StarDestroyer.Net BBS

Why not! It's a round bridge, and there is already a window. The bridge becomes a turret; sounds good to me!

So what, exactly, would be the POINT of a spinning bridge?

To point the window at things? Rule of Cool? Pleasant dining atmosphere?

I doubt the bridge actually turns. But I wouldn't have any problem with it if it did.

Please tell me they're not using the offset bridge design from the TOS blueprints... nobody can be that much of a canon whore and still function as a human being

Incidentally -



Let the hunt commence.

I can sort of see the point of a rotating bridge, if the viewscreen has been reduced to just a window, and they need to see things not in their direct line of sight... but if you need an awkward solution like that, what was the point of ever getting rid of the viewscreen in the first place? (From a real-world POV, I mean, not within the Trek universe)

Not to mention the fact that if the rotating mechanism got stuck at 90 degrees or whatever, it'd make the ship a bitch to pilot, in addition to probably cutting off turbolift access to the bridge. I guess this is yet another thing we're going to have to wait for some confirmation on.

I doubt there is a rotating bridge. Spock is exactly the same in each image, his posture and facial expressions havent changed, so unless the bridge is rotating pretty damn quickly, I imagine this is just something to do with effects that wasn't addressed- the empire shot looks like the more polished of the two, even if it was released earlier- and the layout of the saucer from the empire shot makes more sense.

Batman wrote:So what, exactly, would be the POINT of a spinning bridge?

Makes a great place to have a restaurant.

Call me pessimistic but having a restaurant on the bridge of a warship MIGHT interfere with the bridge crew efficiently operating the ship.

Did it occur to anyone that it might be a digital display that is feeding camera/sensor data in a rotating fashion while the bridge itself is fixed?

Probably not, because that'd be an incredibly stupid way to display that data.

Batman wrote:Call me pessimistic but having a restaurant on the bridge of a warship MIGHT interfere with the bridge crew efficiently operating the ship.

I don't know. Do you know how it is like fighting Klingons on an empty stomach?

Batman wrote:Probably not, because that'd be an incredibly stupid way to display that data.

And a rotating bridge is a good idea? Its incredibly easy to simply convert sensor data and show a rotation. Thats how they did it in TNG. The screen wasn't a camera pointed outside, it was converted sensor data.

Alyeska wrote:

Batman wrote:Probably not, because that'd be an incredibly stupid way to display that data.

And a rotating bridge is a good idea?

Yeah, like I totally didn't ask what the point of a spinning bridge would be to begin with earlier in this thread.

I make a crack about rotating bridge and everyone takes it too seriously. lol

Sorry, late to the thread.

Seems to me that the new movie, ship design anyways, is going the B&B route. That is, designing a pre Trek ship based off of the TNG Enterpirse, because that's what it looks like to me. Curvy neck placed further back on the engineering hull, nacelles pylons similar or at least hearken back to the Galaxy class. Hell, even the squashed engineering hull looks like the Galaxy class design theory behind it.

Enterprise the show and the plot seemed to me to be an attempted to make a prequel to ST TNG and push the TOS out of the way, and perhaps I'm being over dramatic about it, but the new movie (at least with the ship) seems to me to be doing the same.

So, yeah. I don't like it.

On a side note, I do like the engines and I'd be fine with the flare or shroud of the things especialy if they put some sort of impulse or whatever they plan on calling their rockets in there.

Minor update: Playmates has presented its range of toys for the new Star Trek movie, including playsets for the transporter room and bridge. Now, these are toys and might not be accurate, but they're still interesting:





And the new communicator:

They have also revealed the Enterprise toy. The detailing isn't massive and certain bits are a little off such as the writing but I assume the overall shape is accurate- and now we can get a clear view of the end of the nacelles and shuttlebay I think the proportions look a LOT more balanced.

Is see the bridge has 'Battlestar Pegasus' type glass panels for dramatic shattering effects in battle scenes.

Bounty wrote:Please tell me they're not using the offset bridge design from the TOS blueprints... nobody can be that much of a canon whore and still function as a human being

Incidentally -



Let the hunt commence.

Hunt for what?

Ender wrote: Hunt for what?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/47_(number ... he_in-joke

Hunt for what?

It's been a custom since TNG to drop as much of the numùber '47' into Trek productions as possible. It's an in-joke from the college Joe Menosky went to; if you pay attention to it, you'll find that nearly every string of numbers or background prop has the '47' or some derivative in it.

Hahaha look at the new phaser:




Looks like something a BSG79 Cylon Centurion would have as a sidearm.

I'm pretty sure that's a waterpistol.

Where's that from?

Bounty wrote:I'm pretty sure that's a waterpistol.

Where's that from?

It was here http://www.wizarduniverse.com/startrekmovie.html along with various other new movie toys but the page seems to have been removed.

Minus color or even transparency, it looks a lot like the ST V pistols in just shape and design.