How Las Vegas Missed Out on a Life-Sized Starship Enterprise 240
T-Kir writes "Apparently 20 years ago, instead of the Fremont Experience, downtown Las Vegas was actually close to building a life sized version of the refit USS Enterprise, and would have — had it not been for the then studio chairman Stanley Jaffe nixing it at the final meeting. The project had support from Paramount licensing and then-CEO Sherry Lansing, the Las Vegas Mayor, and the downtown redevelopment committee, but not opinion of Mr Jaffe: 'I don't want to be the guy that approved this and then it's a flop and sitting out there in Vegas forever.' As a Trek fan, I'm saddened that this never got built because I feel that this would've appealed to a much wider audience than science fiction fans. Props to io9 for picking this story up."
RAGE! (Score:5, Funny)
KAHN!!!
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
> Which Kahn? Bob Kahn?
The late great Madeline.
WHICH ONE?! (Score:2)
Enterprise A? Or Enterprise D?
The images from the site aren't showing up. :(
Re:WHICH ONE?! (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
IIRC the concept of a 10 Forward lounge was an idea leftover from the aborted Star Trek Phase II TV series.
Re:WHICH ONE?! (Score:4, Informative)
1701-D would have been huge, perhaps too large to be feasible, the !701-A was 289 M long, 72 M high and 127 meters wide which would make it a lot more feasible
Re:WHICH ONE?! (Score:5, Insightful)
1701-D would have been huge, perhaps too large to be feasible, the !701-A was 289 M long, 72 M high and 127 meters wide which would make it a lot more feasible
" Feasible" isn't a word that comes immediately to mind as a limiting convept while walking around in Vegas.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Las Vegas made me realize that New York City is tastefully understated.
Re: (Score:2)
Those dimensions don't tally with the movies.
Re:WHICH ONE?! (Score:5, Informative)
This is a point worth emphasising. The actual ships in Star Trek really are on an space age scale. The ship supposed to be over 1km long.
Rather than quote statistics, I'll just link to a Minecraft Megaproject video [youtube.com] of a virtual 1:1 scale model of the ship (to 1m resolution). It's a lot bigger than the impression given by the Paramounts sets in the show. Seeing shuttle-bay 1 was an experience in itself, and illustrative of just how infeasible building such an object would really be.
Re:WHICH ONE?! (Score:5, Informative)
According to a page I found on the Internet, "D" is 642.5m long. But point taken, still big though. I don't know if that would have been profitable to build well.
The quote in the article:
"I don't want to be the guy that approved this and then it's a flop and sitting out there in Vegas forever."
Nothing in Vegas stays forever. It's usually demolished to make way for the next thing, it doesn't matter if the building is steeped in history, if it's not profitable enough, it goes.
Re:WHICH ONE?! (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:3)
Sadly, this one is schedule for decommissioning. The "Big E" may live on as another ship, but this one is going to be turned into scrap metal and sold to China (most likely).
Re:WHICH ONE?! (Score:4, Interesting)
Can't really see the issue they had. Everything in Vegas gets blown up after a decade or so. It would have paid for itself in that time -- especially if it looked as good as it does in the pics, and did inside too.
If they installed working phasers they could have taken a lot of work out of demolishing casinos!
Re: (Score:2)
it was the Enterprise A. And it looked great in the pics, it has to be said. Can't really see the issue they had.
I can picture the issue http://thepigskindoctors.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/05/nerds.jpg [thepigskindoctors.com]
Re:WHICH ONE?! (Score:4, Insightful)
Enterprise NCC 1701-A and NCC-1701 are different ships. But they are the same design and look exactly the same on the outside. But have very different bridges. The 1701-A is filled with the backlight touch panels. NCC 1701 was destroyed in STIII. I vote for Enterprise 1701-A, since I thought it had the coolest looking interiors and exteriors, and was featured in Star Trek VI ( as well as ST-V, but that should not reflect badly on the ship, it was a fine vessel). If the Las Vegas 1701-A is staffed with a crew, have them wear the Star Trek II-VI uniform style which I liked better than any other style used on the entire series. It was very distinctive but not too cheesy.
