StarDestroyer.Net BBS

Well honestly I think it's pretty clear they're designed to work as you say (even if it's not shown and I'd dispute it ) since otherwise the 'forward reaching' nature of the ship is utterly senseless. There's no way of even remotely determining HOW they help mining, however; they could just be mountpoints for cables/tractors that draw the rock in towards the mining bay while pulverising it with other equipment.

Characterising posts describing how the ship may have worked as 'othing but "har har stupid design and any speculation is unsupported bullshit"' is massively dishonest and hypocritical, however. I'm sorry discussing what the giant door and void space might be for is too speculative for you! WHAT COULD THE GIANT DOOR KILOMETERS ACROSS BE FOR?

Darth Wong wrote:Sorry, but there's still no excuse for that stupid drill. Why would the drill have to be dropped on a long chain? Is there some reason why it can't simply be fired from the ship itself? Of course not, except that it provides a useful plot point, an excuse for certain action sequences, etc. Similarly, the only reason the red matter had to be dropped into the core was to create suspense and give the heroes enough time to thwart the villain. A lot of this film makes no sense.

I noticed that while I watching the movie. Can't he just dump the black hole in orbit over the planet and then speed off? No. He's got to perform a long, elaborate drilling ritual which leaves his ship totally immobilized.

I agree with you about Nero's limited weaponry and the fact that his torpedoes are probably just mining charges. But the design of his ship is a joke; it clearly serves numerous storytelling purposes, but nothing about the ship actually makes sense in context.

I got lots of nasty Scimitar vibes from it, personally.

CaptHawkeye wrote:

Darth Wong wrote:Sorry, but there's still no excuse for that stupid drill. Why would the drill have to be dropped on a long chain? Is there some reason why it can't simply be fired from the ship itself? Of course not, except that it provides a useful plot point, an excuse for certain action sequences, etc. Similarly, the only reason the red matter had to be dropped into the core was to create suspense and give the heroes enough time to thwart the villain. A lot of this film makes no sense.

I noticed that while I watching the movie. Can't he just dump the black hole in orbit over the planet and then speed off? No. He's got to perform a long, elaborate drilling ritual which leaves his ship totally immobilized.

This has been covered in another thread, but simply dropping the red matter singularity in orbit would likely result in the object expiring before it could do any real damage to the target world, so it was necessary to be able to drop it into the planet's core. The drill hanging on a chain is stupid, though, no matter how you cut it.

Singular Intellect wrote:Actually, I'm seriously considering whether those' evil looking girders' are capable of moving like arms, and latching onto independent fragments of a mined target for mining efforts.

Oh sure, it makes soooo much sense to have dozens of jagged teeth which are hundreds of metres long for stabbing rocks, rather than using tractor beams to move objects into position for drilling or melting operations, or having a lot of drone units which can harvest large numbers of asteroid fragments simultaneously rather than having to gather them all into a jagged evil-looking maw.

We let it fly in Transformers '87?

McC wrote:

Singular Intellect wrote:Actually, that question brings up something else; this mining ship was functioning in the past without any support infrastructure whatsoever except for what it could provide itself. Wasn't it in the past for a couple of decades?

Are we sure about this? How do we know they didn't hobble off to Romulus and give them future-tech?

How do we know he had any useful future-tech to give them? His ship was much slower than the USS Enterprise so he probably had a crappy warp drive, and his weapons, while powerful, are pretty limited. I suspect they're only that powerful because of their sheer size. His ship probably has no facilities on-board for fabricating critical parts, and there's no reason to assume that anyone on-board has the kind of technical knowledge required.

To continue the analogy of a modern-day dump truck, the operators of that dump truck couldn't tell you the first thing about designing and fabricating a new one.

Darth Wong wrote:

Singular Intellect wrote:Actually, I'm seriously considering whether those' evil looking girders' are capable of moving like arms, and latching onto independent fragments of a mined target for mining efforts.

