MTV Star Trek Into Darkness Clip Gives Best Glimpse Yet Of The ‘Other Starship’ | TrekMovie.com
jump to navigation

MTV Star Trek Into Darkness Clip Gives Best Glimpse Yet Of The ‘Other Starship’ April 15, 2013

by Anthony Pascale , Filed under: Star Trek Into Darkness , trackback

Two weeks ago TrekMovie took a closer look at an ‘other Starship’ from Star Trek Into Darkness. Last night MTV showed a clip from the movie that included a tiny bit of new footage that revealed more detail of the ship crashing into San Francisco Bay. So today we re-analyze the analysis. Take a deep dive below.     

 

MTV gives best look yet at ship crashing into SF

First off here is the short clip of Star Trek Into Darkness.

At first glance it looks like footage seen in various trailers and commercials however there are tiny bits of extra footage. Notably you get your first good look at the ship, right as it crashes into San Francisco Bay.


This is not the USS Enterprise – but this Federation-style ship is in deep trouble (note widely spaced nacelle struts)

While the sequence gives the impression that the ship falling from space is also the ship crashing, it is now clearer than ever that the ship falling into San Francisco Bay is not the USS Enterprise. Any subscriber to Nacelles Monthly would be able to tell you there are a number of key differences, notably the nacelles are a different shape than those of the USS Enterprise. And even more apparent is how the nacelle struts are very widely spaced, as opposed to the Enterprise which has the struts much closer together. And the above ship’s saucer has more of a tapered knife-edge as opposed to the Enterprise’s more flat blunt edge. Just compare the above to the picture of the Enterprise from the MTV clip (below).


The USS Enterprise falls towards Earth and has taken serious damage (note nacelle struts are close together)

UPDATE: Here is another comparison image of the two shots with the crashing ship on top and the Enterprise below (rotated to match orientation).


Crashing ship above with USS Enterprise below – these are not from the same ship

Last week the new domestic one sheet poster showing the Enterprise falling towards Earth caused lots of buzz on the internet. Even though the ship crashing into the water isn’t the Enterprise, the clip last night gave an even better look at the damage the ship has taken. The above image shows some of that and the below image shows that a hole has been blown through the saucer (in addition to big chucks taken out of the edges. It is fair guess that there are going to be some casualties in Star Trek Into Darkness.


The Enterprise saucer has a hole worthy of the Borg (not a spoiler…just saying)

Is the crashing ship the ‘other starship’

Two weeks ago TrekMovie did an analysis of an ‘other Starship.’ This is the ship which features its own bridge and even crew uniforms.


We have also seen the exterior of a different ship both in the space jump sequence and the fall to San Francisco Bay.



Let’s take a closer look…


Ship from space jump sequence


Ship from crashing in SF Bay scene

It is clear these images are not the USS Enterprise. Either they are both from the same Federation-style ship (and possibly the ship we also have seen on the inside). Or they could be two different Federation-style ships. 

We will find out when Star Trek Into Darkness opens.

Thanks to Salvor Hardin for YouTube clip.

Comments

1. Joel - April 15, 2013

Still wonder if this is April’s Enterprise referenced in Countdown… In a month, we’ll all know!

2. Daniel Broadway - April 15, 2013

I have said for months that it’s not the Enterprise crashing into the bay, and people didn’t believe me. I know my starship design damn it!

3. TrekMadeMeWonder - April 15, 2013

Why does the E’s hull catch on fire from entry into the atmosphere – when it’s a thousand miles up!?

4. TrekMadeMeWonder - April 15, 2013

@ 0.16 in the preview.

5. Robert McLaws - April 15, 2013

I’m telling you, the ship crashing into the bay is a refit version of the NX-01. Given the Archer references in the last one, I bet the NX-01 is a museum in space that is hijacked and crashed into SF.

6. Daniel Broadway - April 15, 2013

@ #5 Robert McLaws

No.

7. Moputo Jones - April 15, 2013

It’s must be Robert April’s Enterprise. The “areyouthe1701″ viral campaign probably has something to do with the two Enterprises.

8. sean - April 15, 2013

#5. Yes, that’d make the most sense. They’ll bring back a ship from a series that hardly anyone watched and got cancelled after 4 seasons. That’s exactly the kind of approach Abrams seems to want to take — make critically important elements of the movies’ plots be based upon stuff only Trekkies care about.

9. Josh C. - April 15, 2013

If Harrison “detonates the fleet” using this hidden code from the countdown to darkness comic…and this code exists on the old enterprise, assuming the “other ship” is the old Enterprise, I guess that if they executed something that ran code on all ships that had it, that would include the old Enterprise.

Though why Harrison would want to scuttle his own ship (assuming it was intentional) is somewhat a mystery, unless he meant to use it as some sort of weapon. who knows.

At this point I’ve given up trying to guess who Harrison is and what he’s up to

10. Daniel Broadway - April 15, 2013

@ #8

Ha ha, exactly what I was thinking, but you put it into words. Thanks!

11. Defiant - April 15, 2013

I would like the idea if this is the USS.Reliant, maybe attacking the Enterprise and then crashing into the SF-Bay. It would fit together well with a kind of a “Khan-story”.

12. LogicalLeopard - April 15, 2013

But wait….what if it IS the Enterprise, and the CGI guys got the wrong ship pulled up andfigured that no one would pay much attention?

If so, they’re in for one nice little riot on the 17th *LOL*

13. Grand Marshall Scaldac - April 15, 2013

Please stop with the Nacelles Monthly gag…

But thanks for another wallpaper for my desktop though! :-D

14. Jack - April 15, 2013

12. Ha!

“I can’t fix it now, I’m leaving on vacation. Just go heavy on the lens flares and nobody will notice…”

15. Star Sick: the Original Generation - April 15, 2013

#9

Thanks for reminding me of the phrase “detonating the Fleet”… I knew there was some reference to destroying multiple ships (or something along those lines).

This ship may be April’s ship, or Harrison’s, or another one altogether, if our villain’s goal is to take them all out.

Along with the Enterprise, it’s looking like there are going to be plenty of “starship casualties” in this film…

16. The Mighty Chip - April 15, 2013

Is anybody else getting 404 errors when clicking on the pictures?

@5. I’m not sure about it being the NX-01. The only Archer reference I remember from the last movie was from a throwaway joke line (Scotty using Archer’s “prized beagle” for a transporter test) but more importantly it makes no sense to hijack the NX-01.

I can totally buy the idea that the NX-01 is a museum ship. In fact, I’d even go so far as to call that likely. But a museum ship is a horrible choice for commanding terrorist attacks from:
1. Museum ships very often go through a “preserving” process that includes permanently de-fueling and deactivating all of their major systems. I can only assume the same would hold true for a ST starship – it would take way too much time and effort to refuel/reactivate the warp core, reactivate/replace all the weapons, reactivate/replace all the navigation systems, etc etc…. And even if you did you would be stuck with…
2. A severely outdated platform. Museum ships are, by definition, antiquated. That’s why they are no longer in active service, after all. The NX-01 in particular would be 100+ years old by the time of this movie. Why would you want to choose that ship to stand up to a hardened modern flotilla? It would be like hijacking the RMS Olympic to face off against the modern day royal navy.
3. Museum ships are famous. Only notable and well known ships are chosen to be preserved as museums. If Harrison attacked with the NX-01 he’d be at an immediate disadvantage because the enemy (Starfleet) already knows every last bit and bolt on that ship, including all her weaknesses, potential override codes, etc… Even if Harrison made special modifications/additions himself it would still be largely the same ship, or at least similar enough to needlessly give SF a tactical advantage.
4. You generally don’t refit museum ships, since the whole point of them is to preserve them in their original state.

For what it’s worth, my money is on the “other ship” being “April’s Enterprise” from the comics. True it runs into a few of the same problems I described above, but it is more modern than the NX-01, matches the images we’ve seen better, and as far as we know hasn’t been mothballed/hardcore deactivated like a museum ship would be.

17. Calz - April 15, 2013

I guess it could simply be an earth vessel but not starfleet. There could be other earth based space organisations in this universe.

18. Phil - April 15, 2013

@5. No, Way too big to be an NX.

19. Why is it??? ... - April 15, 2013

As cool looking it is to see the ship being destroyed in graphic detail, the plausibility of such a thing happening begs a reality check. One would think that there are sufficient defense measures like shielding, if not planetary..a few ships could create a deflector net to ‘steer’ a crashing ship away from a a populated area like SF…to an unpopulated area like the ocean, or into space away from earth. Heck..tractor beams anyone? They’ve got em. Use ‘em.

20. DangerousDac - April 15, 2013

If you freeze frame the shot of it hitting Alcatraz and look at the bridge, its predominantly black and has hard angles – It’s a stealth ship, used by the covert shady evil element of Starfleet that Harrison/Khan is railing against.

21. Thomas Evans - April 15, 2013

Pause on 2 seconds it’s quite clearly the NCC-1701 USS Enterprise…

22. B.T. Dubbs - April 15, 2013

…it’s the same ship. Just by the time it crashes, they’ve locked s-foils into attack position…

23. Starman - April 15, 2013

Re: Museum ships.

Galacitca

/drops mic

24. Smike - April 15, 2013

It’s quite obvious the Enterprise is either up for a refit after this movie or completely destroyed. I’m wondering if the next Enterprise will be a bit closer to TOS. If they follow the 007 pattern it actually might! They had the old MI5 headquarters destroyed in Skyfall, only to make use of the old 60s style sets towards the end of the film. It would be awesome if we get a much-closer-to-TOS-type set towards the end of the film or for the next one… It doesn’t have to be 1:1, only a tad closer…

25. Smike - April 15, 2013

If hope the other ship that crashes (the one commandeered by Harrison / Khan?) will be called Reliant…just for old lang syne as Scotty might be tempted to say.

26. AB - April 15, 2013

A bit off-topic for this post, but I just saw a link to a tweet from what looks to be the official Twitter for Paramount Pictures UK:

“Prepare to pick a side.”

https://twitter.com/ParamountUK/status/323772922730786819

27. NCC-73515 - April 15, 2013

Section 31 ship.

28. StephenH - April 15, 2013

My theory is that it’s the USS Bradbury, the ship that Spock gets temporarily reassigned during the course of the movie’s events (according to the IMAX footage reviews) that smashes into the bay.

I also think that Spock’s quick thinking saves the lives of a lot of the Bradbury crew (if not those in San Fransico who get crushed), and leads up with him teaming with Kirk and Urhura to go after Harrison on Quo’nos.

The Enterprise won’t play as big a part in the climax of the movie as we are accustiomed to in a Star Trek movie, but I think we’ll have a little postscript scene set a few months later where she’s refitted and ready to go back on the beat !!