Re: (Score:2)
Did I miss a book? Where did NCC1701 go from active service (TMP, newly refit) to training cruiser (TWOK)?
Re: (Score:2)
This would have been in LasVegas. All females would have worn the mini-skirts from TOS.
Re: (Score:2)
Why is this downvoted? I totally agree, and I'm guessing that's what would sell the most!
Re:WHICH ONE?! (Score:5, Funny)
They're building a cloaked ship, whaddya expect?
Re: (Score:3)
TFS says "refit Enterprise". So that'd be the one from TMP (1979). No bloody A, B, C or D. As Scotty once said (TNG: "Relics". God I'm a nerd).
Re: (Score:3)
Enterprise 1701 LV XXX
Beam aboard for Baccarat at the captains helm.
Replicator buffet 24/7.
Non stop Holo-brothel.
Shooting craps with the boys in engineering.
Vulcan security guards.
Romulan Cocktails......
We are talking about Vegas
Really just as well (Score:5, Insightful)
While it sounds awesome, the guy who cancelled it is right on the money - it would have just sat there for some time languisingh after the novelty wore off for people.
Vegas already had the coolest Star Trek exhibit/show I've ever seen (Qwark's bar and two really well done shows). That is gone now. If those great shows could not survive, no way the Enterprise would have lasted.
Re:Really just as well (Score:5, Insightful)
Just like the novelty of the Eifel Tower, Liberty Statue, Tower of Pisa, etc. have worn off?
They are timeless and universal (Score:4, Insightful)
I would argue that each of those are more timeless and universal than the Enterprise would have been.
All of them except for the Pisa tower are far larger than the Enterprise would have been.
You know that the Enterprise would not have been built nearly as well as any of those things.
Also ALL of the things you list are nationally beloved monuments to the respective countries they are in, meaning there is money from a whole nation to take care of each of those national treasures. Can you honestly say with a straight face that a crumbling Enterprise in Vegas would draw the nation in to repair it as was done with the Statue of Liberty?
I mean, if you're going to go there then the parallel is that it would have been repaired by now, but you wouldn't be able to go to the bridge anymore. Well what the hell good is THAT???
Re:They are timeless and universal (Score:5, Interesting)
The other guy was probably talking abut the REPLICAS of those things.
It's like you've never been to Vegas ever.
That and the guy from Paramount too. They're fine with blowing up a local landmark and puting a redundant Italian themed casino in it's place.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:They are timeless and universal (Score:4, Informative)
There's a Tower of Pisa in Vegas?
Not exactly, but it was called that early in its development
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Veer_Towers [wikipedia.org]
Google Street View Link [google.com]
Re: (Score:2)
Theres a Luxor Pyramid, so anything is possible.
They wanted to build some condo units in the style of the Leaning tower of Pisa.
http://www.finehomeslv.com/blog/project-city-center-las-vegas-towers-resemble-leaning-tower-of-pisa/ [finehomeslv.com]
Re:They are timeless and universal (Score:5, Informative)
All of them except for the Pisa tower are far larger than the Enterprise would have been.
I had to google the exact measures but the Eiffel Tower (320 m) is way bigger than the other two monuments (I've seen the three of them with my eyes). It's a little taller than what the Enterprise is long (286 m). The Statue of Liberty (93 m) is much smaller and the statue alone (46 m) without the base would be shorter than the Pisa tower (58 m). Check this [garygoddard.com] for the relative sizes (Pisa tower not included).
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Can you honestly say with a straight face that a crumbling Enterprise in Vegas would draw the nation in to repair it as was done with the Statue of Liberty?