Oh sure, it makes soooo much sense to have dozens of jagged teeth which are hundreds of metres long for stabbing rocks, rather than using tractor beams to move objects into position for drilling or melting operations, or having a lot of drone units which can harvest large numbers of asteroid fragments simultaneously rather than having to gather them all into a jagged evil-looking maw.

Keeping in mind that the idea those jagged teeth being used to stab rocks is entirely your suggestion...

And seriously, tractor beams? Aren't you one who would point out the stupidity of moving large masses of rock near your ship with power depend energy fields? What happens if the power fails? On that note, maybe those jagged teeth you're pointing out are massive shock absorbing systems that would allow a arm to more adaquately absorb the momentum of large chunks of moving rock if the power did in fact go out.

My point is we have no clue what all those arms/girders may in fact be used for or how, nor why they are designed the way they are. I'm merely submitting speculation with what very litte information we have; primarily the fact that we know this is a mining vessel of some sort. So far all I've suggested is that these 'arms' may move in some fashion to assist mining operations, while freely admitting we have no evidence to suggest they're capable of movement to begin with. I base this speculation on concepts like modern day mining equipment with movable appendages and existing spacecraft like the space shuttle with the Canada arm.

But for a professed engineer to step up and say "I don't know what those are there for, therefore they are ridiculous for being there except to look menacing, I don't see any useful purpose"...seriously, I would have thought you of all people would find such an objection outright offensive in nature. Especially since we don't get to see the vehicle in question operating as it was intented to, nor are we in any way qualified to determine just what kinds of technology and design features this vessel incorperates during it's intented function.

If you want to point out the Star Trek production staff designed the Narada to look menacing, by all means do so. I have absolutely no argument there. I'm simply trying to submit speculation that would make sense in universe, and I'm fairly certain "said girders/arms are supposed to make it look menacing" isn't a valid train of thought without some form of serious justification.

Singular Intellect wrote:Keeping in mind that the idea those jagged teeth being used to stab rocks is entirely your suggestion...

No, it's yours.

And seriously, tractor beams? Aren't you one who would point out the stupidity of moving large masses of rock near your ship with power depend energy fields? What happens if the power fails? On that note, maybe those jagged teeth you're pointing out are massive shock absorbing systems that would allow a arm to more adaquately absorb the momentum of large chunks of moving rock if the power did in fact go out.

Don't be an idiot. If the power fails, the rocks simply remain at their current velocity.

My point is we have no clue what all those arms/girders may in fact be used for or how, nor why they are designed the way they are. I'm merely submitting speculation with what very litte information we have; primarily the fact that we know this is a mining vessel of some sort. So far all I've suggested is that these 'arms' may move in some fashion to assist mining operations, while freely admitting we have no evidence to suggest they're capable of movement to begin with. I base this speculation on concepts like modern day mining equipment with movable appendages and existing spacecraft like the space shuttle with the Canada arm.

And did you ever wonder why they don't make mining equipment with a hundred arms? It's because it makes no fucking sense. You would use multiple vehicles with one arm or two arms apiece, instead of building a single giant vehicle bristling with arms all over the place. It's far more efficient to be in many places at once.

But for a professed engineer to step up and say "I don't know what those are there for, therefore they are ridiculous for being there except to look menacing, I don't see any useful purpose"...

I'm not a "professed" engineer, asshole. I'm a real one.

Seriously, I would have thought you of all people would find such an objection outright offensive in nature. Especially since we don't get to see the vehicle in question operating as it was intented to, nor are we in any way qualified to determine just what kinds of technology and design features this vessel incorperates during it's intented function.

What is your mental malfunction, fool? Do you honestly not understand why you would not build a single vehicle with a hundred manipulating arms, so much that most of its size is these arms? Do you honestly not understand why you would build many smaller vehicles to harvest large number of floating rocks, instead of one giant one with a hundred arms?