29. Smike - April 15, 2013

On the other hand…maybe that ship that crashes is a prototype created from future 24th century technology. Maybe Section 31 has actually tortured Spock Prime to obtain intell from the future (a forced mind-meld would do)…because thise ship here looks definitely closer to 24th century designs… okay, maybe a bit far-fetched…but it’s less than a month to come up with theories like that :-)

30. The Mighty Chip - April 15, 2013

@23. Starman

Galactica wasn’t quite a museum ship. It was about to become one but then an emergency pressed it to remain in active service. With that in mind let’s see how it stands up to my original points.

1. It was not fully deactivated. They had shut off a few nonessential systems but all the big stuff like propulsion, power supply, weapons etc. were still operational. Again, the Galactica was only a planned museum ship but she didn’t make it to that point.

2. Yes, the Galactica was an outdated platform, a point that was pointed out and addressed countless times during the course of that show.

3. Yup, she was famous too. However this point isn’t applicable in the Galactica scenario – she wasn’t hijacked to be used against her builders, which is what #5 was positing for the NX-01. Galactica remained under human control the entire time so her enemy (the cylons) didn’t get any special knowledge about her.

4. Again, Galactica never made it to the point of actually becoming a museum ship.

31. Creed - April 15, 2013

I think it’s the Enterprise, and the nacelle struts have just broken as it has fallen through the atmosphere, hence being further apart… either that or indeed, they’re doing a very good job at deceiving us, given we clearly see the enterprise in a very bad shape and falling through the atmosphere preceding the crash,=.

32. Tim - April 15, 2013

Actually, it’s pretty obvious that this is the ship that Khan/John is using and it’s also the ship in the spacejump scene background. Clearly, this is from the end of the movie when the ship is finally defeated.

And the 1701 burning up is probably from some silly dream sequence and doesn’t actually happen. No one is stupid enough to write a script featuring two seperate ships crashing to Earth in the same movie.

All though this is JJ Abrahms and he doesn’t really seem to care if it means flashy action scenes…

And besides all that, who cares what ship it is? JJ Abrahms let the franchise burn up in the atmosphere three years ago so this is just gravy.

33. Space Odyssey - April 15, 2013

Hmm…things are falling (pun intended?) into place now (or are they?). I don’t yet know if Harrison wll actually have a so-called ‘true, hidden identity’ and how it will somehow pay homage to Trek lore (remember, his identity is still apparently ‘canon’) but I will not take a stab at the overall plot.

With all the talk in the trailers/synopses of Kirk failing the prime directive and the UFP ‘comitting grave and unforgivable mistakes’, is Harrison truly just such a veteran Federation black ops agent who is finally fed up with the UFP covertly meddling in pre-space/warp faring civilizations all these years and has now eventually become a disillusioned ‘enemy within’ terrorist seeking to ‘detonate the (Star)fleet’ by hijacking the fleet’s ships and crashing them back down to earth, and therefore ushering the Earth back ‘Into Darkness’ of pre-space/warp affairs because Harrison no longer believes that humanity is yet mature enough to share itself with other alien civilizations, considering that it continues to disrespect the prime directive no matter what its intentions are.

Maybe?

34. Space Odyssey - April 15, 2013

Edit “but I will NOW take a stab at the overall plot”

35. Kapten Kerk - April 15, 2013

I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again.
I don’t care about Harrison but I NEED to know about the “other” Federation starship!
Is it Khan’s Reliant, April’s Enterprise, the nuExcelsior or a Section 31 black-ops ship?
And you’re telling me that the “space-jump” starship may be a different ship than the “Alcatraz-crashing” starship?!
I CAN’T WAIT TO SEE IT/THEM!
The more Federation blueprints/schematics/orthos and models/toys I collect the better!

36. Christian - April 15, 2013

Forget your books and comics guys. They have nothing to do with what’s seen on screen.
Slightly different uniforms and different ship with a lot of evil. Looks like the famous and popular mirror universe to me.

37. vantheman77 - April 15, 2013

Could we see two Enterprises going at it that causes one or both to fall to Earth? One is commanded by Kirk and the other commanded by John Harrison, perhaps?

38. Garth Faction - April 15, 2013

I am wondering if he does a “World Trade Center” crash with a starship.. I don’t think this happens near the end..

39. JohnRambo - April 15, 2013

@32. Tim

lolz

40. The Mighty Chip - April 15, 2013

@33 Space Odyssey:

I could totally see that being the plot, it ties in really well with what we’ve seen so far.

41. Bob - April 15, 2013

Some of these comments are unbelievably ridiculous.

42. Mad Mann - April 15, 2013

Thanks Anthony for doing these close-up analysis. But with that kind of damage to the Enterprise, can she even be salvaged?

43. Whatever - April 15, 2013

Can anyone actually read? Look at the pic with the “hole worthy of the Borg,” whatever the hell that means. It very clearly says 1701. Fanboys are sad.

44. SFC3 - April 15, 2013

I have a theory.

In the trailer, it seem that kirk space jumps through rumble near the Moon or something.

So this obviously is Harrison’s “ship” which kirk himself will confront harrison on (also in several trailers, the standoff with harrison in the command chair). Somehow the starship will be very damaged and disabled and will fall to earth.

45. Star Sick: the Original Generation - April 15, 2013

#41

Ridiculous comments? On a Star Trek comment section? Perish the thought!

Wacked-out theories and nitpicky disagreements are what we’re here for, amirite?? That’s what makes it fun. I, for one, love reading the various theories, even when I disagree or whatever. It’s all part of the fun!

:)

46. Anthony Pascale - April 15, 2013

RE: Hole worthy of Borg
http://en.memory-alpha.org/wiki/Cutting_beam

47. THK - April 15, 2013

Alternate universe’s “The Great Project” aka Excelsior? Hmm…

48. Elias Javalis - April 15, 2013

Harrison must be some terrorist. An inside man? Creating havoc into Starfleet’s infrastructure!!

49. Christopher Roberts - April 15, 2013

Doug Drexler’s Enterprise NX-01 refit?

Okay… okay

I’ll get my coat. :-\

50. Djeewhy - April 15, 2013

NX01 has no secundary hull, its deflector dish is on the front of the main hull. It is not a serious candidate for the “other ship” in my mind.

51. The Mighty Chip - April 15, 2013

@43 Whatever:

Nobody is disagreeing that the ship falling from orbit is definitely the Enterprise. As you correctly pointed out, it clearly says NCC-1701 on the hull.

What the disagreement is about is whether or not that ship seen falling from orbit is the same ship seen falling in to the bay right after. Most people believe (including myself and apparently Anthony) that the ship crashing in to the bay is a different ship and that the two shots were just edited together in the trailer to throw people off and think the Enterprise is doomed.

The reason we believe this is mostly because the shape of the USS WhateverItIs is slightly (but definitely) different than the shape of the Enterprise as seen when it’s falling from orbit.

52. Superquerulant - April 15, 2013

It`s is clearly the flagship of the mighty Mugato monkey empire…

Because: Harrison is a Mugato!!!!!!

53. Star Sick: the Original Generation - April 15, 2013

Are you the 1701… or are you the Mugato?

54. maspill - April 15, 2013

The enterprise is destroyed / damaged and Kirk has to use Aprils ship a dated ship similar to original seriers enterprise as the fleet has been crippled and no other modern ship is available???

55. Gaz UK - April 15, 2013

@47 .. EXCELSIOR is my vote with Harrison as Captain and poss Section 31.

Maybe the wide pointy nacelle is trans warp.

Anyway….tickets booked for May 10.

56. Govna - April 15, 2013

Will this (possible) terror attack affect the release or final cut of STID???

Anthony, can you weigh in on that?

57. The Sinfonian - April 15, 2013

Oh boy…. now with today’s terrorist attack on the Boston Marathon with over a dozen killed, on *Patriots Day* of all days, especially when it lands on April 15, tax day in the US… the themes of Into Darkness are becoming all too real.

I’m not sure I want to see attacks on London and San Francisco so soon after a real attack on Boston.

58. will - April 15, 2013

I personally think its the Enterprise! i mean look at the footage of the enterprise falling into earths orbit! This is one way that they can get another ship in the next movie but my main objection is why destroy the ship i mean seriously ! Startrek fans are not to keen on destroying the enterprise just to see what new one they can come up with in the next movie!

59. Marshall McMellon - April 15, 2013

The Nacelles and the struts (not so much though) seem reminiscent of the TMP Enterprise.

60. Anthony Pascale - April 15, 2013

it is too soon for me to do anything related to the incident today in Boston. I dont even want to think about how it relates to Trek

61. sean - April 15, 2013

#3

“Why does the E’s hull catch on fire from entry into the atmosphere – when it’s a thousand miles up!?”

For the same reason starships have been ‘catching fire’ throughout Trek’s history – it looks cool. But if you want a more Trek explanation, the ship IS full of oxygen…

62. Marshall McMellon - April 15, 2013

@ # 36- Yeah, lately, my thoughts keep going to Mirror Universe as well- but I’m not really sold on that theory yet. :)

63. sean - April 15, 2013

#19

So it’s implausible because ‘technobabble tachnobabble technobabble’? Sure, sounds great.

64. Dr. Cheis - April 15, 2013

I still don’t see how it’s not the same ship, but I’ll trust the experts that they can discern some difference where I can’t.

65. Christopher Roberts - April 15, 2013

@50. Not entirely serious… but the NX-01 refit does.

http://sphotos-b.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-ash3/541163_574395799246760_621708699_n.jpg

http://sphotos-a.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-ash3/62368_574396595913347_495778337_n.jpg

http://sphotos-f.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-ash3/534263_10151583542751147_2057791673_n.jpg

66. Kapten Kerk - April 15, 2013

Are you the 1701?

Or perhaps Archer’s NX-01? Khan’s Reliant? Spock’s USS Bradbury? April’s Enterprise? An Akyazi/Akula class? The nuExcelsior? A Section 31 black-ops ship? A mirror universe ship? A 24th-century-tech ship?

67. Dennis C - April 15, 2013

I prefer this ship over the JJ Enterprise and I suspect others will too (everyone loved the Kelvin, not everyone was sold on the new Enterprise).

If we’re to believe Countdown to Darkness we’ve aready seen April’s Enterprise.

68. DMR - April 15, 2013

If the Khan rumor is true…U.S.S. Reliant?

69. Rick Sternbach - April 15, 2013

I don’t know if this was mentioned previously, but did folks notice the escape pod/shuttle/lifeboat thing thrusting its way off the reentering ship?

70. The Sinfonian - April 15, 2013

@69 Can’t pick it out clearly. Is it big enough to be the vessel Cumberbatch pilots to attach SFHQ?

