The Size of the Alt Timeline Enterprise

Post by **Mike DiCenso** » Sun May 17, 2009 3:09 am

According to various offical sources, the Alt E is given a length of variously between 2,500 and 3,000 feet (756 to 900 meters). The question is, does this hold up to scrutiny? Is this more SFX people BS ala the various tossed out numbers for the Death Star, or are they actually right for a change?

The images here and here created by Rogue Vulcan seem to argue against a 700-900 meter Alt E, but rather a much smaller ship. The pixel count and the bridge window size would net a height of 103 meters for the Alt E, and in turn the height to length ratio appears to be 5 to 1 for a length of no more than 525 meters. The ejection of Kirk's pod would apparently substantially reduce this down as it would require a 6 meter tall airlock door, and Kirk's pod is quite substantial in size compared to this door.

I know it's kind of early in trying to scale these things given the lack of good footage and the DVD is probably 4-6 months at the earliest for release so we do not have much to go by. But for now, I have to argue against a 900 meter Alt E.
-Mike

Praeothmin · Post by **Praeothmin** » Sun May 17, 2009 6:52 pm

I went to see the movie for the second time yesterday, and as in the first viewing, I was carefully looking at the different scenes where we see the shuttles next to the ship, and rapidly scaling the shuttles compared to humans.

The shuttles are around 12 meters long, and the E-Alt seems to be about 30 shuttles in length, so I would venture a maximum length of 400 meters for the E-Alt...

Post by **Mike DiCenso** » Sun May 17, 2009 8:12 pm

I believe someone else got a scaling of around 370 meters for the E-Alt, which is considerably more substantial in size than it's Prime counterpart, but still well below the 700-900 meters quoted by the FX people as well as on various sites. Personally, as much as I'd like to see a 900 meter Enterprise, I find that a 370-500 meter E is much more believable within the bounds of what Starfleet and the Federation at this time period should be able to build.
-Mike

GStone · Post by **GStone** » Sun May 17, 2009 10:35 pm

900 might have been what they were thinking of when they had the far off shot with the back of Kirk on his bike in the foreground. In that context, I could see them thinking it'd be 900, but it just might not have worked out that way.

Post by **Mike DiCenso** » Mon May 18, 2009 4:21 am

Possibly, though it is hard to tell since the only indicator of scale in that panorama scene are the refinery-like tanks and some hanger-like buildings to scale the ship from.
-Mike

2046 · Post by **2046** » Mon May 18, 2009 4:44 am

It is dangerous as holy hell to try to scale jack using a 3px measurement. I had such an error on my Death Star scaling page way back when. I mean when you've got nothin' else you gotta go with what you've got, but you have to realize it is a very low confidence measurement, no matter how much scrutiny you gave those three pixels.

2046 · Post by **2046** » Mon May 18, 2009 6:00 am

Regarding the size of the Monsterprise and any Altstitution Class sister ships:

On TrekBBS there is a pretty good thread on the topic.

To summarize some of the more interesting data or noteworthy posts, in no particular order:

0. Improved view of the ship, making it look less absurd than Bernd's drawing (which may or may not be more accurate, but given that it just didn't look quite so horrid on screen I'd go with this):

http://www.trekbbs.com/showpost.php?p=2 ... tcount=135

1. Size figures published in the media have varied wildly. One said 3000ft (~900m), another said 762m, and then this one says 610m:

http://www.trekbbs.com/showpost.php?p=2 ... tcount=154

2. The viewscreen window is about 26 feet (7.9 - 8m) wide, with a 3.25:1 width/height ratio. (That makes it about 8 feet (~2.5m) tall.)

http://www.trekbbs.com/showpost.php?p=2 ... tcount=267

3. Comparison with TMP:DE CGI of Kirk and Spock standing on the saucer rim suggests a larger ship, but this is compared to a trailer scene and should thus be taken with a grain of salt.

http://www.trekbbs.com/showpost.php?p=2 ... stcount=36

4. Comparisons with the shuttles and shuttlebay suggest a huge ship.

http://www.trekbbs.com/showpost.php?p=2 ... stcount=96

5. Generally badass post:

http://www.trekbbs.com/showpost.php?p=2 ... tcount=202

More as needed.

ILikeDeathNote · Post by **ILikeDeathNote** » Mon May 18, 2009 11:41 pm

well, I had a longer post in mind, but here's a roughly reworked image based on the first post:

http://i230.photobucket.com/albums/ee27 ... estion.jpg

And I just want to say that keep in mind ILM has had scaling judgement issues all throughout their history - remember how long it took for us to figure out what the true size of the Super Star Destroyer is?

Post by **Mike DiCenso** » Tue May 19, 2009 12:43 am

Well, the size controversy is brewing elsewhere as well, and Bernd Schneider of Ex Astris Scientia has chimed in on the matter in an article here. His general consensus is that the hanger bay scene should be ignored and that the E-Alt is only 300 meters using the identical features on this ship with the refit Prime E as scaling markers.
-Mike

ILikeDeathNote · Post by **ILikeDeathNote** » Tue May 19, 2009 7:35 am

Mike DiCenso wrote:Well, the size controversy is brewing elsewhere as well, and Bernd Schneider of Ex Astris Scientia has chimed in on the matter in an article here.

I was wondering when he'd pick up on it.

