Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

scaling SG-Universe's ships with real life ships

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    #16
    yes your right, in reality the deadalus class should have been the same size as the toilets, with the oniel dwarfing everything, its by far the largest ship ever seen in stargate, 20X the size of a hatak, which makes it almost 20miles long and about 9miles high.
    BUt in this shot all three ship classes were dwarfed by the orii ships, all appearing alkesh size...a stupendous screwup in scalling. As i have said the oneil should have been able to fit the entire allied fleet between it 'legs' + the super gate and the enemy with no trouble atall yet it looked as big as the deadalus!
    sigpic
    You are the fifth race, your role is clear, if there is any hope in preserving the future it lies with you and your people ~ 8years for those words
    Stargate : Genesis |
    Original Starship DesignThread
    Sanctuary for all | http://virtualfleet.vze.com/
    11000! green me




    Comment


      #17
      Originally posted by immhotep
      yes your right, in reality the deadalus class should have been the same size as the toilets, with the oniel dwarfing everything, its by far the largest ship ever seen in stargate, 20X the size of a hatak, which makes it almost 20miles long and about 9miles high.
      By your estimations, it'd be 32.2 kilometers long, and 14 kilometers high, roughly 15 times larger than what it should be.

      The O'Neill is only slightly larger than a Bilskirnir class ship, which have been scaled at about 1750 meters in length. That means that the O'Neill class ships are nearing 2 kilometers, but are far smaller than you assumed.
      Jarnin's Law of StarGate:

      1. As a StarGate discussion grows longer, the probability of someone mentioning the Furlings approaches one.

      Comment


        #18
        This is a quite interesting post from bruce about Hive ship sizes:

        http://board.thescifiworld.net/viewt...858f033d49bfc4

        11km long ...

        Comment


          #19
          Uh, Cronos never landed a Ha'tak in that episode. There was a pyramid on the planet with rings, which SG-1 and the robot SG-1 used to transport into orbit, where Cronos' Ha'tak was.
          ...Sorry Jarnin, he does land the Ha'tak, it's the vesy last thing you see, right at the end as it fades to the credits!

          Was the "Pyramid" definatly visable as a pyramid? Maybe the Ha'tak landed on a tetrahedron?
          www.AlexReekie.com

          Comment


            #20
            Originally posted by Auralis
            This is a quite interesting post from bruce about Hive ship sizes:

            http://board.thescifiworld.net/viewt...858f033d49bfc4

            11km long ...
            If Wraith hive ships are over 11km, than just how big are the BC/DSC-304s?

            Or if you wanna dig a lil deeper... they said that it was ORIGINALLY, 11km long. Meaning that they must've scaled it down, if the 304s are about 450m long.
            http://www.myspace.com/peoples_general
            http://www.brickshelf.com/cgi-bin/ga...PeoplesGeneral

            Comment


              #21
              Originally posted by Auralis
              This is a quite interesting post from bruce about Hive ship sizes:

              http://board.thescifiworld.net/viewt...858f033d49bfc4

              11km long ...
              That guy is smoking crack. He may have originally scaled them to be that long, but there's no way they've remained that scale throughout the series.

              In fact, if you watch Allies when they're talking about flying the Daedalus so close to a hive ship that their signatures will merge, they show a very cool graphic showing the size differences between the Daedalus and a Hive; If the Hive in that shot is supposed to be 11+ km long, then the Daedalus should be nearly a kilometer in length, which it can't possibly be.

              Originally posted by Lex Reekie
              ...Sorry Jarnin, he does land the Ha'tak, it's the vesy last thing you see, right at the end as it fades to the credits!
              Yes, you're right. I must have missed that part.

              Originally posted by Lex Reekie
              Was the "Pyramid" definatly visable as a pyramid? Maybe the Ha'tak landed on a tetrahedron?
              Yes, it was definately a square pyramid; tetrahedrons don't have 90 degree angles at the base; they have 60 degree angles. It looks like the Ha'tak in that shot is also a square-pyramid...

              If that Ha'tak had landed on a pyramid, it would be setting its mass on an unstable landing platform, since it'd be like trying to fit a square peg in a triangular hole; you'd have stress points on two of the Ha'taks sides, and it's center of mass would be way off the center of the pyramid it landed on. That would either cause the stone pyramid to crumble under the weight, or it' would damage the Ha'tak (with the crumbling being the most likely to happen).

              If you look at the building materials used in the pyramids at Giza, they're barely able to sustain their own weight, let alone anything you might want to pile on top of it. There are hundreds of "failed" pyramids that crumbed because they tried to build them too tall out of materials that couldn't bear the weight. In fact, there is one that has 9 faces; they started building it, then halfway though construction they figured out that it was too steep, so they changed the angle so it wouldn't crumble.

              Now, the Goa'uld might be able to do some magic with inertial dampeners to lessen their ships mass, thereby not crushing the landing pad, but that doesn't reduce the stress from the ships center of gravity being off. If you further reduce the ships mass to avoid damaging the ship, then what's the point of landing on a pyramid at all? You end up expending energy (to reduce your ships mass) to the point where you're wasting energy. You'd save energy by landing on flat ground, or by staying in orbit and using the rings to beam down.

              Here's the real answer to why ships change their look or size from episode to episode, and from season to season from:http://board.thescifiworld.net/viewtopic.php?t=174
              Originally posted by Bruce Woloshyn
              Okay . . . some more details. Something I haven't mentioned on this forum yet, is although Rainmaker Animation & Visual Effects was the main contractor (doing almost every single shot) in season 1 for Stargate: Atlantis, this is no longer the case. There are now several visual effects vendors working on the series (much like Stargate SG-1 has always done).

