Talk:Serenity (Firefly vessel)

Serenity Pronoun Reference

I changed all the pronoun references to Serenity on this page, changing them away from "it", in keeping with the spirit of the show that Serenity is always reffered to as "she" and is granted a great deal of personification. -- 03:49, 24 September 2005 (UTC) KenoSarawa

Crybaby mimicry

I generalized the recently added info about the "crybaby" mimicking Serenity because it was used to simulate a distressed personnel carrier in the pilot. Also, if we get into too much detail about what it actually does imitate, we might need to put it after the spoiler message. ~ Jeff Q (talk) 08:16, 11 October 2005 (UTC)

Alterations for Serenity (parts that have been removed or changed)

Just a few points about things that've been removed from this part of the article.

Firstly, the cargo area in the nose of the ship. Yes, it was there in the series, but it was covered by a floor grating - hence my statement, 'the bridge has seen few changes, but the forward flooring section has been entirely removed, exposing an extra cargo-storage section in the nose of the ship.' Key word being 'exposing', not 'creating'. So I don't see why this has been removed, since, as far as I can see, it is true and relevant to the article.

Second, the paint job issue. Firstly, a good shot of the paint job of the front of the film Serenity can be found here - firefly.ytmnd.com. That's just when Serenity is going off to barn-swallow the Mule. Now, the model used in the series, from the front, looks like this - www.fireflywiki.org/img/serenity_front.jpg. As is fairly obvious, it's different. Take the cargo bay door, for example. Series version is in browns and greys; film version is blues and silvers. The personnel door in the cargo ramp stands out more in the film version, as well. So IMHO, that part is right, as well, and is relevant to the article.

And about the ship being triple-tiered like an insect... IIRC, 'tier' is similar to 'level', or 'storey'. So having a triple-tiered insect would make no sense. You may be thinking of the head-thorax-abdomen arrangment on an insect. Or I may be wrong about what a tier is. Whichever.

I'm not sure about the galley storage space issue, I'll rewatch Heart of Gold tonight (got the series on DVD). Berle 13:39, 4 November 2005 (UTC)

Well, I've reinserted the deleted material (the parts of which I am sure are correct, anyway - I haven't checked HoG yet)... I didn't realise you got rid of the bit about the new landing legs, either, and as such am seriously wondering if you saw the show's Firefly. :P The landing legs were very, very struttish, with pads at their ends, not full-blown claws with toes. They didn't look in the least bit organic, either, unlike the film's version. Add to that the fact that the film Serenity is blue and silver, not the series' bronze, and so on... anyway. Berle 19:54, 7 November 2005 (UTC)

Can it be explained whether the alterations were simply because of improved production values in a higher-budget film than the TV series permitted, or whether the differences are explained by the storyline? Bovineone 05:41, 29 November 2005 (UTC)

I'm assuming that the changes were purely the result of improved production values. No such radical overhaul was mentioned in the film; however, this does not disprove the notion that the ship may have refitted in 'the canon'. Berle 19:19, 2 December 2005 (UTC)

Changes made between Serenity (episode) and Bushwacked.

See www.fireflyfans.net/sunroomitem.asp?i=1665. The top image is the model used in the episode "Serenity", and sometimes in "The Train Job". From "Bushwhacked" onwards the model in the 2nd image is used. -- Jeandré, 2006-07-16t12:32z

Speed

Can someone clarify whether Serenity is a sub-lightspeed vessel, or can go faster than light (FTL)? If specifics are known for its top speed that would also be nice.

I know the colony ships were slower than lightspeed, but I don't know if they've developed it since. The reason I ask is to figure out if the story's self consistent - they would have to have FTL in order to get between the core and outer planets in a matter of days or even months. In our Solar System with a measly 9 planets (give or take a couple), it's some 40 light years from Pluto to Mercury. --zandperl 05:37, 2 January 2006 (UTC)

Pluto is about 0.0005 light years from the sun; maximum possible distance from Pluto to Mercury would be only fractionally longer than that.70.178.29.175 17:22, 2 January 2006 (UTC)

Just saw notes on the Firefly page. I'll stick something in about that. --zandperl 05:39, 2 January 2006 (UTC)

Oh duh, and I was thinking AU, not ly. --zandperl 05:46, 2 January 2006 (UTC)

If we could manage constant acceleration at 1g (which we can't today, we can't carry enough fuel) the Earth/Mars trip would take around 3 days (on average). Earth/Pluto would average around 3 weeks. Earth to Alpha Centauri would only take around 6 years if we could burn at 1g all the way (it'd seem less to the crew due to time dialation). --soto 00:07, 27 April 2006 (UTC)

I removed the following paragraph:

In the Firefly episode "Our Mrs. Reynolds", the salvage workers state that Serenity's current speed is 81. Though it is unclear what form of measurement they were using (it could have been in kilometers per hour, Mach number or percentage of the speed of light).