If you want to point out the Star Trek production staff designed the Narada to look menacing, by all means do so. I have absolutely no argument there. I'm simply trying to submit speculation that would make sense in universe, and I'm fairly certain "said girders/arms are supposed to make it look menacing" isn't a valid train of thought without some form of serious justification.

You're submitting speculation that doesn't make sense, and then trying to make it seem as if anyone who does not uncritically accept your stupid explanation is being close-minded. It's not as if I haven't seen this particular kind of behaviour before.

Darth Wong wrote:

Singular Intellect wrote:Keeping in mind that the idea those jagged teeth being used to stab rocks is entirely your suggestion...

No, it's yours.

Uh, where did I say that then?

Don't be an idiot. If the power fails, the rocks simply remain at their current velocity.

Yes, and if that velocity has been altered by the ship relative to itself, it could end up smashing into other parts of the ship unless absorbed by systems in place to prevent just that. I assume this would be simplier than trying to maneuver the entire ship, especially if it's tied down to other pieces of mined rock and such.

And did you ever wonder why they don't make mining equipment with a hundred arms? It's because it makes no fucking sense. You would use multiple vehicles with one arm or two arms apiece, instead of building a single giant vehicle bristling with arms all over the place. It's far more efficient to be in many places at once.

I was under the impression that the scale of operation here is what would make it practical. The Narada is, what, file miles across?

And does the Narada have a hundred arms? Do we have an actual number to work with? I though it was a couple of dozen, at most.

I'm not a "professed" engineer, asshole. I'm a real one.

Ok, I honestly apologize for that misunderstanding. I didn't mean to sound like I was disrespecting your degree in engineering. Perhaps that was a poor choice of words on my part, I had intented the meaning as in "To practice as a profession or claim knowledge of", both of which apply to you.

What is your mental malfunction, fool? Do you honestly not understand why you would not build a single vehicle with a hundred manipulating arms, so much that most of its size is these arms? Do you honestly not understand why you would build many smaller vehicles to harvest large number of floating rocks, instead of one giant one with a hundred arms?

Isn't this a faulty assumption, assuming that the capabilities of the large ship can be scaled down into smaller ones?

Furthermore I've been working under the assumption this ship deals with very large targets, not smaller ones.

If you want to point out the Star Trek production staff designed the Narada to look menacing, by all means do so. I have absolutely no argument there. I'm simply trying to submit speculation that would make sense in universe, and I'm fairly certain "said girders/arms are supposed to make it look menacing" isn't a valid train of thought without some form of serious justification.

You're submitting speculation that doesn't make sense, and then trying to make it seem as if anyone who does not uncritically accept your stupid explanation is being close-minded. It's not as if I haven't seen this particular kind of behaviour before.

On the contrary, I welcome your criticism and points. What better way to learn than have you point out my bullshit and mistakes?

Please keep in mind I have nothing invested in my suggestions; I'm simply tossing ideas out there in an attempt to rationalize the design of the ship. This is simply because I find the conclusion "It's just stupid" very unstatisfying, and an absolute last resort.

Do you honestly not understand that this is a mining vessel, and as such, it is not doing some fantastic exotic sci-fi thing that's beyond our comprehension? It's mining rock; this is something we understand quite well. You can't invent imaginary requirements or bizarre claims that for some reason it uses some magical process that won't scale down to anything smaller than a 5 mile long ship, nor can you pretend that it might need this bizarre shape for special sci-fi mining concepts that we cannot possibly understand. Mining is a conceptually simple endeavour: you break up rock, you extract stuff you want.

Darth Wong wrote:

Do you honestly not understand that this is a mining vessel, and as such, it is not doing some fantastic exotic sci-fi thing that's beyond our comprehension? It's mining rock; this is something we understand quite well. You can't invent imaginary requirements or bizarre claims that for some reason it uses some magical process that won't scale down to anything smaller than a 5 mile long ship, nor can you pretend that it might need this bizarre shape for special sci-fi mining concepts that we cannot possibly understand. Mining is a conceptually simple endeavour: you break up rock, you extract stuff you want.