              Hence, there is more than one company building models of the city. So, although each model version at Rainmaker is consistent (e.g. you can't tell which of our models we are using), there would be some differences between our model (the master original) and any copy someone else may have built.
              So there you have it; Rainmaker doesn't have the resources to do all the CGI work for SG-1 and Atlantis, so they subcontract alot of it out to other companies.

              I'd bet my bottom dollar that the CGI sequences shown at the end of Camelot were rendered by a sub contractor, which would explain why the shots were so shoddy and scaled wrong.
              Jarnin's Law of StarGate:

              1. As a StarGate discussion grows longer, the probability of someone mentioning the Furlings approaches one.

              Comment


                #22
                scaling in the sg series is inposebol those scens ar to look cool and not to be
                rael
                its sifi
                sorry cant spell

                Comment


                  #23
                  Originally posted by Jarnin
                  Uh, Cronos never landed a Ha'tak in that episode. There was a pyramid on the planet with rings, which SG-1 and the robot SG-1 used to transport into orbit, where Cronos' Ha'tak was.



                  A Ha'taks size has been inconsistent since they introduced them in season 1. The CGI artists scale the ships differently depending on the shots; for example, if they need to show a battle between an Earth ship and a Ha'tak, the Ha'tak looks massive. If they want to show a battle between a Ha'tak and the Ori, the Ha'tak is scaled down to make the Ori ship look more menacing.

                  They established the size of the supergate in Beachhead at 300-400 meters in diameter. Each segment of the supergate was supposed to be about 10 meters in length. This allowed the Ori to send these segments through our stargates from their home galaxy, and the supergate would assemble itself in orbit.

                  In Camelot the segment of the supergate Carter was on was at least 100 meters in length by itself, which would make the gate something like 3000-4000 meters in diameter; this is where continuity falls apart.

                  Why would the second supergate be ten times bigger than the first? And how could the segments be 100+ meters in length and still fit through a Stargate in this galaxy?

                  If you ignore those questions and accept that this supergate is actually 10 times bigger than the first, the scaling of the Ha'tak and O'Neill ships is accurate; the problem is that the Daedalus ships are too big now. If the Odyssey and Korolev were scaled correctly in that sequence, they'd barely be visible during the fight.

                  So it all boils down to the size of the supergate; if they had followed continuity, it would have been 300-400 meters in diameters, and the Ha'tak and O'Neill class ships would be massive compared to it and the Ori ships.
                  Personally, I think this would have been a better approach to the battle, since it would make the Ori ships look small and weak initially, but when they open up with the Ori mojo beams, which rip the good guys to shreds.

                  In all the ship scaling threads and personal beliefs of everyone on the board, this has got to be one the best logical, rational, well thought-out post on conclusions I have seen to date. Most sci-fi shows have screwed up scaling ships to allow fitting them into shots and adding drama and so-forth. Anyone who has seen a Romulan Warbird face off against the Galaxy Class Enterprise or the Defiant on DS-9 and then in comparison to the Sovereign Class Enterprise in ST:8 knows this. Stargate is no different. You'll never have proper scaling in these shows, not even B5. Maybe BSG, but I'm sure people could probably pick out scaling inaccuracies even on that show just like the old school BSG where the size of the Galactica has still been debated even to this day.

                  Comment


                    #24
                    I deffinitely remember seeing the scaling problems in those shows. Especially in Star Trek. Guess it's just one of those things....

                    A very wise man once said...."Reality is an illusion created by a lack of Alcohol."

                    Comment


                      #25
                      Those kind of details never have as much put into them as they should. They always do it to make one thing look "scarier" than another. Early on the Asgard ships dwarfed everything to make them look menacing to the Goa'uld. The Goa'uld dwarfed everything we ever saw except the Asgard in order to make the Goa'uld look scary. Now the Ori dwarf everything in order to make them look Scary. If they stuck with detail and all that the Oneills probably would have been close to the Ori ships in size. And it probably would have blown away an ori ship or two as well. Oh well.
                      www.theamericanright.com

                      A website by the people, for the people.

                      Comment


                        #26
                        Originally posted by Ravroz
                        I deffinitely remember seeing the scaling problems in those shows. Especially in Star Trek. Guess it's just one of those things....
                        Since Camelot has aired, there have been a couple interviews with the shows creators. This one in particular explains that the final battle in Camelot was done by the shows own SFX team.
                        What does this mean? It means that the show now has it's own CGI team to build whatever scenes the director deems necessary. Who directed Camelot? Robert C. Cooper. So Coop ok'd a CGI sequence that had models that were scaled wrong.
                        It's not a big deal really since only die hard fans of the technical aspects of the show would notice such things. It's just that I'd have expected a show runner to follow continuity as best as they could.

                        If you guys are looking for models "properly scaled", you'll have to wait for the Stargate: Worlds MMORPG to come out next fall/winter. Everything in that game is to be considered "canon", which means the models they build for the game will be the "correct" size, regardless of what the shows do.
                        Jarnin's Law of StarGate:

                        1. As a StarGate discussion grows longer, the probability of someone mentioning the Furlings approaches one.

                        Comment


                          #27
                          Hiveships were originally supposed to be 11 km in length? That'd have made them larger than the original stated length of the Executor-class Super Star Destroyers, at least until that got retconned recently and their official length was changed to approximately 19 km, or roughly Manhattan-sized.

                          Comment


                            #28
                            Originally posted by zpm!! View Post
                            size comparsion can only be done, by, angle, geometry, algebra, math. not based on a picture alone.
                            Exactually

                            Comment

                            Working...
                            X