The actual line from the episode is "Right on target, speed...A-1", probably stating that the vessel's speed was just right for their purposes. Since the entire paragraph refers to a measurement that doesn't exist, I removed it.

--JPG 00:57, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

Official speed and range

According to the official blueprints, the ships max acceleration is 4.2 g, and the range is 44–400 AU depending on the cargo to fuel —MJBurrage • TALK • 03:55, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

Dimensions

I've encountered some specifications for Serenity (and as far as I can tell, the height/width/length are just about right for Mal to fit through the bridge door). Grain of salt required. lwg3d forums RoadKillian 04:12, 7 February 2006 (UTC)

I just removed a "Size" section that someone added because it had only the meta-statement "This area is in need of content." Standard Wikipedia practice recommends against both empty sections and such meta-statements in articles. If and when someone has something to say, they should add it at that time. The proper way to request content is to bring it up on the talk page. ~ Jeff Q (talk) 06:52, 7 February 2006 (UTC)

Ship stats

I removed the following text because it was incorrectly credited as coming from an Internet posting by Emile Edwin Smith of Zoic Studios, but was really from a fan posting to the "Lightwave Group" forum, citing a supposed posting but failing to provide a source. (The LWG forum itself provides no hint of what its own purpose is, and few of the usual about-links shed any light, no pun intended. One is broken, and the only semi-informative one is clicking on the logo — no words to indicate function. Very anti-least astonishment.)

---

The following was posted on the internet by a memebr of the films special effects shop. [1]

The, “Serenity” is a Firefly Class interplanetary ship. Originally conceived and built as a medium range cargo ship.

Dimensions and Weights: She is comparable to that of Boeing 747. She is 63 meters long, 40 meters wide and 18 meters tall. Her gross empty weight is 575,000 lbs and her maximum takeoff weight is 945,000 lbs.

Performance and Powerplants: Primarily powered by two wing mounted Smith & Davis SD-2595 (95,000 lb) turbofan and solar induction engines, she can achieve a maximum airspeed of mach 2 (1484 mph) at 1000 Meters EBSL (Earth Based Sea Level,) and mach 30 (22270 mph) at 100,000 Meters (62 miles) EBSL. During the transitional phase from atmospheric to orbital flight the fan blades rotate to collect photons emitted by a solar source to feed the engines keeping the relative thrust ratio comparable to its atmospheric rating. The “Firefly” engine, a Smith & Davis SD-4631 photon reaction drive, was developed on the same principles that drive fusion in a star, (4 ¹H + 2 ^oe^– → ⁴He + 2 νc + 6 γ) The reaction produces enough thrust to propel the ship to 643,738 kph (400,000 mph) taking it approximately 16 days to travel 1 AU. (The Astronomical Unit is the distance from the Earth to the Sun, 149,597,871 kilometers.) Although very reliable, this reaction produces large volumes of plasma as hot as the surface of a star. Thermal panels on the outside of the engine dissipate the plasma and heat that builds up during the process typically glowing in a yellowish hue as they cool down.

Handling: The maneuvering of the ship is handled in two different ways. In atmosphere she has flaps and ailerons that in conjunction with the pitch of the side engines control her direction. In space she uses an RCS, (Reaction Control System,) consisting of Hydrazine fueled thrusters that work in a countered measure. For example if she were to turn nose up, thrusters on the back rear of the ship would fire upwards and thrusters of the front nose would fire downwards pushing the tail down and the nose up. Variations on this, tied into the side engines pitch, produce all her movement in space. For landing her side engines rotate vertical and vents on the front of the engine open to allow the engine the “breathe” as she hovers.

Gravity: The Firefly class ships gravity comes from a rotating ring just aft of the ships midsection. It produces a gravity field using the “Peristere Principal,” that also acts as a momentum dampener to allow passengers more freedom of movement during all aspects of flight.

