I saw a timeline Friday with another PC on the web that included Enterprise.
Can’t find the darn thing.
Can anyone reccomend one?
Thanks
Not quite what you were looking for, I’m sure but here’re some links that might help:
http://www.memory-alpha.org/en/index.php/20th_Century http://www.memory-alpha.org/en/index.php/21st_Century http://www.memory-alpha.org/en/index.php/22nd_Century http://www.memory-alpha.org/en/index.php/23rd_Century http://www.memory-alpha.org/en/index.php/24th_Century http://www.memory-alpha.org/en/index.php/25th_Century
Thanks, but that’s not it.
Basic question: How much time passes between Enterprise and TOS?
115 years (2151 to 2266)
And I know it wasn’t what you were looking for but thought it might help.
Thanks.
Mrs. Plant and I were discussing whether or not Sarek is alive.
There seems to be remarkably little technical development in 115 years.
Sarek was born in 2264 which means he’ll be born seven years after the series ends, assuming it isn’t cancelled early.
Yes, TOS was supposed to have begun exactly 300 years in the future (started in 1966) and Enterprise exactly 150 (started in 2001).
Lordy, not only were there whole threads devoted to this but entire websites!
When I originally saw the NX-01 Enterprise I thought it looked too much like Kirk’s. But after reading some of the new ship designer’s answers to this criticism I think its reasonably accurate. He offered comparison photos between early naval ships (carriers, cruisers etc.) and ones made today and except for closeups the basic designs are very similar. TOS Enterprise’s exterior is very smooth while the NX-01 has a very pieced together, bolted-on look. Also it has no cylindrical engineering hull.
Some other technical differences:
[ul][li]No deflector shields (hull polarizing, whatever that is, instead)[/li][li]Top speed of only warp 5[/li][li]No tractor beam (grapling hooks instead)[/li][li]Shuttles are used instead of the transporter (except in emergencies)[/li][li]No stardate system (Archer always says Earth’s date in his logs)[/li][/ul]
Hmm, ocean-going ships haven’t been riveted together in decades, they’re welded. Can’t imagine why riveting would come back.
What I want to see: the voyages of Captain Christopher Pike. Starring Jeffrey Hunter’s son!
Perhaps the armoring they use isn’t very conducive to welding? Perhaps it’s got too high of a melting point or something?
Besides, I’ve always got the impression that it had a double-hull, so they don’t need to be so pretty with the outer one…
Is that TOS Warp 5 or TNG Warp 5?
I think the idea was to do away with any sort of space walks or other distractions close to the hull of the Enterprise in TOS. The smooth hull was also quite good looking, especially with the pearlescent paint job in the movies and the individual panels that made up the hull.
Then with Enterprise the um, Enterprise was supposed to look a bit more rough and ready (despite its interior) so it was all knobbly. This look was brought back for the Soveriegn class vessel which was a shame.
TOS; 125c if I am remembering the formula right.
You know what? I don’t think we’ve done this question before. Have we? Good one…
Answer: I don’t know. Anyone?
The British idea of angled flight decks was first added to the USS Antietam CV-36
From here:
So, ther have been some changes in USN (and other) ships…
Well, it’s not like there’d be any problem with drag or barnacles. That’s two missing reasons to exclude rivets.
Well there you go. Must have posted while I was linking all that Navy stuff. Takes me a while sometimes, what?
I see two reasons.
In 1968 they were making plastic models instead of using computer generated graphics; ease of construction and they didn’t do many close ups for detail.
The smooth TOS hull looked more like real spaceships; smooth boosters and shrouded Gemini capsules. I built a model; there’s lots of rivets, bolts and tubes inside that white service module. 