Actually, yes. It's Nevada. It's a giant desert... nothing is ever going to 'crumble' out there... There are cars out there that were parked in the 1930s and except for damage caused by the sun are still exactly the way they were left. If you build something out there and right after civilization ends, it would take hundreds of years before it started to show traces of weathering beyond what you'd expect from being sandblasted. -_-
Re: (Score:3)
Also ALL of the things you list are nationally beloved monuments to the respective countries they are in, meaning there is money from a whole nation to take care of each of those national treasures.
I think he was talking about these:
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/04/16/nyregion/liberty-statue-in-las-vegas-stands-among-many-replicas.html [nytimes.com]
http://3dpariseiffeltower.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/Eiffel-Tower-In-Las-Vegas.jpg [3dpariseiffeltower.com]
http://www.finehomeslv.com/blog/project-city-center-las-vegas-towers-resemble-leaning-tower-of-pisa/ [finehomeslv.com] (there is actually no Pisa Tower replica in Las Vegas, it's more of a leaning high-rise)
Re: (Score:2)
Sorry, why would the French or Italians put money in to help Las Vegas keep their versions of the Eiffel Tower or Tower of Pisa standing?
Seems a very random thing to do.
Except Eiffel Tower was no monument (Score:4, Informative)
In Bavaria, Ludwig II von Sachsenhausen caused a load of pre-Hollywood fantasy castles to be built; for many people they are the defining image of Bavaria. Personally I barely know the difference between Star Trek and Star Wars, but I suspect that a huge building in the shape of an enormous fantasy spaceship would, in exactly the same way, define its own myth. If it wasn't built too well, before long there would be a campaign to rebuild or restore it.
Re:They are timeless and universal (Score:5, Funny)
Why not? We did it for the Washington Monument which is nothing but a giant rock dildo.
But it so perfectly symbolizes what the People have come to expect from D.C.
Re: (Score:2)
I don't recall those items ever being novelties, or casinos with poker tables and slot machines
While the engineering and architecture to make a life sized Enterprise may have been a feat, it's raison d'être would have been as a mere attraction based on pop-culture.
Re: (Score:2)
They could have hooked up laser lights to it. Then, have a helium-filled borg balloon in the sky, and a "phaser" would shoot out from the Enterprise. Pyrotechnics ensue.
WHY DID THEY NOT BUILD THIS.
Re:Really just as well (Score:5, Interesting)
Each one of those was an original masterpiece designed to be something different and never seen before. Usually it was built from state-of-the-art materials and construction techniques. The Eiffel Tower wasn't even intended to be a permanent structure.
A replica life size model of a TV series starship might work if it were part of an office block, startup incubator, luxury hotel or cinema multiplex. The exterior wouldn't diminish the functionality of the inside space, but the functionality would pay for the maintenance.
The best location in my opinion would be as part of an airport hotel or conference center. Imagine having your flight coming in through the fog or haze and the first thing you see is a spaceship coming into view like something out of the Wrath of Khan.
port.
Re: (Score:3)
You're more right than you think. Downtown Las Vegas until VERY recently(within the last 5 years or so?) has languished BADLY.
If they built a giant Enterprise, it'd just sit there and become a giant eyesore.
STILL, it would've been cool as fuck the first few trips down.
Re:Really just as well (Score:4, Insightful)
If they built a giant Enterprise, it'd just sit there and become a giant eyesore.
If they built a giant Enterprise, they'd probably have trekkie fans all over the world visting downtown vegas. And moving to the city.
You know that would still be a big attraction today. But in 40 or 50 years, yeah, it would eventually become a giant eyesore.
Re:Really just as well (Score:5, Insightful)
TOS debuted in 1966, that's 46 years ago. It's as popular today as it ever was. At this point, it's safe to say it's a hallmark of science fiction. A life-sized replica would remain culturally relevant for much longer than 50 years. It's hard to imagine that people would ever look at it and say "what's that supposed to be?" and even if they did, it would be like looking at the Great Pyramid. Even though we don't really know what it originally meant, it's simply too large to be ignored.