71. John from Cincinnati - April 15, 2013

Seeing what JJ Abrams has done to the Kirk, Spock, McCoy troika…

Expect Star Wars VII to be Luke, Leia and Lando..Sorry Han, you’re not politically correct anymore.

72. Chris Roberts - April 15, 2013

@69. Goes by so quickly. But I’m pretty sure it’s hull plating coming off.

73. John from Cincinnati - April 15, 2013

Well Anthony Pascale..the picture clearly shows NCC-1701. Know of any starships with that number that are not the Enterprise?

74. Phil - April 15, 2013

@60. It’s not even life imitating art at this point. Leave that for other sites to comment on…

75. Anthony Pascale - April 15, 2013

I added another image to the article to make the point of the differences in nacelles and struts even clearer.

76. Selor - April 15, 2013

So we know that it is definitely not “the” Enterprise… so which ship is it?

77. Starman - April 15, 2013

the ship crashing into the Bay has a different saucer section than the Big E…look at the edge of the saucer on both ships….

78. PaulB - April 15, 2013

#73 – THAT picture IS of the Enterprise. But the falling toward San Fransisco is obviously not the Enterprise–not the ship with “1701” on it at the start.

Two different ships. One, Enterprise 1701, is falling and catching fire. The other is diving nose-first toward Alcatraz. NOT THE SAME SHIP. THAT is the one that is not the Enterprise.

Geesh…

79. Emperor Mike of the Alternate Empire - April 15, 2013

It’s the U.S.S Lollypop.

80. Emperor Mike of the Alternate Empire - April 15, 2013

Oh Ok. It’s the U.S.S Federation Starship Galactica.

81. Emperor Mike of the Alternate Empire - April 15, 2013

Oh Ok. it’s the U.S.S Federation Starship Babylon 5

82. Emperor Mike of the Alternate Empire - April 15, 2013

It could be the U.S.S Federation Starship Pascale.

83. Phil - April 15, 2013

@3. Powerless ship, falling to earth. Google space shuttle Columbia video, and note that it’s also burning up very high in the atmosphere. Something twice the size of an aircraft carrier crashing should be a massive molten blob when it hits the ground, and crater the city. All things considered it held up fairly well….

84. StarFleetVeteran - April 15, 2013

U.S.S. Reliant. Duh.

85. Peter Loader - April 15, 2013

Two ships obviously… doesn’t mean they both don’t crash.

86. Dr. Fridgehead - April 15, 2013

That ship still looks like a smaller, squashed version of the Sovereign class. I’m wondering if it is brought down by weapons fire or placed explosives. The earlier trailers suggest the latter, though. I’m hoping not because I tend to like a little ship-to-ship, personally.

87. Rob Steckel - April 15, 2013

On a different note, very sad what happened in Boston today. If it does turn out to be terrorists, and giving that STID seems to be about a terrorist, I wonder if the NA premiere would be postponed as a movie about terrorism only a month after an event like this would still be pretty raw.

88. PEB - April 15, 2013

That’s exactly how I wished the BOP would’ve crashed in San Fran.

89. olly - April 15, 2013

#87 based on that shouldnt Iron man 3 be postponed

90. Rob Steckel - April 15, 2013

I’m not sure, were there movies cancelled after 9/11? Perhaps I’m remembering wrong.

91. No Khan - April 15, 2013

I’m not wild about these terrorist stories to begin with & now todays events. I don’t go to the movies to see news like events for this type of entertainment. I go to escape! Hollywood can’t wait to throw this in our faces thinking it so relevant. Did they ever think we might not want to see this in every plot point. Star War better not be a terrorism movie.

92. I'm missing my child... Have you seen him? - April 15, 2013

Where the hell is Chechov?

93. Red Dead Ryan - April 15, 2013

I suspect that the marketing will be tweaked to emphasize Kirk and Spock as the heros as opposed to John Harrison as the terrorist.

I doubt the movie will be postponed though.

94. TheWrathOfBong - April 15, 2013

#90

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_entertainment_affected_by_the_September_11_attacks#Movies

95. Dee - lvs moon surface - April 15, 2013

#93.

yep…

96. rfk - April 15, 2013

Would be interesting if the story happens to loosely mimic real-world events, just as TUC did (coup in Russia a few months prior to release).

97. mcn - April 15, 2013

I still think something big reveal is going to happen in this movie that no one will see coming, and I don’t mean the real identity of John Harrison. As in alternative universe or something big. It just seems the same details are rehashed in different ways and the movie is not as simple is that. Hoping, anyway…

98. John from Cincinnati - April 15, 2013

Didn’t we already see Nero’s drill fall into the SF Bay in ST2009? Can’t the producers be more creative?

ST09: Terrorist, battle above SF bay, drill falls into bay

ST:into darkness: Terrrorist, battle above SF bay, ship crashed into bay

My God, please be more original for the next movie (if there is one)

99. John from Cincinnati - April 15, 2013

Plot summary for Star Trek 2015:

Star Trek: Out of Darkness

A vengeful terrorist threatens our Enterprise family, battles over SF Bay and a starbase falls into the bay. Kirk, Spock and Uhura battle on New Vulvan to repel a rebellion of Vulcan tired of seeing the same movies over and over again.

See, even I can write a Hollywood screenplay.

100. Gary 8.5 - April 15, 2013

87 It is terrorists either way, doesnt matter if it is domestic or international terrorists .
I don think the movie will be delayed , but I dont think that matters when we are talking about people who died and others who were gravely injured .

101. John from Cincinnati - April 15, 2013

BobOrci:

Since when are communications officers required to go planetside armed with phasers to “kick ass”?

102. Chris Roberts - April 15, 2013

I tend to think the Starfleet ship crashing on land, and then in the bay, must be an older one.

If you consider nacelles wider apart and closer to the level of the saucer, less advanced – and higher, nearer to each other, more advanced.

Also the secondary hull looks small from some angles, and there’s virtually no neck joining the two, as there is on the Enterprise NCC-1701 (in either universe).

103. John from Cincinnati - April 15, 2013

Plot Summary:

Star Wars VII

Luke, Leia and Lando go planetside to stop a terrorist. (Leia and Lando are having an affair). Sorry, Han Solo, you’re the best character but we won’t be seing much of you.

Lens flares. An Imperial Destroyer and Republic Frigate are battling over Naboo. The Destroyer loses and falls into the ocean on Naboo.

The End.

104. Gary 8.5 - April 15, 2013

101. the movie probably explains that .

105. John from Cincinnati - April 15, 2013

BobOrci:

You’re a talented guy, come clean. Was this whole Uhura thing your idea or was it pushed on you from executives at Paramount, JJ or Zoe herself? I mean, a comunications officer would have to take a lot of xenolinguistic classes, probably some computer classes (we saw TOS Uhura repair the communications equipment). Since when does the curriculum for communications include phaser proficiency and hand to hand combat? I mean, it would seem to be really inconvenient to have a bridge communications officer go down on landing parties to “kick ass” when there are dozens of security officers better trained to handle those situations.

106. boborci - April 15, 2013

101. When they are the only ones that speak local language.

107. Trek Fan - April 15, 2013

101. John from Cincinnati

Since Uhura isn’t just a communications officer, but also the linguist … she needed to go along since they are on the Klingon home world.

108. John from Cincinnati - April 15, 2013

So the one universal translator got broken I assume and there’s only one on the entire starship? and she is the only one on a ship of 400 that speaks Klingon???

109. John from Cincinnati - April 15, 2013

Wow if that is the case, we shoulve seen Uhura in every TOS episode going down on landing parties. She would’ve been a much more prominent and important character.

110. Trek Fan - April 15, 2013

108. John from Cincinnati

Ensign Noname was in bed with the flu. But then again… would you want to see some generic crewman on the mission…. or once of the series regulars? Hmmmmmmmm……

111. Lurker - April 15, 2013

109. Prominent? She opened hailing frequencies in every damn episode she was in.

You’re right, they should just have the new Uhura do the same thing.

112. Lurker - April 15, 2013

99. “See, even I can write a Hollywood screenplay.”

By all means go ahead – what is stopping you?

113. ObsessiveStarTrekFan - April 15, 2013

@109 John from Cincinnati

Take the questions you’ve asked in the past few posts and replace the words ‘communications officer’ with the word ‘doctor’…

We get it that you want to see more of McCoy. It’s a fair bet the rest of us do as well. However, realistically, how do you justify sending the ship’s chief medical officer into harms way on every away mission?

It’s a plot device and always was.

By the way, in case you missed it, McCoy was down on Nibiru with Kirk – on another away mission that on the surface of things did not need the CMO to be present…

If the 3 are now 4, and I really believe it’s looking that way, I for one am very pleased.

114. Red Dead Ryan - April 15, 2013

#99.

“See, even I can write a Hollywood screen play.”

Yeah, but I doubt it would be any good.

115. Khalifa - April 15, 2013

We have 2 Enterprises in the Movie both NCC-1701

116. Michael Hall - April 15, 2013

“@3. Powerless ship, falling to earth. Google space shuttle Columbia video, and note that it’s also burning up very high in the atmosphere. Something twice the size of an aircraft carrier crashing should be a massive molten blob when it hits the ground, and crater the city. All things considered it held up fairly well….”

Worse, actually–it would be an extinction-level event, assuming a free fall from orbit as opposed to a powered glide. SF and everything for hundreds of miles around would flattened, then vaporized. And that’s not even taking into account the vast quantities of antimatter the ship supposedly carries.

*Sigh*. A line of dialogue in a sub-par third season episode (“That Which Survives”) produced 45 years ago managed to get this mostly right. Will INTO DARKNESS?

117. omegaman - April 15, 2013

Anyone going to ask why the ships are falling out of orbit in the first place?

Seems to me they wouldn’t fall back to Earth immediately after any sort of explosion is they are parked correctly in orbit.

Lost of navigation under impulse power while attempting orbiting maneuvers perhaps?

118. Matt - April 15, 2013

why the ships are falling out of orbit in the first place?

119. Picard, Jean-Luc - April 15, 2013

To anyone who thinks this is the USS Enterprise. PLEASE go get your eyes checked, this isn’t an insult but a concern because if you think that the ship smashing into the bay is the same Enterprise that Captain Kirk commands then I worry about how good your driving is with eyesight like that…

The ship smashing into the bay and the city is clearly the ship in the scene where Kirk is space jumping through debris and NOT Kirk’s USS Enterprise.

Also I have a feeling that Scotty saves the Enterprise and manages to restart her engines to avoid smashing into the ground because I can’t imagine ANYONE surviving a fall that out of control. If the Enterprise hits the ground then it would just blow up and kill everyone onboard, Kirk, Soctty, Spock… KEENSER!!! The OTHER ship seems to be deliberately flown into the ground, no exterior damage and the fumes coming out of the nacelles could just be as a result of something happening to the engines – certainly the ship crashing doesn’t seem to be in as bad a condition as the Enterprise.

