Re: Enterprise E Deck Madness...
Posted: Fri Jul 09, 2010 1:47 pm
As long as it isn't that stupid I'm pleased.Tyyr wrote:Well since the Ent-E is really 17km long I don't see the problem.
Daystrom Institute Technical Library
https://mail.ditl.org/forum/
As long as it isn't that stupid I'm pleased.Tyyr wrote:Well since the Ent-E is really 17km long I don't see the problem.
The fed are obviously experimenting with timelord tech - bigger on the inside.Mikey wrote:Meh, ships named Enterprise in 'Trek have an illustrious history of referencing more decks than they actually have.
Maybe it's a side effect of their turns-people-into-newts drive. That had a poor man's Time Lord as an intermediate stage.colmquinn wrote:The fed are obviously experimenting with timelord tech - bigger on the inside.
This makes the most sense given the Ent-E has room for a bottomless pit in NEM.Mikey wrote:Both products of the Gallifreyan Shipyards, no doubt.
tbh I don't think I have a problem with a Federation ship having 26 decks but the bottom deck being named number 29. kinda like how hotels in the US don't have a '13th' floor. With all the cultures in Trek and the happy-go-lucky attitude of the Federation and respecting every cultures superstitions that could lead to deck 26 being called deck 29Reliant121 wrote:Then in NEM, he has to send security details to deck 29.
One map somewhere had the Remans up on deck 19 or so when they fought. That would give a few decks for the Reman character to fall. Of course, if they had turned the lights up (to blind the Remans) or one of the Reman actors had them all get sports goggles (to reflect battle visors with light compensation), it would have made more sense.JudgeKing wrote:This makes the most sense given the Ent-E has room for a bottomless pit in NEM.
I like the way you think!Lt. Staplic wrote:tbh I don't think I have a problem with a Federation ship having 26 decks but the bottom deck being named number 29. kinda like how hotels in the US don't have a '13th' floor. With all the cultures in Trek and the happy-go-lucky attitude of the Federation and respecting every cultures superstitions that could lead to deck 26 being called deck 29Reliant121 wrote:Then in NEM, he has to send security details to deck 29.
Of course. But where's the fun in being a Trekkie if you don't ignore OOU explanations and analyze canon points like this from a strictly IU perspective?Demon971 wrote:There's too much over-analysis of this. It seems simple enough to write it off as a script/actor error. Big woop.
Aye, and it'd make conversations pretty damn short.Mikey wrote:Of course. But where's the fun in being a Trekkie if you don't ignore OOU explanations and analyze canon points like this from a strictly IU perspective?Demon971 wrote:There's too much over-analysis of this. It seems simple enough to write it off as a script/actor error. Big woop.