" sphere. For 3, building on earth is limited by gravity. The bigger the structure is, the harder it will be to support and manage. Think about building a big ocean craft and the amount of effort required. In space, gravity is not a factor and large structures like a starship could be managed with little effort. Minimal attachment to the space station, a chain to keep it from floating away and you're good. For 4, the cost savings and energy savings to be had from manufacturing in space are enormous. Imagine the space shuttle not having to break orbit? The engines could be a lot smaller and more efficient not having to operate in an atmosphere. Also, traditional engines that function in space might not work like our crude rockets we put on the space shuttles of today. Solar sails, warp engines, ion propulsion, etc. So to advance to the next "level" we would either have to put 2 engines on our ship, one to leave the earth and another to travel in space. Or we could start in space and leave it in space. take cochrans first ship, it had a rocket on the back then dislodged in space and the warp cores opened from the side. This is clearly not the enterprise model, but something like that could be achieved with a different design.
There are disadvantages of course, keeping astronauts alive and safe, transporting raw materials, zero water for quenching tempered materials like steel. Etc. They are trying to figure out a "space elevator" though to solve some of these problems. The main disadvantage would be the initial cost of building such a space station in the first place. Insanely huge. But we could just borrow another 200 trillion from China and be able to afford it, no problem.
I just peeked and there is a wiki on space manufacturing. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_manufacturing
and here is one on the space elevator
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_elevator
And then of course we have the data (I posted before) that the enterprise WAS constructed by the San Francisco fleet yards orbiting in space from the original movie. It's such a weird thing to change in my mind for a simple "camera shot". Why? It doesn't make sense. But then again, I was leery when they changed the batmobile when they rebooted batman, but I was super happy with his new rig and it made so much more sense than the original vehicle. After I saw the movie. Perhaps this is will make sense as well.Your safety is not my responsibility.
-
01-20-2009, 09:53 AM #15
-
01-20-2009, 09:54 AM #16
Oh Death keep talking... that was hot!
All of it made perfect sense. Never gave it much thought.
Thanks for such a lovely explanation... when I have more time I will have to explore the websites you posted.Chere'
-
01-20-2009, 03:34 PM #17Originally Posted by Don
Originally Posted by blueeyessmilingYour safety is not my responsibility.
-
01-20-2009, 06:36 PM #18
Death you are a too sweet!
However I am in the wrong state. The ideal around here is Molly Mormon and that women I am NOT! (please no one take offense to that) I did try for 10 years and failed. I think having my kids 24/7 scares most guys off.
You see the one thing I secretly long for..... from ST.... is the Replicator. I would kiss the man (or women) who invented it. They would have my undying devotion. To be able to walk into the kitchen and say "6 oz Porterhouse steak medium-rare, garlic roasted asperagus spears, buttered roll and to drink margartia on the rocks." That would make my life so much more enjoyable.
Back to the spacship.... It would make a hell of a lot more sense to finacially to construct a ship in space with a transporter then a space elevator.
Don - love the new avatar!
Do you know what they call the new IHC hospital well more specifically the lab on 5300 S? The Death Star. They are taking over the world one lab at a time.Chere'
-
01-23-2009, 10:18 PM #19
-
01-24-2009, 07:00 PM #20
Looks cool
Similar Threads
-
Star Trek Wetsuit!!!
By Don in forum CanyoneeringReplies: 18Last Post: 01-13-2010, 02:09 PM -
Star Trek
By blueeyes in forum General DiscussionReplies: 22Last Post: 05-16-2009, 07:21 AM -
star trek filmed in san rafael swell
By stefan in forum General DiscussionReplies: 5Last Post: 05-09-2009, 10:37 AM -
Another Saturday Trek
By tallsteve in forum Skiing, Snowboard, XC and SnowshoeingReplies: 0Last Post: 12-08-2007, 05:37 PM -
Star Wars vs. Star Trek
By accadacca in forum JokesReplies: 0Last Post: 03-09-2005, 04:07 PM
Visitors found this page by searching for:
Outdoor Forum