120. Craiger - April 15, 2013

#119 – I could just see the fans reaction to Scotty saving the Enterprise. I wonder if the would all be like “Yay!!!! Go Scotty!!!”

121. Craiger - April 15, 2013

Sorry I should have said the audiences reaction.

122. omegaman - April 15, 2013

Either the damaged ships feature at the beginning or the end of the film.

If the E’s damaged at the beginning then she’s in no shape to take on the enemy, which might account for the small ship Spock, Kirk, Uhura and Bones are using.

If its at the end, then its a last ditch effort by Harrison to take out star fleet headquarters and Kirk’s (space jump scene) aboard her trying to stop Harrison, that’s why it crashes into Alcatraz.

123. Son of Jello - April 15, 2013

Maybe the structural integrity feild has collapsed and in the shots provided we are seeing a distorted image of what the ship actually looks like. Being so close to a gravity source it would be really pulling the ship out of its natural shape.

124. boborci - April 15, 2013

109. John from Cincinnati – April 15, 2013
Wow if that is the case, we shoulve seen Uhura in every TOS episode going down on landing parties. She would’ve been a much more prominent and important character.

—-

Agreed, but that series was pretty good anyway;)

125. Steve Johnson - April 15, 2013

@117

I imagine it has something to do with either a plot device we are not aware of something that can cripple starships, maybe Harrison is pushed to use this when he’s cornered and that causes both ships to go down. Think, like a big EMP wave. Losing power in the middle of what i’m assuming is combat maneuvers would be disastrous.

Or the old fashioned way. Battle damage causes both ships to lose primary power.

There are other potential explanations, too.

126. Yanks - April 15, 2013

Nice to know we had it right a couple months ago.

127. Craiger - April 15, 2013

I found that NX-01 refit photo.

http://images1.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20100722194044/startrek/images/1/16/NX-01_refit_quarter.jpg

128. TrekMadeMeWonder - April 15, 2013

116. Michael Hall

Size does not matter in this case. And it would never be close to “an extinction-level event.”

The Columbia Space Shuttle was traveling in orbit. Meaning it had to be going at least 17,000 mph. The E in all of these shot looks like it is just falling straight down. I do not think, and it does not appear that it would be reaching the speeds of Columbia.

A good reference would be the new Virgin Galactic. When it launches from its mothership, it travels only straight up and then falls back directly toward the Earth and lands easily without any dangerous atmospheric friction. That’s why there are no heat sheilds on that space craft. It does not need them if its falling straight down at the much, much lower speeds.

Another good example would be Felix Baumgartner’s recent space jump.

My two cents on the depiction or science in this new Trek.

129. TrekMadeMeWonder - April 15, 2013

127. Craiger

Wow. Nice job, Craiger. Is it the same ship?

130. Coastie - April 15, 2013

The USS Reliant thing just doesn’t work. Even if he is Khan … Khan was exiled for years when the Reliant came across him. Unless the timeline has been sped way up, the Reliant probably hasn’t even been built yet. If they call this ship the Reliant, that just shows a lack of creativity.

131. Melllvar - April 15, 2013

lol @#3

BECAUSE IT ISN’T REAL!!!

132. TrekMadeMeWonder - April 15, 2013

130. Coastie

Here, here. So true.

But I doubt that will happen in this Trek. The writers had sooo much time to get this right.

131. Melllvar

You’re a Furberger.

133. Coastie - April 15, 2013

@36 – Amen, I’ve said it before too … just because its in the comics and books doesn’t mean the movie producers/writers care about it enough to put it in their movie … this film is meant to attract mainstream, not the fan art comic book club types.

134. The Sinfonian - April 15, 2013

In TOS, Uhura went down on the mission to recover McCoy in _City on the Edge of Forever_. (I’ll avoid guffawing at the phrasing “going down on the landing party”… or not.)

I just used to think of TOS has somewhat having Kirk and Spock on away missions, as they were “expendable”, as Uhura and Sulu and Mr. Scott could run the ship just fine in their absence. :)

And >tlhIngan Hol< is a difficult language, I've been trying to master it since 1986, and I still can't. :) Dajpol! Dajpol! I'm sure Uhura is the only one who understands many of the various dialects of it beyond just "Standard Kronosian".

In the nucanon, she's *clearly* a full Starfleet Academy graduate, and at or near the top of her class. She's going to be on away missions, because this is an amped-up Uhura. On the other hand, McCoy, clearly is essentially not changed at all from TOS and the prime universe. This all starts to make plenty of sense if you think about it. Kudos to Bob.

135. MJ - April 15, 2013

TO ANY TREK FANS IN BOSTON:

WE STAND WITH YOU TODAY !!!!

136. Jason - April 15, 2013

#5 that’s possible; considering a look at the photos show some similarities to the digitally created photos of what the refit NX-01 would’ve looked like. Then again…who knows; it could be April’s Enterprise.

137. omegaman - April 15, 2013

In my opinion… based on the state of the two ships…
The climatic ending of this movie will feature a face of between Kirk and Harrison (“Khan”). Both ships will be severely damaged forcing Kirk to space jump to Harrison’s ship in a last ditch effort to stop him crashing it into Star Fleet Headquarters. After a hand-to-hand fight with Harrison Kirk manages to divert the course of the ship which crashes into Alcatraz, plows into the sea and up onto land. With a few parting choice words Kirk beams off the ship and we see Harrison staring down at the city below from the bridge of his ship. Seconds later the saucer snaps off and Harrison stoically holds on while cursing Kirk’s name as the saucer plunges to the pavement below.

138. Michael Hall - April 15, 2013

“Size does not matter in this case. And it would never be close to “an extinction-level event.””

Good God. You’re kidding, right?

Sorry, I really don’t mean to be disrespectful. But your two cents on the “science” of this movie–which I went out of my way to say I’m not pre-judging, remember–are worth just about that.

139. Torlek Chang - April 15, 2013

It is Admiral Marcus starship.

140. Torlek Chang - April 15, 2013

Besides after all of this, any modern starship crashing into any area of the earth will completely destroy such area making an atomic bomb blast look like a firecracker. San Francisco Bay, Alcatraz and everything else would be destroyed completely. Antimatter.

141. Kaaaaaahhhn!!!!! - April 15, 2013

Do they really have to destroy more Federation hardware? How many ships named Enterprise, in how many universes, in how many movies, need to be crippled, destroyed, fired upon, saucer-sepped, atmosphere-reentered, forest-damaging, San Francisco Bay plopping, and otherwise used as a bad plot device before somebody at Starfleet says, “hey, maybe we should stop calling these ships Enterprise. They seem to have a bit of bad luck.”

142. ObsessiveStarTrekFan - April 15, 2013

@141. Kaaaaaahhhn!!!!!

Cmdr Riker would disagree with you: “Fate: Protects fools, little children, and ships named Enterprise.” – TNG Contagion

143. MJ - April 15, 2013

Michael Hall and TrekMadeWonder,

Here are the calculations:

For every 100 tons you drop from orbit, you end up with a 1 KT explosion.

So, for the TOS Enterprise, which ways approximately 200,000 tons, you would get (assuming no gliding effect) an explosion of 2000 KT, or a 200 MT blast. This would really mess up half a continent and would likely mess up worldwide weather for a couple of months, but it would not rise to the level of an extinction-level event.

However, if

144. MJ - April 15, 2013

However, if the new Enterprise is really 4 to six times the mass of TOS enterprise, and multiple starships of this size are falling (again, without gliding, which seems unlikely) out of the sky, then this would approach a Nuclear-Winter-like event I think.

145. Trek Fan - April 15, 2013

\Well, we don’t really know if the ship is “falling” out of the sky … or if it has it’s thrusters on reverse or something of the like. It was more than likely not just dropping … The footage looks like it would out of control but the speed didn’t look like it was falling at full speed. I would liken it to the way the Enterprise D crashed in Generations.

146. MJ - April 15, 2013

@145. Agreed. I was simply providing those guys with the real facts on the case of it was in true free fall with no glide effect. Just some fun math.

147. sean - April 15, 2013

#105

If you’ve ever read any of the behind-the-scenes stuff on TOS, you’d know that the plan was in place for Uhura to go planetside more often in Season 4. What’s your problem with Uhura being given a larger role? It’s not 1969 anymore, Trek shouldn’t be a sausagefest.

148. Oxford - April 15, 2013

Every kilogram of antimatter you have on board a ship is equivalent to 21.5 Megatons of TNT. If it annihilates you’ll get double that yield because you have to allow for the energy equivalent of the matter as well.

Science lesson for the day.

149. TrekMadeMeWonder - April 15, 2013

138. Michael Hall, 143. MJ

Not sure where you are getting your facts, but the atmosphere would somewhat aleviate the dramatice effects you predict. The atmosphere and wind resistance would support the ship as it falls – to some degree.
So much so that the Enterprise would probably break apart if it were to move at the speeds neccesary to “mess up half a continent.” That would NEVER happen. Obviously.

You guys are pretty off if you presume to think a ship the size of an aircraft carrier would destroy that much. If so, why did Columbia breakup? The turbulance from the atmosphere ripped the shuttle apart. But remember the shuttle was traveling at 17,000 mph while it was traveling through the thickest parts of the atmosphere.

150. DJT - April 15, 2013

If all it takes to bust up the fleet is the prefix code / Aprils secret code…. well that would be stupid. Hope that isn’t the case. Plus, I hope they actually explain stuff in the movie this time. Not just expect us to fill in the blanks

151. MJ - April 15, 2013

@148. One would have to assume thought that the antimatter is stored such that it would survive situations like a ships destruction.

152. Phil - April 15, 2013

@128. You’re joking, right…

Columbia had begun re-entry when she burned up, to expand on your observation, if the starship was falling straight down, it would be traveling a hellva lot faster. That’s extinction level disaster…

Virgin Galactic is a bad example, it’s a sub-orbital craft. As long as the integrity of your airframe hasn’t been compromised, it’s a controlled decent. The starship has been compromised, so all bets are off.

The whole concept that a damaged craft flies in the face of physics to begin with, but as so many have pointed out, this is now science fantasy, so your two cents worth is about all this fantasy is worth. Enjoy the show, but don’t for a minute believe that what you are seeing is science in any shape or form. Size does matter…

153. TrekMadeMeWonder - April 15, 2013

Jeez, Oxford. You, too?

The effects of a Starship’s crash landing are not meant to include an Matter-Antimatter explosion in this argument.

These ships were on their way down. And after a lot of apparent destruction. Looks to me like thier “engines” had probably been shut down or broken.

I am sure that you would need a tremendous amount of energy to act as a catalyst to an Antimater chain reaction. That requires a functioning Antimatter “engine.”