People often bring up the idea that a megastructure may become an eyesore over time. I can't think of an example where that's been true. As far as buildings go, if it's huge and strange looking, people will be impressed buy it. It doesn't matter how old it is.
Re: (Score:2)
>>even if they did, it would be like looking at the Great Pyramid. Even though we don't really know what it originally meant, it's simply too large to be ignored.
1d4
Re: (Score:2)
it's more like 1/2d8
Re:Really just as well (Score:5, Insightful)
Have you ever been to Las Vegas?
No one's saying this would be the next great pyramid (excepting your attempt to present such a claim as a straw man). Of course the two objects would be similar in scale [slashdot.org]. But people said the Eiffel tower would be an eyesore when it was built, and the people of Paris have not found it to be so. What I'm saying is that this story has repeated itself over time, and none of the things people have said were going to be eyesores have actually turned out that way.
Doubtless an ancient ancestor of yours objected to the building of the great pyramids claiming it would be an eyesore as well. And let's not forget all those idiots complaining about windmills. You aren't objectively looking at the situation, you are simply looking at a strange new idea and rejecting it because it doesn't fit with your existing world view.
Re:Really just as well (Score:4, Funny)
Where, I am sure, some eccentric billionaire would buy it. I mean, it would be the ONLY life sized complete Enterprise in existence.
That's the first good reason I've heard for wanting to be filthy rich!
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Much like the manned space race itself...
Re: (Score:3)
I dont think so. First part of it at least could have been a hotel and restaurant, casino, etc, and those things dont wear off. But i really think that the interest would have held up and would have become very popular, if it was lifelike enough,.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Really just as well (Score:4, Interesting)
Vegas did indeed have the coolest Star Trek exhibit/show. It eventually turned into a very expensive and poorly managed coolest Start Trek exhibit/show. When you charge in the neighborhood of the admission price of a full theme park for what IN a full theme park would be a couple of shows, you're not going to attract non-geeks and the generally curious. I went there every time I was in Vegas while it was there and I'm glad I did, but I also watched the prices go up, the quantity of shows go down, Quark's Bar always inaccessible because of being booked for a wedding or some "special event" or just plain closed early because somebody wanted to save payroll. My first visit, which was several years after the attraction opened, I had to wait in decently long lines to get in. The last couple of years--barely any, and I STILL couldn't get in to have a drink at Quark's.
Point is: it's not good to say something failed because people didn't want it. Management or lack of it has a LOT to do with stuff like that.
Re: (Score:3)
Honestly in 1992 if they had built a $150 Million dollar Enterprise (even if it was 30 or so years prior to the current universe they were promoting) would have kept Star Trek active a great deal longer. Instead of DS9 & Voyager on their own private UPN they would have probably landed on CBS or NBC. The benefit of it existing would drive trekkies into a frenzy so that not only would it make a constant revenue stream available but it would essentially cement Star Trek as a permanent part of reality. A
Re: (Score:3)
Hey this is Vegas. The full size Enterprise could have become a hotel (just how many crew staterooms ARE there on the USS Enterprise?). As a hotel it would have been booked solid FOREVER (who wouldn't want to stay there?) They would have had to build the turbo lifts oversized and have more of them then in the plans though, otherwise there wouldn't have been enough elevator capacity for all the guests. You know the real Enterprise (as per the published plans) had a bowling alley and a full size swimming
Backroom land deals? (Score:3)
Next we'll have an informer tell us that Mr. Jaffe has been busy secretly buying up property in Iowa.