His general consensus is that the hanger bay scene should be ignored and that the E-Alt is only 300 meters using the identical features on this ship with the refit Prime E as scaling markers.
-Mike

Somehow I'm not surprised to hear this coming from him. He's about close to the worst either side of the debate has to offer at times, especially when something's in danger of contradicting TOS (even for the better).

In fact I'll go ahead and refute his three main arguments against a 700+ meter Enterprise right here:

details of Ent-Prime upscaled

So? I hardly think this is unplausible given what else has changed, especially in regarding to the overall design of the ship itself.

Dwarfs any other Starfleet ship without reason

Once again, so? Is there a reason why the Alt Enterprise needs to be small, other than that it's not the same size of Enterprise-Prime?

too few windows

Of all the complaints to make, this is the most nonsensical and the most nonsensical for a person well-versed in space travel as Brend Schneider is to make.

IT'S A GODDAMN SPACESHIP! FEWER WINDOWS ACTUALLY MAKE MORE SENSE!

Praeothmin · Post by **Praeothmin** » Tue May 19, 2009 3:37 pm

Although on the window side, if the ship was 700 meters long, then those windows would be what, 2 meters tall?
that doesn't fit well with what we've seen.
Also, there are some other shuttlebay scenes that argue for a 350 meter E-alt.
The scene where Pike leaves with Kirk and Sulu and redshirt number 1 puts the shuttle bay as smaller then the first time we see it.
Also, the shuttlebay picture has an angle which can alter the scaling perception.

In addition to that scene, there's a scene where we leave the E-Alt's bridge through the viewer, and the apparent scaling of the bridge is closer to 300-350 meters then to 700 meters, IMO.

I'll go see it a third time and pay close attention to the scaling... :)

GStone · Post by **GStone** » Tue May 19, 2009 4:24 pm

Mike DiCenso wrote:Well, the size controversy is brewing elsewhere as well, and Bernd Schneider of Ex Astris Scientia has chimed in on the matter in an article here. His general consensus is that the hanger bay scene should be ignored and that the E-Alt is only 300 meters using the identical features on this ship with the refit Prime E as scaling markers.
-Mike

I'd say that the shuttlebay view he wants to ignore is really the best indicator for scaling. It's a pretty decent view without having to worry about just how much 1 pixel represents. After that, there is the scene where Sulu, Kirk and Olsen are jumping into the shuttle with Pike. The height of the shuttlebay is about as high as the central part of the forward hull before it curves towards the central part at the top and the bottom. The only real difference is the engineering hull undercurve is longer, a few more curves elsewhere and the front of the nacelles is taller.

The excellsior is not that far off from being made and that is about as long as a galaxy, so a larger connie shouldn't be that big of an issue.

Post by **Mike DiCenso** » Tue May 19, 2009 4:51 pm

Dwarfs any other Starfleet ship without reason

ILikeDeathNote wrote: Once again, so? Is there a reason why the Alt Enterprise needs to be small, other than that it's not the same size of Enterprise-Prime?

Actually, if that's one of his reasons, he is forgetting that the appearance of a ship the size of the Narada (multiple kilometers long) would probably prompt Starfleet into re-thinking the size and power of it's ships. Also he forgot that 115 years prior the Vulcans had at least two classes of starships that were in the 600-1,000 meter range. The need to re-think and redesign the Constitution class also neatly explains why the E-Alt is being launched so late in 2258 instead of a decade or so earlier. So Starfleet has plenty of reason to build bigger, though how much bigger they can go is the question.

But this isn't the first time that Bernd has been flummoxed by the size of spaceships in Trek. For example, Bernd could not deal with the canon fact that Starbase 74 is some 13 x 9 kilometers, and disregarded it completely on the basis that he could not except that the Federation could go and build a space station 10 times bigger than the Spacedock first seen in "The Search for Spock". It's like complaining that you can't except the existence of the Empire State Building because it is so much larger than the older Woolworth Building! Or like saying that the Queen Mary is impossible to build because you cannot conceive of someone being able to build a larger ship than the old Oceanic.
-Mike

Post by **Mike DiCenso** » Tue May 19, 2009 5:12 pm

GStone wrote: The excellsior is not that far off from being made and that is about as long as a galaxy, so a larger connie shouldn't be that big of an issue.

Actually, the Excelsior is still at least some 30 years off in the future (remember this movie takes place in 2258, while ST2 takes place some time around or after 2285). Also the Excelsior class is still volumetrically several times smaller than a Galaxy or a Sovereign, so it is not merely a matter of linear dimensions that have to be taken into account here. However, that being said, as I pointed out in another post, the Vulcans more than a century prior had been able to build two classes of starship which were at least 600 meters long, and possibly much larger than that. In addition, if we needed any kind of indication of Federation industrial capacity, the new super-massive space station the E-Alt and the task force is seen docked to is many kilometers wide! And that was a station built sometime during or before the 2250's.
-Mike

GStone · Post by **GStone** » Tue May 19, 2009 6:11 pm

Mike DiCenso wrote:Actually, the Excelsior is still at least some 30 years off in the future

For ship development, 30 years isn't that far away.

Also the Excelsior class is still volumetrically several times smaller than a Galaxy or a Sovereign, so it is not merely a matter of linear dimensions that have to be taken into account here.

It's still long.