An Antimatter explosion just does not occur naturally.

154. TrekMadeMeWonder - April 15, 2013

You guys are so off.

155. Phil - April 15, 2013

@149. Man, you just need to stop – everything you mention is flat out wrong, and you are embarrassing yourself.

156. TrekMadeMeWonder - April 15, 2013

Felix Baumgartner’s Top Speed In Plunge Estimated At 844 MPH.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/02/04/felix-baumgartner-speed-sound-faster_n_2617480.html

Notice the photo.

Looks ALOT higher to me than the Enterprise in the above pics.
My two cents are beginning to add up. : )

157. TrekMadeMeWonder - April 15, 2013

Up your turboshaft, Phil.

158. MJ - April 15, 2013

Look up “Project Tho”r and you can get all the calculations that I used here from that. The military has already looked at this. And no, the Columbia is much to small of a mass for an extinction-level event.

Do the math, people, and stop making stuff up because you think you are smart. LOL

159. MJ - April 15, 2013

“Project Thor”

160. TrekMadeMeWonder - April 15, 2013

Link, please MJ. I don’t have time to do your reseach.

161. ObsessiveStarTrekFan - April 15, 2013

@153. TrekMadeMeWonder

Umm – I’m pretty certain all it takes for a ‘bit’ of antimatter to annihilate, is the corresponding ‘bit’ of matter. No catalyst necessary. It takes a tremendous amount of energy to keep the antimatter away from the matter in the first place. Does the term ‘containment field’ ring a bell?

162. MJ - April 15, 2013

The largest nuclear bomb ever tested was 25 MT.

TOS Enterprise, assuming the unlikely case of very little drag/no glide, would cause a blast of 200 MT, per my earlier calculations.

So, yea, that would be like dropping 10 of the largest nuclear bombs ever on one spot.

It would certainly be a piss-poor day to even be on the same continent downwind of that.

But an extinction-level event…nope!

163. MJ - April 15, 2013

@161. Yea, so you would want to have heavily shielded containment vessels with independent power supplies should the ship around them be destroyed. Or a simpler solution might be an independently powered transporter that transports the antimatter into space away from a planet.

164. TrekMadeMeWonder - April 15, 2013

MJ. You too? JEEZ!!!!

Project Thor…

Project Thor is an idea for a weapons system that launches kinetic projectiles from Earth orbit to damage targets on the ground….
…The most described system is “an orbiting tungsten telephone pole with small fins and a computer in the back for guidance”.

Project Thor was meant to lauch missles at Earth targets using tungsten aerodymanic missles.

Not the same as the un-aerodynamicly shaped Enterprise.

Wind Resistance would slow the ship considerably. If the E dropped from a stationary orbit (as the above pic indicate) then the resulting crash would not be that great.

Hey! I got it! Here is another interstellar spacecraft that DID drop from space. In fact, it was from deep space. Chew on this…

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Genesis_crash_site_scenery.jpg

165. MJ - April 15, 2013

@164. Why are you being such an ass? I stated that my calculations assumed no drag, which I directly myself stated was not realistic. I am the only person here that actually provided some quantitative calculations here.

Anthony has asked us all to be more civil here, due. “Zero Tolerence” is the phrase he used here yesterday.

166. TrekMadeMeWonder - April 15, 2013

161. ObsessiveStarTrekFan

I am in noway an expert on Antimatter. That’s not even part of the argument here. Safe to say if there was an Antimatter explosion there would be nothing left on this half of out planet.

Consider this… If there is a huge cache of Antimatter laying around on the Enterprise waiting to bang into something. There would definately be a huge explosion when the E’s power was suddenly cut. AS I recall this happened plenty of times on TOS. Never an explosion. Hell, I’ve seen Wesley and Geordie brush their hands on the inside of the Engine after power was turned off in order to do maintenance.

Safe to say the Enterprise must have Engines on and working for their to be ANY anti-matter available for a matter-Antimatter reaction to occur.

Antimatter has to be accessed through an Antimatter Engine. Consider

167. TrekMadeMeWonder - April 15, 2013

That was a bad example, MJ. Not my fault.

168. MJ - April 15, 2013

OK. Dude, I actually was quantitatively proving your point for you that even under the nearly impossible case of no drag, it would still not be an extinction-level event.

169. TrekMadeMeWonder - April 15, 2013

And look… No burn marks!!!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Genesis_crash_site_scenery.jpg

Yeah, I’m flat out wrong.

170. TrekMadeMeWonder - April 15, 2013

I appreciate that, MJ. Sincerely.

171. TrekMadeMeWonder - April 15, 2013

Thanks again, MJ.

But I just do not get the hostility over my two cents (from others above).

I thought most Trek fans were smarter than this.

172. Will - April 15, 2013

I hope the Enterprise is destroyed in this movie so that the design team can have a mulligan and make one that doesn’t look doofy.

173. TrekMadeMeWonder - April 15, 2013

What I am really trying to point out is how Hollyweird always exagerates, or even sterotypes, certain science-fiction related action phenomena.

Actually, it reminds me of how we’ve all seen eliptical explosions since Return of the Jedi destroyed the new Death Star. The damned eliptical exposions was in every sci-fi movie since.

Funny though, that is was Star Trek II, a year earlier, that depicted a better in-space explosion with its destruction of the Reliant. There it showed a more realistic circular, or globe-shaped explosion occuring. Points to Trek there. It was’nt as dramatic looking, but it made damned good sense and it did not take me out of the movie.

I really do not want to see this type of poorly rendered, poorly considered, sci-fi science onscreen in the 21st century, again.

Science Fiction must have well thought out, beleivable and logical effects for a production to play out well and realistically onscreen (for me, anyhow).

174. call me wyw - April 15, 2013

its all about alternate times lines:

In an alternate time line Kirk dies in the stolen car from his step father but his brother is an evil captain of the Enterprise, you all fill in the rest…

175. tman - April 15, 2013

Hopefully that isn’t the reliant — nacelles above. Definately look like retrofit nacelles if not overall a retrofit design. Other than the nacelles kind of looks to me like Excelsior though there are other differences so looks like completely new bird.

@John from Cincinatti

In TOS you can find multiple examples where a character is taken out of commission and others in the landing party have to pick up a different role than their core responsibility including hand-hand or phaser combat. You can say the same thing for Kirk and other captains that you say for Uhura.

I think it’s fair to say that this cross-training along with the hand-hand style were hallmark of TOS and I thought a “gentle” way to break stereotypes. I don’t know much about astronauts but I was under the impression they are highly OVERTRAINED to deal with emergency situations and TOS Star Fleet are the future equivalent. That said, it’s Star Trek. I think somewhere before self-pitying Greek gods or the incorporal spirit of Jack the Ripper you just kind of let it roll and enjoy.

176. MJ - April 15, 2013

@173. Agreed. Good points!

177. omegaman - April 15, 2013

Hmm… regarding the pylons holding the nacelles… wouldn’t gravity pull them further apart and down… one of the pylons on the ship (not the E) crashing into the bay appears slightly bent.

Note: During the E’s construction in Iowa she had the firmly supported by scaffolding towers.

178. omegaman - April 15, 2013

177

Should be… had them firmly supported…

179. Jonboc - April 15, 2013

This surfaced a few days ago here, but in a different thread…it might be a good glimpse of the mystery ship. Also, what looks like some some Klingon vessels may be in the background as well as a strange x-wing style starship…maybe Spock’s new home? Legit? I dont know, but the context of the poster and where it is being used, leads me to believe it may be promotional art for overseas theaters. At least I hope so, I’m really digging all the different starship designs!

http://www.lighthousepauatahanui.co.nz/movie/single/star-trek-into-darkness/

180. Phil - April 15, 2013

@156. This isn’t even a debate. Felix jumped from 120000 feet. The space shuttle at is in low orbit at about 200 miles. When you make s**t up, just label it as such and be done with it.

I’m done. Enjoy the fantasy..

181. Oxford - April 15, 2013

@153
Some of you guys have some odd ideas about how matter and antimatter interact. There is no catalyst needed Google ‘Electron-positron annihilation.

To look purely at Earth impacts and ignore the massive antimatter bomb that is the ships power source have a look at
http://www.purdue.edu/impactearth/

182. ObsessiveStarTrekFan - April 15, 2013

@166. TrekMadeMeWonder

“I am in noway an expert on Antimatter.”

That much is obvious. I am no expert either. However, I may not have studied physics since my university days 30 odd years ago, but to quote Scotty: “ya cannae change the laws of physics”

First, let me remind you that we are referring to a TV show, and not real life. Of course as trekkies/trekkers we will attempt to scientifically explain what happens in our favourite sci fi show ;-)

There IS a cache of antimatter lying around on Enterprise. According to memory alpha, Antimatter pods (specialized forms of magnetic confinement pods) were magnetized self-contained storage units which contained un-reacted antimatter fuel for a starship.

Also, antimatter is confined in a containment field as part of the warp core when it is actually being used as fuel. On how many occasions did you see a Star Trek episode where the warp core had to be ejected, or was in danger of having to be ejected because the containment field was about to fail? This was because a failure of the containment field would have brought the antimatter into uncontrolled contact with matter resulting in a massive annihilation that would have destroyed the ship.

If the warp core is properly shut down, then it’s safe – there is no antimatter there. The antimatter pods protect the rest.

183. Red Dead Ryan - April 15, 2013

Well, if the Enterprise (the new one) crashed straight down into San Francisco, the city would be obliterated, and San Jose and Oakland would face significant amounts destruction as well. But I don’t think half the continent would be gone. I could see at least fifteen million people being killed in an instant.

The Yamato, a Galaxy class ship, lost anti-matter containment during “Contagion” and exploded in a massive blindingly-white flash resulting in total destruction of the ship and a piece bouncing off the Enterprise D. That was a pretty powerful explosion, and if happened in San Franciso, the city would be gone in an instant.

184. Captain James "Get Funky" Kirk - April 15, 2013

Too much of this movie is being given away while at the same time a great deal is being kept under wraps. Is that even possible? From the Countdown comic, I gather that Spock will be taking more risks because of the destruction of Vulcan, The “April” Incident (if it is even mentioned in the film, which I doubt) has been classified by Starfleet, and the Klingons much like their original series counterparts are in the process of conquering planets and expanding the empire. I also gather that Kirk is reckless as hell and this will be the event that matures him. I also think that the ramifications of Neros incursion and the destruction of Vulcan factor heavily into this. I really think that its the spark that ignites this whole thing. Vulcan, a major player in the Federation was wiped out by an angry Romulan from the future. Starfleet I am sure pissed in their pants Right @BobOrci? (If you are on)

The more I think about it, I think that Harrisson is a well trained Star Fleet Intelligence Officer (I hope that its Section 31. That would be soooo cool) who feels like Starfleet did something to him. Some of his lines include talking about the people he has loved and what would you do for your family. Some people have been saying its Robert April. I highly doubt its April and I doubt if April’s name gets a mention in this film. I believe and this is just me that the “prequel” comic was a set up for the themes we will see in the movie. I doubt if its canon.