I've never had a desire to go to Vegas (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
But if there was a "Life-Sized" enterprise in which I could book passage (rent a room) and visit 10-Forward or see the bridge, I would make the "trek" to vegas. I am sure I am not the only tight ass that would do this... Flop? I don;t thin it would be, espesially if they built the Emporer's imperial cruiser next door and they had weekly geek fights to see which would win. :-)
That was my thinking. An Enterprise hotel that looked just like the sets on the inside would be a huge attraction. If you could build something as massive as the D model, then wow at the hotel possibilities, with a Ten Forward bar and restaurant, and quarters that looked like the ones from the series.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
It wasn't a full life sized one, but the Hilton in Vegas had a fully built full size STTNG bridge as an attraction, along with turbolifts and such. It looked pretty much exactly like the TV show and they had actors in full costume. There was a bar and restraut with it as well, but it was more like the Star Wars cantina with Star Trek decorations.
They shut the entire thing down about 2 years ago, it had been there for a long time before that.
Geeks and Vegas don't mix (Score:2)
There's a rumor that the American Physical Society is banned from hosting their conferences in Vegas because physicists don't gamble, don't have champagne parties with hookers, and drink considerably less then the average Vegas-goer. I'd assume that these points also applied to anyone getting excited about a Star Trek themed hotel.
Re: (Score:3)
There's a rumor that the American Physical Society is banned from hosting their conferences in Vegas because physicists don't gamble, don't have champagne parties with hookers, and drink considerably less then the average Vegas-goer. I'd assume that these points also applied to anyone getting excited about a Star Trek themed hotel.
You don't know many physicists, do you?
Re:Geeks and Vegas don't mix (Score:4, Funny)
Quite the contrary, as you know, physicists are big into experimentation. Vegas would love to have the physicists, except... Well, you know how people sometimes get a little crazy on the Las Vegas booze, hookers and drugs scene, and cause a ruckus; there was one year the Physical Society's meeting happened to overlap with the pharmacist's and psychiatrist's conventions...going on, oh about 50 years ago now.
Now, some people are bound to call me a liar, or say I have a runaway imagination, but buried in a vault somewhere under Washington, there's a classified briefing my grand-pappy told me about--he was a fed you see--and if you go down to the FBI office and ask someone, they're going to deny it and look at you like you're some kind of lunatic. And if you press 'em on it, they're going to call the cops and people with white coats. That's when you know you've got 'em in a lie, it's right in the secret FBI training manual under Chapter 11, Deny, Divert and Attack! You know, so you'd better not. Ask anyone that is.
Anyway, to make a short story long, many of the physicists, pharmacists, and psychiatrists shared the same hotel, and as is always the case in a large enough group of people, some of the pharmacists were into the...recreational side of their business, and the psychiatrists, well, you know how they always want to know what makes people tick.
As a prank, and to get the physicists to loosen up, the pharmacists slipped a bunch of amphetamines and the psychiatry researchers' LSD into the physicists' punch bowl. Nobody knows how they did it, but the hopped-up and wigged-out physicists spent the next five days straight in the conference room where they built at life size, fully functional replica of Big Boy, right there in Sands Hotel.
Now, this was also about the time the Roswell aliens escaped Area 51, the aliens kidnapped the atom bomb and held Las Vegas as ransom for their flying saucer and took Humphrey Bogart hostage...but I digress. That's a whole 'nother story, and if I told you I'd have to kill you. So, in a nutshell, that's why LSD research was banned, because when you mix physicists with amphetamines, LSD, and spiked punch, doomsday almost happens, and aliens fly off with Humphrey fucking Bogart. We just can't take the chance.
Re: (Score:2)
yea every nerd would do it a time or two and once the novelty wore off your left with a undesirable building sucking up space
Re: (Score:2)
Re:I've never had a desire to go to Vegas (Score:4, Informative)
Damn, you just made me realize how little men have been objectified in Star Trek compared to women. I demand equality! Chris Pine needs to go shirtless the entire next movie to help make up for it.
Women: ....