Emile Edwin Smith
Visual Effects Supervisor
Zoic Studios

---

I tried to Google some key phrases to find the supposed source, but found nothing but the LWG posting. If someone can provide the actual posting that we could verify came from an authoritative source, we could use this information. Even so, however, we shouldn't just paste it wholesale into the article, no more than we would take a page out of someone's book to be part of any Wikipedia article. (Besides, the text as presented is riddled with punctuation and capitalization problems by any English standard, and needs more tweaking to WP standards.) ~ Jeff Q (talk) 06:03, 11 February 2006 (UTC)

Running this thing at Mach 2 at 3,000 feet altitude strikes me as unreasonable. It is capable of atmospheric travel, but is not particularly aerodynamic. Its shape could well be described as fat and lumpy, not the sort of thing you would push through the air in a hurry. It also seems to have no autopilot, and there is not enough time for a human pilot to recover from mistakes at that speed. Ken McE (talk) 20:35, 29 June 2008 (UTC)

Union Jack Door?

Thought I'd mention this; I've only seen three or four episodes of Firefly, but I just happened to catch sight of a Union Jack worked into the decor; at the end of Shindig, it's clearly visible as the pattern on a door behind Mal and Inara in their final scene. It's not just a superposition of vertical and diagonal crosses; the diagonal "St. Patrick's Cross" part of the design is off-symmetry, as per the flag. Do any of you more, ah, enthusiastic types have more info on this odd detail?

- Astatine 23:51, 27 February 2006 (UTC)

These people have not lost their past. It just means that someone there is using a symbol of their ancestors, much as you or I might use a coat of arms. The door artist may have British roots, there could be British derived worlds somewhere in this 'verse, or the artist may have run across an old symbol and liked it. Ken McE (talk) 20:18, 29 June 2008 (UTC)

In the specs below, it mentions the contractors Mandel & Earls, Ltd., Londinum (London?) Might explain it. Sfryeruk (talk) 09:18, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

Serenity as a character

I think it's appropriate to add [[Category:Firefly characters|Serenity]] and place Serenity into the characters list for Firefly. However I didn't want to make this change without posting here and getting opinions.

From my POV the ship is treated as a character, and for that matter in the DVD's extra features there is a secion on Serenity as a character, this indicates she should be listed along with the others.

That's an interesting question. I would suggest not adding the category but I do think this would make an interesting addition to the article. As you suggest Whedon does indeed treat the ship as a character - he makes this point explicitly in the Firefly DVD commentaries. Its a real feature of the show and film. However the category scheme is part of the Wikipedia structure and I believe we should keep within the standard definition of "character" when using it. Gwernol 00:25, 27 April 2006 (UTC)

New crewmembers?

" As of 2518-19 Mal has acquire two new crew members, a former Browncoat (Corporal or Lieutenant) & a workshop machinist"

Okay, where's that coming from? It's not in the movie, not in the series, and (Though I haven't read it yet) I'm pretty sure that it's not in the comics either. What other source is there? JBK405 02:21, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

It's just somebody vandalising. Just gotta revert and ignore. JQF 15:21, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

Mothership or not?

"17:15 Serenity (Firefly vessel) (diff; hist) . . (-1) . . Jeffq (Talk | contribs) (rv mothership cat; simply having aux craft does not make mothership, else every Navy vessel w/ a Captain's gig would be one)"

Mothership defines one as:

A mother ship is a vessel or aircraft that carries a smaller vessel or aircraft that operates independently from it.

From this I'd class the Serenity as mothership.

1. It carries two shuttles.
2. At least one of these shuttles can operate independently, Inara Serras.
3. The shuttles are smaller.

What does everybody else think? Also note that the parent category is becoming increasingly larger, and hence I've been working to neaten things out and reduce the amount in the parent which are more suitable to children categories. thanks/Fenton, Matthew Lexic Dark 52278 Alpha 771 18:25, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

The text immediately following the initial, obviously brief definition above from Mother ship states:

Examples include bombers converted to carry experimental aircraft to altitudes where they can conduct their research, or ships that carry small submarines to an area of ocean to be explored.

The implication is that a "mother ship" is a host to a group of independently operating ships. In the science fiction section of that article, we also have:

The concept of mothership (almost always spelled as a single word) clearly implies that the other ships in the fleet are dependent on the mothership for at least some services. Typically, a mothership will take up station in an area and remain there for long periods, while smaller ships sortie to interesting destinations.

