Star Trek XI Plot Holes

posted on March 7th, 2010, 11:04 pm

I don't see how it contradicts canon, as there (as far as I'm aware) is nothing in canon that says ships weren't built on Earth. Was it ever shown, not until the new movie, but that doesn't mean it didn't occur or that it's not canon.

Well, it's not canon due to the fact that starfleet ships usually can't fly in atmospheres.

[Phatome]

posted on March 7th, 2010, 11:05 pm

Last edited by Phatome on March 7th, 2010, 11:08 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Several famous Federation starships were built on Mars' surface at Utopia Planitia Shipyards


Utopia Planitia - Memory Alpha, the Star Trek Wiki

posted on March 7th, 2010, 11:15 pm

Well, it's not canon due to the fact that starfleet ships usually can't fly in atmospheres.

Most Starfleet vessels are shown to have landing gear, implying a capability to fly and land in an atmosphere.

[Xanto]

posted on March 7th, 2010, 11:18 pm

Last edited by Xanto on March 7th, 2010, 11:20 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Well, it's not canon due to the fact that starfleet ships usually can't fly in atmospheres.

Well I don't know for sure, but I have read many people say that ships have been shown to have the ability to land. So if that's true we can assume, they can take off as-well.

Also Roddenberry himself wanted to originally land the ships, you can read that here at number 5.

posted on March 7th, 2010, 11:24 pm

Landing Gear and landing was in the drawing boards and original intentions, but they aren't canon, the show is.

[Xanto]

posted on March 7th, 2010, 11:27 pm

Last edited by Xanto on March 7th, 2010, 11:43 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Landing Gear and landing was in the drawing boards and original intentions, but they aren't canon, the show is.

But like I have said it's an alternate time-line where things have changed, so using "canon" to justify something is nearly impossible. And Star Trek always adds something if it needs to, in order to complete the story. How is this any different?

It's "alternate canon"...

posted on March 8th, 2010, 1:38 am

Several famous Federation starships were built on Mars' surface at Utopia Planitia Shipyards


Utopia Planitia - Memory Alpha, the Star Trek Wiki

Yep. But does Mars have an atmosphere in ST?
We don't know if the colonies are in buildings only or if it got terraforming, and that's a point

posted on March 8th, 2010, 1:43 am

Well, it's not canon due to the fact that starfleet ships usually can't fly in atmospheres.

I would like too know were you are getting that info from? Was this ever said during the tv show, if so what episode... because I have never heard this. 

posted on March 8th, 2010, 1:48 am

I would like too know were you are getting that info from? Was this ever said during the tv show, if so what episode... because I have never heard this. 

Voyager (or more general Intrepid class) is the ship that was seen to can manouver, land and take off in atmospheres at all.
"Landing gear" on other fed ships is more of something I never heard of in the shows actually. Even if some technical backstage-information tells there were some planned or installed, I tend to think that Galaxy-class and Constitution were no candidates for having them.

posted on March 8th, 2010, 2:00 am

Voyager (or more general Intrepid class) is the ship that was seen to can manouver, land and take off in atmospheres at all.
"Landing gear" on other fed ships is more of something I never heard of in the shows actually. Even if some technical backstage-information tells there were some planned or installed, I tend to think that Galaxy-class and Constitution were no candidates for having them.

According to Memory Alpha, the Intrepid-class starship was the only one shown to have landing gear, but it's possible for other ships to have this as-well.

So we don't really know what ships had landing gear, just cause you don't think the Constitution would have them, doesn't mean it didn't and we can conclude that StarTrek.com has stated there are ship yards on Earth, according to the link I posted early. My point was to prove that it's possible for ships to be built on Earth and to be able to land and take off. From these two things, I believe I have done that.

So I think it's perfectly okay to show the Enterprise being built on Earth, and that the alternate time-line could explain the difference from "canon". So it's not a plot-hole.

posted on March 8th, 2010, 2:13 am

Did I personally say it's a plot-hole? 

I say it looks totally dumb to build a non-aerodynamic shaped ship on a planet-surface just to have a half-braindead alternate Kirk looking at it and think over his life.

posted on March 8th, 2010, 2:16 am

Did I personally say it's a plot-hole? 

I say it looks totally dumb to build a non-aerodynamic shaped ship on a planet-surface just to have a half-braindead alternate Kirk looking at it and think over his life.

Not really saying YOU did personally, just that this thread is about plot-holes, and that it was determined by some as a plot-hole. 

posted on March 8th, 2010, 2:46 am

Yep. But does Mars have an atmosphere in ST?
We don't know if the colonies are in buildings only or if it got terraforming, and that's a point

Mars has an atmosphere now and it appears to have had the same atmospheric pressure in the Enterprise series Terra Prime episodes.


The surface based facilities of the Utopia Planitia Fleet Yards in 2370

posted on March 8th, 2010, 5:59 am

That's quite funny. You all are trying to prove that starships were not and cannot be built on planets to support your opinion that the scenes showing the Enterprise being built on Earth are stupid or whatever.
What the funny thing is you might ask...
Well, Star Trek itself and whatever you might consider as canon Star Trek has nothing to do with ST XI and that's why ST XI simply doesn't care!
You can come up with whatever ship / episode / book / website you like. It simply doesn't matter and doesn't prove anything.
The only thing ST XI shares with Star Trek is its name.
Is this so hard to understand?

posted on March 8th, 2010, 6:08 am

So say we all!

It's arguments like these that really impress the AGU.