The first countdown comic was inconsistent as hell with the events of the film. Bob Orci did say in a StarTrek.com interview that the comics are not canon according to official Paramount Policy. I dont know why people tried to act like the first tie in was canon. For example in the movie, Spock says “He called himself Nero”. If he knew him, would he not say, “It was Nero. Someone I had known.” Also Nero would know Spock and Kirks history because they were legendary by that time. In that universe Kirk was the first human to have contact with the Romulans face to face. I am sure that story got passed down in Romulan history books for generations and Spock was part of the unification movement which we never got resolution to (thanks Rick Berman).

Anyway I digress….This film is going to be cool and interesting. I dont want it ruined and will enforce a media blackout until after I see it. I want to find out the secrets of John Harrisson when the rest of the crew does. Not on some bloody blog. I am excited about this movie. I heard that there might be Hot Cat chicks in this movie. If there are @BobOrci is a man after my own heart. If not, then next film there needs to be a hot Cat Chick like the one from the animated series in the next one. Can you imagine Kate Upton as a Catian? (Reflect on that Nerds)

185. TrekMadeMeWonder - April 15, 2013

Not seeing it there, Oxford.

The E’s size and velocity are not even listed on the scale there.
I stick with my real world example…

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Genesis_crash_site_scenery.jpg

Did you see my real world example above?

The Genesis (ironic name here) spacecraft even has a similar saucer shape to that of the Enterprise. Engineers often use minature models to test theories.

If you scale the Genesis crash up in size, in relative proportion the same thing is going to happen.

182. ObsessiveStarTrekFan

Nice post. I did not have that intel as I am really a Star Trek TOS purist.

However, Memory Alpha references this info from Star Trek the Next Generation. As I recall, they were stupid enough to put Captain Picard in a dress! And in their first episode!

But still. A very good post.

186. Captain James "Get Funky" Kirk - April 15, 2013

By the way KUDOS to the Star Trek writers for developing Uhura in this new Trek. I always felt like she did not get the love she deserved in the original series and the films. That is my opinion and if you disagree then too bloody bad. I like her a lot. She is strong and it looks like she kicks ass in this film. I like the relationship with Spock. Dude barely got any if any at all in the original series. Next Gen did mention that Sareks son got married. Anyway I digress, I think its cool that Uhura has been more than the “Hailing Frequencies Open” chick. Thats just me. Zoe is beautiful and really smart. She has some “Leia” tendencies and I think thats cool. This is not a knock on the great Nichell Nichols who I love deeply.

I understand that in the era Trek was produced you could not have a Black woman at the forefront of the series too much. That is the damn elephant in the room. I hate to say it but its true. She did have some moments but her character deserved a hell of a lot more than they gave her. I like that @BobOrci and the boys see that.

187. Rikardus - April 16, 2013

Im surprised nobody has brought up Harrison’s physical properties in this discussion… we know he is “an agent” but how is he so strong and smart, could he be an augment, or could that ship be the valiant(or similar high speed ship capable of reaching the barrier), is john Harrison superpowered like Garry Mitchel or? im still really confused, present your theories!

188. The Sinfonian - April 16, 2013

@186. Amen. I think also about Mirror, Mirror, where Uhura was tough as nails, and had to take a lot of risk on the bridge to avoid mirror-Sulu figuring things out.

189. Son of Jello - April 16, 2013

141 Kaaaaaahhhn!!!!!
Acording to the TNG episode “parallels” there are quite a few Enterprises.

162 MJ.
Almost….. the largest bomb detonated was the Tsar bomb 57megatons it was dialed down from the original 100mt. There is also a doco called Trinity and beyond: the atomic bomb movie. Narated by William Shatner http://watchdocumentary.org/watch/trinity-and-beyond-the-atomic-bomb-movie-video_2f3870afb.html

190. Phil - April 16, 2013

@185. Come on, man, really?? Estimates still vary on the size of the new Enterprise, but most of what I’ve seen have it at about 2 1/2 times the length of an aircraft carrier, which would put it’s length at about 2600 feet and weight at about 220,000 tons. Your Genesis satellite weighted 1050 pounds. So…how are these similar again???

I’m the first to admit that what passes for sci-fi these days is trash science. At least I can admit it…

191. Kev - April 16, 2013

there are TWO enterprises now? and all this is being explained in a comic most of us arent going to read anyways being average movie goers?

isnt that kind of a bad move and wouldnt it be more logical to say this is one of the ships in the background of the enterprise leaving space station scene?

as it looks closer to this

http://scifanatic.wpengine.netdna-cdn.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/stid-t3-50.jpg

than anything else, and with Alice Playing her well maybe he hijacks the science ship and uses that as a way to pull his plans as maybe its off the grid?

192. TrekMadeMeWonder - April 16, 2013

OK. I scaled up the Genesis to that of the E and rendered it as crashed in San Francisco.

Take a look….

http://s1236.photobucket.com/user/TrekMadeMeWonder/media/Ecrash1.jpg.html#/user/TrekMadeMeWonder/media/Ecrash1.jpg.html?&_suid=13660857912650053131266097271146

Scaled up and without an antimatter catastrophy, I don’t think something as powerful as a crashed spaceship the size of the E would destroy a continent, or even all of San Francisco.

Who the hell would want to crash a Starship, anyhow?

193. Son of Jello - April 16, 2013

Dont forget that the ship crashed into water. Yes it was close to the shorline but the effects from the impact would change how the energy is transfered. An impact on land creates a big hole and throws out debris. But an impact in the water creates a tsumani that will create a huge wave as the shockwave mooves closer to the coast. As far as the reactor going boom I think like todays modern reactors it would be designed to fail and starfleet would have considered the worst case senario. (ship crashing into the planet) in the original design. With the Enterprise being mostly empty space on the inside there would be some absordtion of energy on impact like crumple zones in a car.

But if it was a big compressed lump with no cavitys you would get a more concentrated mass and more energy at impact. A meteorite that is a solid ball will have a different result from a clump of rubble of the same size

194. TrekMadeMeWonder - April 16, 2013

190. Phil

A feather and a hamemr fall at the same rate.

Atmospheric resistance is a constant no matter the size.

The effects are all proportional.

ps.

The above Genesis example does not take into effect damage from siesmic effects, which I am sure would topple and set fire to quite a few of the surrounding skyscrappers.

195. The dude - April 16, 2013

So this is compleatly random to what any of you are talking about, but I am still open to Gary Mitchell (Which I am aware is completely stupid but I live in hope)
Now you fans will be asking me, Why are such an idiot? In the Superbowl TV spot kirk clearly says “who the @#%# are you?”
Ha, would you believe your best friend just killed a ton of people and was launching terrorist attacks if you had to kill him weeks earlier because he possessed godlike powers?
Again, call me stupid; but I am open to the idea.

Even thought all evidence at this point is that its Khan.
Thank you. (Bow)

196. martin - April 16, 2013

Why does it make any sense to think this ship must be named Enterprise?

Also I love the usage of supposed real world physics and how it applies to a ship with warp drives, tractor beams and transporters. Hell in the last movie we took transporters and made them capable of distances over light years onto ships moving at warp.

I think it is mental m4sterbation to be working on these physics calculations.

still fun though

197. TrekMadeMeWonder - April 16, 2013

I’m open to anything at this point and I reserve all judgment till I see this movie. I think we really do not know that much, even with all the trailers.

I hope to be surprised. But I am seeing Iron-man 1st.

BTW if any of you are going to watch an Iron-man trailer. Dont.
Thay are showing WAY too much.

Trek may be doing us a service by holding so many details. The surpirse will be thrilling, I am sure.

I hope for the best.

ps. Sorry for so many posts. I am addicted to TrekMovie tonight!

198. Zotz - April 16, 2013

We’ll all know soon enough, but I see some resemblence to Gabe Köerner’s work in the nacelle struts of the other starship. I saved all of those Enterprise renders he put online prior to ST09, some of which would have been great on the big screen.

199. Son of Jello - April 16, 2013

194 Phil

They fall at the same rate but its the mass of the object that causes the destruction on impact. The example is based on falling in a vacume and not an atmosphere. So when the brick and feather enter the atmosphere they will react differently a hammer will maintain its speed longer that the feather due to being hevier and storing more energy that has to be lost due to friction and heat. A feather with less mass will be caught up by wind and blow around for a while before gently landing on earth.

200. Son of Jello - April 16, 2013

Man these posts are popping out like bunnies.

201. TrakMadeMeWonder - April 16, 2013

YES! Son of Jello!

And in the pics of the E falling and it does indeed look pretty porous.
This would provide for even more atmospheric resistance and drag. Unlike the Genesis saucer shaped craft which probably had even less drag due to its smooth shape.

Look my main point is that the E if falling at a 90 degree angle downward would not be traveling at tens of thousands of miles an hour at impact or anywhere through the atmosphere. Perhaps more like 500 – 600 MPH. There would be no hull catching fire from the amazing speed and air friction. There would just be too much drag from the atmosphere at the lower altitudes, and especially towards ground level to permit the ship to travel at those speeds.

The whole ship would eventually slow from the drag of the atmosphere, and the impact would not be that bad due to the lower speeds, and also mostly crumple factor as you descibed.

202. Cranston - April 16, 2013

Oh, for Pete’s sake, people.

Basic physics here:

http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/flobi.html

If a 220,000 ton object is dropped from a height of 200 miles, *even ignoring drag*, the energy of the impact would be on the order of 69 trillion Joules. This translates to an energy of about a 1/6 of a MT. It would cause local damage (knock a lot of buildings down), but not much else. Of course, this assumes dropping from a dead stop; a ship in LEO (~150 miles) would have an initial velocity of something like 17,000 miles, but it wouldn’t drop straight down — it would enter the atmosphere at a very low angle and spend a lot of time being slowed down by drag. If the ship’s tough enough not to break apart, especially with a high surface-area-to-mass ratio like a saucer-shaped starship, I’d expect it to reach terminal velocity before hitting the ground. Unpleasant for anyone standing directly underneath, but nothing resembling a continent-wide catastrophe.

203. Nano - April 16, 2013

You seem dam sure of yourself that it isn’t the Enterprise when I can clearly see NCC- 170? So I’m to assume you have inside intel

204. Red Dead Ryan - April 16, 2013

#201.