* At least one major character per series whose job included being sexy: Counselor Troi (TNG), Yeoman Rand and Uhura (TOS), Seven of Nine (VOY), T'Pol (ENT), and Dax (DS9)
* Orion slave girls as in TOS: The Cage [memory-alpha.org] and ENT: Bound [memory-alpha.org] (three at once there)
* Kirk's various women
* Dabo girls throughout DS9
* Numerous other women in skimpy outfits, eg. Vanessa William's character in the horrible episode DS9: Let He Who Is Without Sin... [memory-alpha.org], Tasha's seduction scene in TNG: The Naked Now [memory-alpha.org], Uhura's sexy dance in the movie that does not exist,
Men:
* Trip saving the ship in his underwear in ENT: Aquisition [memory-alpha.org] and a few other shirtless scenes, usually with T'Pol
* Several scenes with Kirk at least partly shirtless for very little reason in TOS
* Scattered shirtlessness as in the Edo episode (also had women in skimpy outfits), the horrible DS9 episode above (brief), Sulu in The Naked Time
* (Counts negative) Leonard Nimoy shirtless on Nazi-episode-planet
Actually, The Naked Time reminded me of something. There's a hilarious moment at the end of the episode after McCoy develops a serum to cure everyone. He goes around the bridge injecting people, and when he gets to Kirk, for no apparent reason he grabs Kirk's shoulder and rips his shirt open before injecting him like everyone else. It's so gratuitous--I would absolutely love a brief parody of that scene in the next movie.
Re: (Score:2)
If it was Troi's job to be sexy, she did a piss poor job of it. I never saw her as the least bit attractive. Mostly annoying.
Dax wasn't a blatant sexy character, though both Jadzia and Ezri were very attractive actresses. I think they got the balance really right with that/those character(s).
Rand / Uhura were attractive, but I don't know if the show went out of their way to sexualize them. I wasn't a fan of TOS, so perhaps I'm wrong.
Seven of Nine and T'Pol were definitely blatant ratings grabs. The cha
Re: (Score:3)
To be honest, I'm gay (completely; no bi), so my female sexiness detector is pretty buggy. Still, here's my reasoning.
* Troi was the only main character to wear a skirt for the first season or two. Tasha did not. Troi was also the only main character to use a non-standard and skin-tight uniform. Her job was often pretty superfluous considering none of the other shows included a counselor.
* I always thought Dax was supposed to provide some sort of adventuresome sexiness. Terry Farrell was mor
Re: (Score:3)
And there are many really bad ST episodes.
Indeed there are! I happen to have a list of my personal series-worsts right here:
* The Original Series (TOS): 3x06 Spock's Brain [memory-alpha.org].
* The Animated Series (TAS): 1x05 More Tribbles, More Troubles [memory-alpha.org].
* The Next Generation (TNG): 2x22 Shades of Grey [memory-alpha.org] (clip show); 2x12 The Royale [memory-alpha.org]; Wesley's part in 1x03 The Naked Now [memory-alpha.org] (also Wesley's most annoying part period).
* Deep Space 9 (DS9): 5x07 Let He Who Is Without Sin... [memory-alpha.org].
* Voyager (VOY): 2x15 Threshold [memory-alpha.org]. Threshold is probably the worst e
oh forget that (Score:5, Insightful)
http://i.imgur.com/kezWj.jpg [imgur.com]
Re: (Score:3)
The it couldn't be a hotel or a casino, as that would take business away from the downtown area (which it was intended to help).
Re: (Score:2)
They add new casinos and hotels to vegas all the time. I dont think it would necessarily take away business as it would bring in more people. For a business perceptive, it would be just another resoirt, which many have been added over the years. the Primary attraction of vegas is the resorts, otherwise, its just a desert.
Re: (Score:2)
...which means that you could just get the same effect with some mocked up stuff inside of a regular casino. They even kind of did that for awhile but they never took it far enough.
Gambling (Score:2)
That's all that matters to casinos, Enterprise ships or not.