I take it then that you're starting with the premise this ship doesn't mine anything more unconventional than rock and ore?

I was starting with the premise that this is at the very least of what it is capable of, but not necessarily what it is limited to.

Singular Intellect wrote:

Darth Wong wrote:

Do you honestly not understand that this is a mining vessel, and as such, it is not doing some fantastic exotic sci-fi thing that's beyond our comprehension? It's mining rock; this is something we understand quite well. You can't invent imaginary requirements or bizarre claims that for some reason it uses some magical process that won't scale down to anything smaller than a 5 mile long ship, nor can you pretend that it might need this bizarre shape for special sci-fi mining concepts that we cannot possibly understand. Mining is a conceptually simple endeavour: you break up rock, you extract stuff you want.

I take it then that you're starting with the premise this ship doesn't mine anything more unconventional than rock and ore?

I was starting with the premise that this is at the very least of what it is capable of, but not necessarily what it is limited to.

Why would a mining ship have to do anything but mine materials from large asteroids and planets?

Singular Intellect wrote:

Darth Wong wrote:

Do you honestly not understand that this is a mining vessel, and as such, it is not doing some fantastic exotic sci-fi thing that's beyond our comprehension? It's mining rock; this is something we understand quite well. You can't invent imaginary requirements or bizarre claims that for some reason it uses some magical process that won't scale down to anything smaller than a 5 mile long ship, nor can you pretend that it might need this bizarre shape for special sci-fi mining concepts that we cannot possibly understand. Mining is a conceptually simple endeavour: you break up rock, you extract stuff you want.

I take it then that you're starting with the premise this ship doesn't mine anything more unconventional than rock and ore?

I was starting with the premise that this is at the very least of what it is capable of, but not necessarily what it is limited to.

Nero says in the movie "living a life of honest labor". Now take that as you will, but normal people are going to take that, coupled with "mining ship" to mean that he is a miner. Miners dig for shit to find other shit. They break up rocks to get the minerals inside.

And please, say that he is mining something more exotic like "gaseous anomalies", then try to explain the 25 claw arms of doom.

Singular Intellect wrote:I take it then that you're starting with the premise this ship doesn't mine anything more unconventional than rock and ore?

What else would he be mining? And don't say "it could be anything" and then challenge me to disprove that vague speculation; the burden of proof lies on he who starts making up new terms, remember? Even in Star Trek, planets and asteroids are still planets and asteroids. Even heavy metals are mined in exactly the same way. Just what ridiculous naturally-occurring elements do you propose that they are mining which requires mile-long arms and cannot be done any other way? What exact benefit do mile-long arms provide?

Darth Wong wrote:

Singular Intellect wrote:I take it then that you're starting with the premise this ship doesn't mine anything more unconventional than rock and ore?

What else would he be mining? And don't say "it could be anything" and then challenge me to disprove that vague speculation; the burden of proof lies on he who starts making up new terms, remember? Even in Star Trek, planets and asteroids are still planets and asteroids. Even heavy metals are mined in exactly the same way. Just what ridiculous naturally-occurring elements do you propose that they are mining which requires mile-long arms and cannot be done any other way?

Nothing comes to mind; I was actually fishing to see if you or anyone else had any suggestions.

Singular Intellect wrote:

Darth Wong wrote:

Singular Intellect wrote:I take it then that you're starting with the premise this ship doesn't mine anything more unconventional than rock and ore?

What else would he be mining? And don't say "it could be anything" and then challenge me to disprove that vague speculation; the burden of proof lies on he who starts making up new terms, remember? Even in Star Trek, planets and asteroids are still planets and asteroids. Even heavy metals are mined in exactly the same way. Just what ridiculous naturally-occurring elements do you propose that they are mining which requires mile-long arms and cannot be done any other way?