Yes, but while pieces of the Enterprise would peal off as it fell, most of the ship would remain intact at a very high velocity which would result in a massive amount of destruction. I mean, the Enterprise is a huge ship. If it fell straight down out of orbit it wouldn’t stop until it smashed into the ground.

CASE CLOSED.

205. Red Dead Ryan - April 16, 2013

#202.

Look, you forgot to take into account the anti-matter, Einstein. That would increase the explosion by a huge amount and wipe out an entire city.

206. TrekMadeMeWonder - April 16, 2013

I wonder how the Enterprise loses altitude in that scene so easily in the first place.

Would’nt the ship just stay in space for a long time if it lost power?
If I were at the helm, I would be sure to enter a standard orbit so that if there was an emergency that ship would face that silly danger.

But perhaps in this situation the E needs to be in this spot above the Earth.
Perhaps to confront John Harrison in his assault on Star Fleet.
Perhaps Harrison is a a relative of Khan and an Augment himself.
Perhaps Harrison wants to use Genetics to help mankind no matter the cost.
Perhaps Harrison is trying to free the newly collected and still cryo-sleeping Khan and crew during this orbital fight.

I’d place this whole spacebattle scene at halfway through the movie.
Looks exciting!

207. Navy - April 16, 2013

I miss Matt Jefferies Enterprise.

208. TrekMadeMeWonder - April 16, 2013

205 Red Dead Ryan.

I never said the atmosphere would stop the E from falling. Just slow it to about 500 – 600 MPH in an uncontrolled decent/crash.

209. TrekMadeMeWonder - April 16, 2013

202. Cranston

Of course, this assumes dropping from a dead stop; a ship in LEO (~150 miles) would have an initial velocity of something like 17,000 miles.

But It does not look like the E is in a standard orbit. AS it falls the smoke trail in not indicating this great speed. More like a lateral movement of only 10-20 mph If anything it’s almost falling straight down.

So why is the E parked in such an awkward orbit?
See 206

210. Cranston - April 16, 2013

True enough – we won’t know the circumstances of the fall until we see the movie. Then we can start arguing more vociferously!

211. Matt Jefferies Enterprise - April 16, 2013

I miss you too ):

212. TrekMadeMeWonder - April 16, 2013

Nice guys! LOL!

Almost a Wafflebot moment!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZhVeO77ee2I

213. Phil - April 16, 2013

@208. Nonsense – the space shuttle was zipping along at 200 MPH on touchdown, and the previously mentioned Felix Baumgartner exceeded the speed of sound in free fall. Ignore mass, surface area, and Newton then maybe you have a point. Whatever energy that was conserved to get Enterprise in orbit would be released on her return – violently.

Oh, and Newtons first law of motion would keep the wrecked ship in orbit. That’s the first thing you have gotten right all night…..

I’m done, for sure now. Magic Enterprise rules….

214. TrinaInUS - April 16, 2013

I think we’ll see plenty of Bones in the film, and that he & Scotty (at least) will also have posters.

A few thoughts about Uhura.
1) Away Teams: in TOS, the teams varied quite a bit. One thing that never seemed too realistic to me was Capt. Kirk almost always being on the away teams. Am I lacking in knowledge of ship captains and/or semi-military protocol? The captain and second-in-command being away from the ship on dangerous missions, regularly, seems odd… but back to the point, when a team was going to beam down in TOS, Kirk pointed at people, and they went (usually ;) ). Sometimes it seemed rather arbitrary as to who went to the surface.
2) Forty-seven (?) years along, we should all be able to handle a female crew member being a major character, and a capable one. If you’re having issues with that, they’re *your* issues. This isn’t the 1960s. If you know your TOS, Uhura kicked ass in a few episodes there, as well.
3) Gene Roddenberry wanted the TOS crew to be 50% female, and I’m guessing not just ensigns and nurses. He was overruled on that. Perhaps viewers *weren’t* ready to see it, but it’s part of the original vision, and, I think, a good one.
4) Yes, I’ll be disappointed if Uhura isn’t much other than a love interest/girl-who-needs-saving. Same for Carol Marcus.
5) Rant over. ;)

See? The Cumberbatch fan got through a comment without talking about him. Oh, wait … well, almost!

215. TrekMadeMeWonder - April 16, 2013

Phil.

The Space Shuttle landing is a contrlled decent in an gllider shaped spaceship. Its not falling and tumbling straight down.

Once again. The E appears NOT to be in a standard orbit but parked in some form of geostationary orbit above SF.

How the power gets cut and it drops so fast down is beyond me, but it appears to fall straight down in the trailer. Don’t you agree?

216. Cranston - April 16, 2013

Phil – April 16, 2013
@208. Nonsense – the space shuttle was zipping along at 200 MPH on touchdown

I’m not sure what you’re getting at here. The shuttle slows down to 200 mph precisely because of controlled drag. Drag would certainly be a tremendous force on something the shape of this kind of starship.

And yes, the energy of keeping the ship in orbit would be converted to something else during descent and impact. But what I’d argue is that the vast majority of that energy would be converted to heat in atmospheric drag during the descent. I could easily see terminal velocity for something of the Enterprise’s general shape being measured in hundreds of miles per hour (rather than tens of thousands, which is what would make for a tremendously catastrophic impact).

217. Son of Jello - April 16, 2013

Dont forget that nothing is actually in orbit. Everything including the Moon is in a slow curved fall into Earths gravity well. If you slow an object in orbit down it will move closer to the Earth. Thats why speed is important when leaving the Earth. But even than you will come under the influence of another gravity source like the Sun. When a probe goes to say, one of Saturn’s moons its usually a wiggly path that gets the gravity boost and more speed from other planets and uses less fuel. It takes to much energy to go in a straight line anywhere as your always trying to overcome gravity.

218. ME!! - April 16, 2013

1. Too bad they didn’t take a hint from the Starfleet Technical Manual and borrow a little design detail from the Dreadnaught Class (with the third nacelle on the back of the saucer).

2. I hope & pray the Enterprise gets a MAJOR refit after the damage and they FIX the ANNOYING design “flaws” (i.e. nacelles too close together, nacelle fronts too fat, ‘neck’ too far back on the secondary hull, etc).

3. See number 2.

4. See number 2, too.

219. Cranston - April 16, 2013

More numbers (because apparently I don’t need sleep tonight):

If the starship weighed 220,000 tons (a number I pulled out of an earlier post, which I haven’t checked), has a cross-sectional area of ~90,000 square meters (the maximum cross-sectional area of the saucer section if its diameter is 340 meters), and a drag coefficient of 1, then its terminal velocity at sea level would be about 380 mph. I think that’s the high end of what we could expect for something of the E’s shape.

220. TrekMadeMeWonder - April 16, 2013

Just to address how fasf objects move in the upper (thinner) atmosphere as oppossed to the lower (denser) atmosphere and the effects of terminal velocity.

Look here at Felix Baumgardner’s recent space jump statistics.

Felix reached top speed where that atmosphere is very thin. Once he entered lower atmosphere he slowed considerably (and not by parachute).

Under 10,000 feet Felix droped at terminal velocity of only about 120 mph. That’s from a free fall from 39 kilometers! 120 mph is pretty much maximum for free fall objects of any size due to the atmosphere density at lower altitudes.

See his data here…

http://blog.wolfram.com/2012/10/24/falling-faster-than-the-speed-of-sound/

Key chart is halfway down the page…
“This sharply localizes his supersonic travel as the increased drag quickly slows him down.”

http://blog.wolfram.com/data/uploads/2012/10/Speed-Out24x.png

And it looked to me like Felix dropped from about the same height as the Enterprise appeared in the most recent trailer images.

Felix jumping…

http://rack.0.mshcdn.com/media/ZgkyMDEyLzEyLzA5LzU0L2ZlbGl4YmF1bWdhLmhqMy5qcGcKcAl0aHVtYgk5NTB4NTM0IwplCWpwZw/ebfc5dcc/f5c/felix-baumgartner.jpg

Enterprise falling…

http://cdn1.screenrant.com/wp-content/uploads/Enterprise-Crashing-Star-Trek-Into-Darkness.jpg

But I’ll stick with my best argument from above.

Project Genesis.

Now, how Trekkie is that of me?

221. TrekMadeMeWonder - April 16, 2013

219. Cranston

Thank you Cranston. I thought I was buffering at 500 – 600 mph.

I can go to sleep now. Just like Khan! : )

222. Son of Jello - April 16, 2013

217 Son of Jello

The moon is moving away from the earth i got that wrong. I really flushed whatever credability if any down the toilet on that one. Im going to go with objects slowing down getting closer to earth as being probubly wrong to. A double flush. Just ignore the entire post. I am going to go and hang my head in shame in the dumb ass corner for a while.

223. Cranston - April 16, 2013

@Jello

No, you’re right overall — velocity and orbital altitude are linked. If you’re in orbit, slowing down decreases your altitude (i.e. you start to spiral inward) and speeding up increases your altitude (i.e. you start to spiral outward).

224. Phil - April 16, 2013

A 747 weighs 735,000 pounds and stalls at about 140 MPH. At which point it crashes. The starship clocks in a north of 400 million pounds, and at 1/8 sublight is zipping through space at 83 million MPH. This starship is disabled, so it’s floating along at whatever direction and speed it was at when it lost power. Ignore mass and velocity at your own peril. The atmosphere is about 63 miles thick (atmospheric effects are noticed at about 75 miles up). Do the math, that much weight, that fast is planetwide disaster.

Okay, I get it, it’s a movie, and we need the starship to float in like a leaf in the wind. If you want to make the argument that it’s possible, so me one airplane in free fall where drag slowed it down to the point of it experiencing a rough landing. You can’t. The small meteor burns up, the large one wipes out everyone, regardless of if it’s a sphere, or shaped like a starship….

225. Cranston - April 16, 2013

Who says the ship is going 1/8 sublight? Looks like it’s moving very slowly at ~orbital velocity to me. You say “do the math”: okay, then do the math for us.

The meteor comparison is where things fall apart — or at least where your initial assumptions seem to be very different from others. If it’s at a typical orbital velocity or slower, then the numbers work out more or less like I’ve presented them above. But a meteor is moving at much, much higher relative velocities (the Russian meteor last month may have started at ~70,000 mph and slowed to ~40,000 mph by the time it blew up). But the only way you’d be dealing with those kinds of velocities would be if these guys were flying very, very fast toward earth and then slammed into it. Doesn’t look like that to me from the clips.

226. MJ - April 16, 2013

@224. If the Starship was going 1/8 of the speed of light, then you wouldn’t even be able to set it visually in relation to the earth since it would be moving too fast. The ship moves about 20,000 miles per second at that speed, and the earth’s diameter is only 8000 miles.

So what you say here Phil doesn’t really jive with the images we are seeing from the movie.

