A little short for a starship, isn’t he?

  • SpaceNoodle@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    61
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Have you seen container ships? They’re perpective-bendingly massive. 400m is a quarter of a mile.

  • lolcatnip@reddthat.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    45
    ·
    1 year ago

    Going by the caption, it’s the container ship they had a hard time visualizing. Seems weird because I’ve seen container ships IRL but never a starship.

  • ZombiFrancis@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    37
    ·
    1 year ago

    I used to work at a port and would see those ships out at sea. They look like they are just offshore.

    Then you see the fishing boats go out and all but disappear against the massive backdrop. You realize they’re many many miles out.

  • SeaJ@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    23
    ·
    1 year ago

    Container ships are fucking massive. The Enterprise only held like 1000 people which is only a small portion of a basketball arena.

  • Telodzrum@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    21
    ·
    1 year ago

    Sci-fi has issue with scale a lot of the time. Star Trek is no exception. Population numbers and scale of ships is often really bad.

    • teft@startrek.website
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      1 year ago

      Look at Deep Space 9 and literally anytime a starship is near it. The scale goes way out of whack.

      • bionicjoey@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        In the DS9 title credits you can see engineers repairing the outside of one of the pylons on a spacewalk and the scale feels really wrong

    • Stamets@startrek.websiteOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      1 year ago

      Oh agreed but I think there’s one major thing which is what really fucks up how your perceive it. There’s nothing to compare it to.

      When we see the ship it’s typically just by itself flying through space where there’s no comparison. Or it happens across a ship but same problem as the Enterprise so no reliable comparison. Orbiting a planet, surveying an asteroid, being yanked into a Pulsar, sitting in front of a Borg cube… All of these huge events have literally nothing reliable that humans are familiar with to compare it to. The closest you can say are the windows but the windows are such strange sizes for what we’re used to that it doesn’t help much.

      Honestly the biggest ‘events’ that I can think of in Trek media that demonstrate the size of the ship are usually ones where the ship ends up on a planet. Generations crash land, Into Darkness crashland, Voyagers Blue Alert sequences, Discoverys crash land, etc. The only other one I can think of is from Picard Season 3. The Borg cube in Jupiters eye. That thing is fucking massive and the cube took up an enormous amount of space in it. That really shook the hell out of me in seeing how big that vessel was.

    • brianorca@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      Then how about this one: a large container ship carries 24,000 TEU which is about 12,000 40 foot containers.

  • Wilzax@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    19
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Per kilogram-meter of cargo transported, container ships actually have some of the lowest emissions of any form of transportation!*

    Other than electric vehicles that were charged by zero-emission sources of electricity

    • Iceblade@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      I’d wager that just accounting for emissions in the production of said electric vehicle will make it entirely unable to compete with container ships. Boats are crazy efficient.

    • aeronmelon@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      17
      ·
      1 year ago

      Even crazier, the Galaxy-class has the capacity to evacuate an additional 10,000+ humanoids.

      When you watch videos like this, you realize that 1,000 is not that much against the actual size of the ship. The entire crew can comfortably gather in the main shuttlebay at the same time.

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lwx5uB0pyhQ

      • The Liver@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        1 year ago

        Uhm what are you guys talking about?? I don’t quite understand…

  • ParsnipWitch@feddit.de
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    17
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    This made me realise you could probably fit an entire small town including all it’s drama on a container ship.

  • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    16
    ·
    1 year ago

    I remember many years ago seeing a size comparison between an aircraft carrier and the TOS Enterprise. The aircraft carrier was bigger. I didn’t even know how to process that because of how big the Enterprise seemed to me.

    • Ryumast3r@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      13
      ·
      1 year ago

      305m is 1000 feet. The USS ENTERPRISE was 342m or 1,123 feet.

      A modern day FORD class carrier is 1092 ft or 333m.

      For personnel comparison, ENTERPRISE held ~5000 people and a FORD class has between 4-5000 people.

      The fact that NCC-1701 only had like 1000 people is…a big difference.

      • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        1 year ago

        I can understand that on a mathematical level, but on a more emotional one, it’s hard to process. Just like I know that the speed of light is 186,000 mps, but I can’t really fathom how fast that actually is.

        • BluesF@feddit.uk
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          Well the speed of light is actually faster than you can reasonably comprehend… you can’t see or experience the travel time of something going that fast. 300m is not unreasonable to understand once you’ve experienced it though - that’s a big boat, but you can see one and get a sense of the scale.

  • AndyLikesCandy@reddthat.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    13
    ·
    1 year ago

    I know we only ever see a handful of rooms, that’s fine, but with over 100 crew they always all have personal quarters that are probably the square footage of 3/4’ish containers.

    150m in diameter is one way to think about it. But then it’s also 8 containers long, or 25 containers circumference at the largest point down to no more than a few in circumference at the bridge.

    You know, that seems tiny, it’s like there’s no volume left for the hardware that needs to be between every room and all over the hull

  • Nurgle@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    10
    ·
    1 year ago

    More context, Empire State Building is 380m without the spire, 443m with spire and antenna.