You know what would help? (Score:3)
From wiki:
Length 642.5 Meters
Width 467.0 Meters
Height 137.5 Meters
This is not trivial. There are no structural integrity fields in the real world. 150M$ for that? Doubtful.
Re: (Score:2)
They were talking about the original Enterprise, which would only have been 305 meters long.
Re: (Score:2)
The 1701-A is smaller, only 200 meters or so. Which would be more doable. the D would just be enormous.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Even the original Enterprise would probably take up about the same footprint as the Pentagon. I say we build it.
Kickstarter anyone?
He doesn't undeestand how Vegas works (Score:4, Interesting)
Nothing sits for long after it stops being popular/profitable, they implode it and build something else.
I vote for 1701-A (Score:3)
I think 1701-A of 1701-B would look best with a crew staffed in ST II-VI uniforms. There could be a hotel inside, as well as restaurants, all themed like the real ship.
I was never fond of 1701-D or nor the crews unform from that era, though, the STNG series was well written and well executed. I always wished they could couple the story line quality of STNG with the styles of the 1701-A or 1701-B era. I found the tight fitting uniforms of D to be cheesy and the ship too cheesy as well.
Another factor is the 1701-A was a much smaller ship than the D, the D is just a huge thing that might be completely infeasible to build, if they want to build the thing to spec, it would be enormous.
I imagine this thing could have rather than a mock up, could have been an entire building, including a built in hotel and so on. But the saucer section raises quistions on structural support, I am not sure if it would be possible to construct an unsupported, hanging saucer section without some sort of supports from below, in a feasible way. Having support columns from below for the saucer section would take away from the whole thing. Probably the main hull could be fully occupied hotel and attraction space and they might have to settle with a shell for saucer, with some places inside being built, such as the bridge and so on, unless a way can be found to build the saucer.
Re: (Score:2)
But the saucer section raises quistions on structural support, I am not sure if it would be possible to construct an unsupported, hanging saucer section without some sort of supports from below, in a feasible way. Having support columns from below for the saucer section would take away from the whole thing. Probably the main hull could be fully occupied hotel and attraction space and they might have to settle with a shell for saucer, with some places inside being built, such as the bridge and so on, unless a way can be found to build the saucer.
You realize, of course, that this analysis defeats the whole engineering model for the ship itself - ostensibly designed to handle the stresses of battle, which can easily exceed the pathetic 1G that the Earth would exert on it. :)
I always did think the engineering design of the Enterprise was a bit dicey for a military system - too much weight hanging out on skinny spars. But, having said that, I think it would be doable in the sense that one could build something that could handle the the weight, wind st
Re: (Score:2)
If you were going to build the "D", I think you'd take advantage of the idea that the saucer section is detachable, and build it separate from the engineering section.
This gives much better vertical support for both sections, and also improves your flexibility with land use footprint.
Re:I vote for 1701-A (Score:4, Informative)
Supposedly the Constitution class could do saucer-sep maneuvers nearly as easily as the Galaxy class.
Don't know if that's canon or not, but I definitely read it in a novel or two back in the day.
Land is expensive in Vegas; build a TARDIS instead (Score:4, Funny)
Then you can pack more gamblers inside, than it appears outside. The dream of every casino owner.
And if the house starts to lose big time . . . just skip back in time, to before the bets were placed.
Two compound words: (Score:2)
Holodeck Whorehouse.
Quark's @ The Hilton (Score:3)
I'm not super-trekkie, but I know from personal experience that the Hilton in Vegas through away massive amounts of convention/conference business when it closed down Quark's. =\
I miss my Moogie's Choice Pasta and Warp Core Breach
Re: (Score:2)
Foolish decision to nix it. (Score:2)
So then DO something about it. (Score:2, Funny)
As a Trek fan, I'm saddened that this never got built because I feel that this would've appealed to a much wider audience than science fiction fans.