I think the ship is much more likely moving at a suborbital insertion speed, which would explain the falling to Earth.

227. Cranston - April 16, 2013

And to follow up —
“[show] me one airplane in free fall where drag slowed it down to the point of it experiencing a rough landing.” I’d definitely categorize what’s shown in the trailer as an all-out crash, not a “rough landing.” In fact, I’d say it’s fairly equivalent, proportionally speaking, to a 747 crashing, provided that the 747 was structurally a lot stronger and didn’t break up on impact.

228. MJ - April 16, 2013

@219. Cranston, yep, I just validated your numbers/calculations.

229. TrekMadeMeWonder - April 16, 2013

Oh, I get it. When Cranston says it’s so. Sarc. ; )>

230. Ben Yoris - April 16, 2013

Don’t have the time to read the whole thread but it appears to me at first sight that these are two different ships.

231. MJ - April 16, 2013

@229. Well you gotta admit, “Cranston” sounds like an Engineer; whereas “TrekMadeMeWonder” sounds like an English major. :-)

232. TrekMadeMeWonder - April 16, 2013

Ha!

I started the re-entry discussion here. It was my g-estimate that the E would only fall 500-600 mph, max. And I left so many links and sources.
But, I’m the English major?! : 0

I’m no scientist, although I interact with many, but some props gotta go my way for taking all the heat above.

BTW. It does look to me like the E(?) did regain some control at the last second.

We’ll see. The premiere awaits us.

233. CaptRobau - April 16, 2013

The other ship reminds me of the Excelsior-class

234. THK - April 16, 2013

And now imagine this – the very same ship crashes in the very same place, but after travelling back in time, let’s say 1990s. Imagine the reaction of people of that time :)

235. Kapten Kerk - April 16, 2013

@179 Jonboc
That is an old ship from the Star Trek Online video game. It is the Excalibur class starship (Tier-2 cruiser).
Here is the original Star Trek Online wallpaper:
http://img.wallpaperstock.net:81/star-trek:-online-wallpapers_27038_1920x1200.jpg
It has nothing to do with Star Trek Into Darkness.

236. Jonboc - April 16, 2013

Thanks Kapten!

237. singularity87 - April 16, 2013

There was a notion to have Kirk’s Enterprise and the Enterprise-D do battle when Generations was produced, but they couldn’t find a plot to back it up. Also not sure how they would explain how the Enterprise-D didn’t win out rather quickly.

Perhaps this is a recycling of that idea of two Enterprises in battle. By using a prior Captain that the audience has no loyalties to, it’s possible to make one the bad guy.

Note, this isn’t basing it on previous material like the NX-01, just a concept. And it might have been arrived at entirely independently.

238. frederick - April 16, 2013

Obviously, the ship is in a semi-controlled but emergency descent. Otherwise, it certainly WOULD have burned up and disintegrated during re-entry. If some of it survived, it WOULD have crashed full-speed straight down into the city, taking out half of it. But it is under partial control,, with partial shields, and is being brought in at ant angle, slowly, and trying to ditch in the bay. Someone was working hard to bring it in and crash-LAND it as it fell. It didn’t just FALL.

Think about the similar crash-landing at the start of “Revenge of the Sith.”

239. TrekMadeMeWonder - April 16, 2013

Oh gawd.

Please no Wars-type references here.

240. falcon - April 16, 2013

Here’s my take on the antimatter:

The Star Trek Technical Manual (TNG, not TOS, although there’s probably a similar reference there) says that the antimatter carried aboard starships is held in a series of unbreachable magnetic fields, so that when a ship crashes the antimatter is still recoverable. The guess here is that each “bottle” has its own power generator. That’s not to say that “unbreachable” is really “unbreachable.” Also, when the captain gives the self-destruct order, there are two different levels – “zero zero zero” initiates an explosives-only sequence that drives the ship out of orbit to burn up on re-entry. “Zero zero one” causes the magnetic bottles containing the antimatter to collapse, triggering a M/AM explosion that obliterates the ship.

YMMV, but at least that’s what I remember reading.

241. Adam C - April 16, 2013

damn http://i.imgur.com/AKckoJT.jpg

242. MJ - April 16, 2013

@240. Great info – thanks. Agrees with what I said in my posts @151 and @153.

243. Jack - April 16, 2013

“Since when does the curriculum for communications include phaser proficiency and hand to hand combat?”

Nonsense — you could say the same for navigation, or helm, or engineering. An officer is an officer. And they would have all gone through the same basic academy training.

Although, what was Pike’s line in the last one: “I need someone trained in hand-to-hand combat?” You’d guess that they all were. But maybe some fared better than others.

244. Jeffery Wright - April 16, 2013

Theres no way the 1701 could survive that, they must have heard the fans who point out how ridiculous the ship looks and they’re going to destroy it, hopefully replacing it with a suitable Constitution design, more closely resembling the original and refit.

Hopefully.

245. Jack - April 16, 2013

Sorry 175 — I missed your post, you made my point better than I did.

I remember trying to imagine what academy training would be like, when I was writing Trek stories as a kid — and it seemed logical that they all would have the same basic skills and would have all gone through the starfleet equivalent of basic training/weapons training/survival training/pilot training/tech training/even basic command before specializing. They’re military officers, essentially. And they could be called upon to do many different things on a star-ship in an emergency. And bridge officer training (mentioned in TNG, no?), normally, probably adds more skills. Otherwise you end up with a clueless Troi commanding the ship in an emergency.

All this Uhura can’t fight or shoot bs seems pretty sexist to me.

246. TrekMadeMeWonder - April 16, 2013

244. Jeffery Wright

Not going to happen.

241. Adam C

Great pic!
I have not seen the new trailer. Is that image from the new trailer?

Looks like the future of Trek to me.
Again, nice shot. Thank you for posting!
AWESOME!!!! The fragile and pretty looking E is squaring off against the big guys!

247. frederick - April 16, 2013

Re: #173 and the elliptical explosion… ST 6 did it first in 1991 with the destruction of the moon of Praxis… THEN it showed up in the 1997 re-master of Star Wars Ep 4. It was never there before. I think I am right in my timeline.

248. frederick - April 16, 2013

Re: my last post… my error, you were referring to the Return of the Jedi. But it still holds true, the so-called “Praxis Effect” was only added to Star Wars in the re-mastered editions, not the originals, after ST 6.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_changes_in_Star_Wars_re-releases

249. frederick - April 16, 2013

And here. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Praxis_effect

250. Phil - April 16, 2013

Well, almost nothing about the effects shown has been right so far, but hey, it looks cool.

Space fantasy, space opera. Enjoy the show….

251. Anthony Pascale - April 16, 2013

Now that new trailer and reports from CinemaCon are out. Anyone else not see the clip shows two ships and not just one?

252. MJ - April 16, 2013

@243 “Nonsense — you could say the same for navigation, or helm, or engineering. An officer is an officer. And they would have all gone through the same basic academy training.”

Yes — I mean this should be obvious to anyone who understands even the basics about military training. And all officers would get training in both combat and command.

253. Son of Jello - April 17, 2013

#223 Cranston

Thanks for that Im a bit old school when it comes to facts and information I try to keep them in my head and not on the internet. I feel a bit less stoopid now.

254. Leo R. - April 17, 2013

I don’t know what this film is about but here is what I think and its my $0.02 worth.

Harrison is a code name for something, it could be Khan and remember this is an alternate universe.

I don’t know what the crime is mentioned by Harrison that Starfleet committed but what I do want to know is, what planet Harrison is standing on that’s dark and the entire surface is in ruin? We also know Harrison is in the Enterprise Brig, so somehow Harrison escapes? Carol Marcus ends up on that new big ship so its plausible to suggest either Marcus is on that ship as a crew member or she’s been kidnapped by Harrison; I think its the latter. There is also that torpedo-like device we saw a still of being lifted in mid-air with Carol Marcus below. I think its the Genesis Device or something similar. Remember, alternate universe.

I think the new big ship opposite the Enterprise is probably the Dreadnaught, although, it might be the Excelsior. Although there is a still of Harrison attacking a crew member on this ship and the guy is wearing a different uniform. It is obviously Federation. If Marcus is Starfleet Science then why would this other ship have a different style of uniform?

255. Xplodin_Nacelle - April 17, 2013

I’m thinking Harrison just wreaks havoc on Earth’s surface, & up in Earth’s orbit

256. Unwanted - April 17, 2013

@243. Nope it was “advanced hand to hand combat”, implying a specialized level of proficiency beyond the standard training.

257. the startrekker - April 19, 2013

What if, just what if,….
There are two Enterprises. Not the new dreadnought class ship. What if a replica of Kirks Enterprise was built in secret, to stage and incident and start a war with the Klingons, and this is the ship we keep seeing falling helplessly in Earth’s atmosphere. Can’t believe they will actually destroy the Enterprise on it’s second outing, moviewise.

258. the startrekker - April 19, 2013

Suppose it would just be easier to steal the Enterprise, or another ship for that matter, but, that wouldn’t protect the conspiracy. While Starfleet desperately tries to deny, the Klingons keep showing evidence of replica Enterprise doing whatever. Then the replica Enterprise shows up at the final battle too, on the bad guys side, only to be destroyed.

259. GG - April 21, 2013

Ok, I haven’t read the Countdown comics, so I’m confused. Let’s talk about “April’s Enterprise” for a minute. Let’s break it down..

* BEFORE Nero (in the original timeline), April’s Enterprise would have been the SAME Enterprise as Pike’s and Kirk/Shanter’s, right? (NCC-1701). One ship.

* But, in the NEW timeline, people are suggesting that new Kirk/Pine inherited a newer/”different” Enterprise than the original? So, is April’s Enterprise registry number different? They can’t both have the same number (1701). Because, new Kirk’s/Pine’s Enterprise should have to be 1701-A.

People are implying that April’s Enterprise (new timeline) might be the “original”, and that Kirk got a “different” Enterprise. But, Kirk’s is 1701. Can someone clarify for me?

260. Tim - April 23, 2013

Hate to be a bubble burster but can someone explain to me why we’re all supposed to accept that this is an alternate timeline and not a replacement?
When the borg assimilated Earth in First Contact, the timeline was changed and it had to be fixed. When Nero goes back in time, he somehow jumped into a parallel universe and changed that one instead with no effect on the timeline we are used to? It makes me care about these characters, the ship and Earth even less.
It’s more likely that fans have to accept that these movies invalidate the previous timeline. 40 years, down the drain.
And did he change it that much that Kirk and Chekov are now in the academy together despite the massive difference in age/graduation in the original timeline.
Too many holes, JJ. Too many…

TrekMovie.com is represented by Gorilla Nation. Please contact Gorilla Nation for ad rates, packages and general advertising information.