Nothing comes to mind; I was actually fishing to see if you or anyone else had any suggestions.

You can't just propose an explanation which is centred around a big imaginary undefined term. That's what creationists do.

I only remember the water from the Centurian eel scene, and I was under the impression that it was a tank for the eels to live in.

(We might not be talking about that anymore. )

Darth Wong wrote: You can't just propose an explanation which is centred around a big imaginary undefined term. That's what creationists do.

Except creationists try making shit up about reality in face of the facts.

In this case, I'm fishing for/propping up plausible sounding explanations (or at least trying to) for a particular subject that is filled with made up shit to begin with, with people like you helpfully demolishing unworkable explanations.

I've made no secret of the fact I'm trying to rationalize what seems to be a silly design concept to begin with.

Sure, we can just call the ship design a piece of shit and leave it at that. But that's boring and unimaginative in my opinion, and I don't see why it's so wrong to make an effort and see if we can come up with a in universe explanation that doesn't rely upon "It's just stupid".

Given all of the other stupid things in the plot, I don't see why you have such a big problem with simply declaring that the design of the ship is stupid. Especially since no one has proposed an intelligible explanation yet.

Darth Wong wrote:Given all of the other stupid things in the plot, I don't see why you have such a big problem with simply declaring that the design of the ship is stupid. Especially since no one has proposed an intelligible explanation yet.

I suppose the tentacles being some sort of specialized sensors to detect specific minerals at depths normal sensors can't effectively read would be too much of a stretch? That's about the only thing close to a non stupid explanation for them I can think of; otherwise I got nothing.

Darth Wong wrote:Given all of the other stupid things in the plot, I don't see why you have such a big problem with simply declaring that the design of the ship is stupid. Especially since no one has proposed an intelligible explanation yet.

Don't get me wrong, I'm perfectly aware you often end up with this conclusion because nothing else fits. Such is the result of entertainment media that concerns itself with the goal of entertainment above all else.

We have quite a bit of fun tearing the shit out of science fiction for it's faults, but it doesn't hurt to try and plug some holes if we can either. It's fun to at least try, right?

General Zod wrote:

Darth Wong wrote:Given all of the other stupid things in the plot, I don't see why you have such a big problem with simply declaring that the design of the ship is stupid. Especially since no one has proposed an intelligible explanation yet.

I suppose the tentacles being some sort of specialized sensors to detect specific minerals at depths normal sensors can't effectively read would be too much of a stretch? That's about the only thing close to a non stupid explanation for them I can think of; otherwise I got nothing.

Again, a small flotilla of scanning drones would make far more sense. And the stupid design of the ship is manifestly obvious in other ways as well. Just look at the chain which hangs down for the drill. The whole idea of dropping this chain is stupid already, but the chain itself; did you look at it? The same pointless spikes everywhere, which conveniently match the scorpion-like tattoos on the Romulans' faces, and the claw-like appendages of the ship. Maybe those tattoos have some special function too, in order to avoid the conclusion that it's an obvious attempt to create an arts department "visual motif". Perhaps they channel subspace or some other bullshit.

Re the Narada looking stupid:

It was supposedly stated that they extensively modified the ship with secret romulan weapons systems and regenerative capabilities based on Borg tech in the comic.

Does anyone have a screenshot of what the Narada looked like before the re-fit?

Maybe it's dumb-ass look is a result of slapping borg bits onto the hull or something.

Darksider wrote:Re the Narada looking stupid:

It was supposedly stated that they extensively modified the ship with secret romulan weapons systems and regenerative capabilities based on Borg tech in the comic.

Not only did they refit it with (presumably not well-understood) Borg tech, but the dialogue in the comic also states that the Borg tech can self-repair and actually grow the ship. If they have only limited control at best over what kind of growth the Borg tech manifests in, then maybe that would account for certain retarded design features.

Except nobody gives a shit about the never-referenced stuff in the comicbook?