Are you new here? Stop whining about what somebody else shoulda oughtta done and put your efforts where your conviction is: throw a proposal up on Kickstarter or similar and then wait for the millions of dollars to roll in from all these alleged Trekkies-in-the-closet. If you're not just nuts, then you get to build the Enterprise, and if you are just nuts, then you'll have it confirmed in a way you can't ignore....
Re: (Score:2)
I never said "money was the problem". Go ahead, read my comment again and try to show me where I said that. No, what I said, and all I said, was that if the summary OP was bothered by this failure that *HE* should spearhead a renewed effort. What, the people that were considering it two decades ago are just gonna hand him the money to do it now, assuming they're even still alive? That's stupid to even imply it. It ain't likely their successors are going to be quite so eager, either, which is why it STI
Biggest reason this fell through: (Score:3)
Comment removed (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
I'd rather put it into California. Make it a conference hotel and invite every half way on-the-edge tech conference over. It's no secret that a fair lot of the tech people are big into Star Trek (hell, when I was with a not-so-unimportant IT-Security company my boss was one of the biggest trekkers I ever met. Imagine your boss coming in at Halloween in full Klingon war gear, and even having the body to actually look impressive in it). That should make it fairly simple to stay ahead of the tech curve if you
CSI (Score:4, Funny)
I guess it was just
*shades*
Too much of a gamble
Lucky break (Score:2)
It's a good thing they never built this full-sized Enterprise replica. By now it would be looking pretty shabby. It would have been become cheesy and embarrassing. At its best, Star Trek was kitsch (in a good sense). Kitsch on a scale like this, in Las Vegas, would have pretty much spoiled a great experience.
Big things in Las Vegas tend to end up looking small and sad. I'm a fan of the place, honestly, but whenever it tries to assimilate pop culture of a vintage later than the Rat Pack, it always ends
Re: (Score:3)
It's moving as quickly as possible away from family friendly. Turned out catering to peopel on a tight budget, with special needs for kids, and don't drink as much doesn't make as much money as young people with excess cash and a desire to break the house.
A family around a pool in a casino is nothing but lost revenue.
Re:Fuck Paramount execs. Galactica FTW! (Score:5, Interesting)
Galactica was pseudo religious military wank with a dash of body horror and a vague stab at challenging social issues like racism to be honest, an homage to the Bush era.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
That's as true as saying that Star Trek is just a long story about people in pajamas.
Re: (Score:3)
ST dealt with large moral issues.
Galactica about individual personal issue.
Nothing there to compare.
Re: (Score:2)
A giant penguin would be cool, and I would go out of my way to stay at a penguin-shaped hotel (which you might guess based on my screen name), but I think a giant flamingo hotel would be more appropriate for Vegas - and would be really cool with the long legs being glass tunnels that the elevators go up. But that has the same structural support questions that an actual full-size Enterprise would have. A penguin would be a lot simpler.
Re: (Score:2)
from an engineering stand point alone. In the photos the entire saucer section is only held up by the neck piece down to the engineering section. Building this thing would be a feat all on its own.
FTFA: "We got Ken Ball (former head of engineering at Disney’s MAPO) involved to figure out how to engineer and support it. (Ultimately we realized we would need to add some supports on the outer edge of the “disc” section due to the extremely high wind conditions in Vegas. For this we created a high tech “scaffolding structure” that gave the ship more of the appearance of being in an open-air dry dock. I have not yet located that sketch, but I’ll try to find it.)"
Re: (Score:3)
Quite the opposite. It would have been a hit.
Star Trek has become somewhat of an American icon show. Go out there and find a single person who doesn't know about Star Trek (don't ask the Amish, that's unfair, stay with the, as you called them, normals). Every single person knows about Star Trek. And even if the movie wasn't a hit, people would flock there to see "an Enterprise". They don't give a fuck what movie it was from, but they'd want to see it.
The die hard fans would certainly complain about how inac