Again, the implication is something designed to be a host vessel. Serenity is a cargo vessel which merely has auxiliary craft. The distinction is certainly arguable, but I'd recommend focusing on the intent of the vehicle and not every capability a vessel has. Using the broad connotation would force us to include every fictional spacecraft with gigs that can run shore missions, mostly notably an entire series of famous fictional spacecraft whose shuttlecraft were regularly detailed to extended missions to explore strange new worlds during hour-long shows. Finally, there are currently only 66 pages in Category:Fictional spacecraft, which is not at all "large" for a category. ~ Jeff Q (talk) 19:01, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

I agree that Serenity is not a "mothership" in the normal sense of the word. If it was ever called a mothership in the series or movie, we'd have to go with that, though. Absent that, we should not invent our own categorization of it as a mothership. Friday (talk) 19:10, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

I'm with the 'not a mothership' people, too. Although Serenity does have auxiliary craft, that is not her primary purpose (which is carrying freight), nor would she be significantly impaired in fulfilling that purpose if she didn't have her shuttles. --Scott Wilson 19:16, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

Firefly resemblance to Terran Trade Authority design

Should there be a mention of the startling resemblance of the Firefly to the "Interstellar Queen" ship design of the Terran Trade Authority series? This was a series of books that wove a fictional future history around a series of paintings of ships. (OOP, but recently re-released as an rpg.) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 204.184.29.2 (talk • contribs)

Probably not, unless it transpires that the Interstellar Queen was an influence on Serenity's design; it's only a passing similarity. --Scott Wilson 20:15, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

Definitely not, unless we can cite a reliable source for the comparison, as without it this would be forbidden original research, the bane of articles on popular fictional subjects.. ~ Jeff Q (talk) 22:36, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

Absolutely. It is nearly identical in appearance. There must be an influence there. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.194.156.59 (talk) 20:10, 30 March 2013 (UTC)

The claim that Serenity is based on Interstellar Queen would absolutly be original research, and would thus need to be cited to a reliable source. This is especially true since such a claim implies copyright infringement by a living person. It does seem to me that both ships are inspired by natural shapes common to flying animals, but that does not make one based on the other. —MJBurrage^(T•C) 19:33, 1 April 2013 (UTC)

Official stats

According to the official Serenity Blueprint Set by Geoffrey Mandel (Graphic Designer, Serenity) and Timothy M. Earls (Illustrator, Firefly, Set Designer, Serenity).

Serenity Firefly Class Transport General Plans and Schematics Specifications
Class	03-K64-Firefly
Type	Mid-Bulk Transport (Class B)
Drive	Standard Radion/Accelerator Core
Powerplant	2 Blue Sun 6V4-178-B31 Trace Compression Blocks 36 RCS Thrusters
Registration	U.A.P./Hera
Owner of Record	Capt. Malcolm Reynolds
Registry No.	404-E-132-4FE274A
Mandatory Reg. Markings	None
Contractors	Allied Spacecraft Corp., Osiris Firefly Ship Works, Ltd., Hera Mandel & Earls, Ltd., Londinum
Manufacturers' Model No.	47 Mark IV
Hull No.	G-82659
Keel Laid	August 2459
Length Overall	269'-3"
Width Overall	170'-0"
Height Overall	78'-8" (Landing Gear Extended)
Main Hull	L 261'-1" × W 68'-10" × H 74'-5"
Wingspan	112'-4" (to Engine Mounts)
Main Engines	L 62'-8" × W 28'-4" × H 29'-6"
Weight (Empty)	282,500 lbs
Weight (Maximum Takeoff)	585,000 lbs
Payload (Maximum)	164,900 lbs
Crew	5 (5 Crew Cabins)
Accommodation	18 Maximum (9 Passenger Dorms)
Standard Acceleration	4.2 G
Range (Maximum Fuel)	400 A.U.
Range (Maximum Payload)	44 A.U.
Standard Complement	2 Endo/Exo-Atmospheric Shuttles 1 MF-813 Flying Mule
Other Equipment	2 Magnetic Grappler Launchers 6 Self-Powered Transmitter Buoys

How much of this should be in the article? That which fits in the infobox has already been added. —MJBurrage • TALK • 04:22, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

I've seen some of these stats floating around the web and the one that seems to be the most ridiculous is the weight. It would not even be remotely imaginable that the tare weight is 128 tonnes. I'm not sure why such a ludicrously light weight is quoted. An M1 Abrams tank exceeds 60 tonnes. A Boeing 737-800 comes in tare weight of 44 tonnes and half the length, and half the width, and has probably 10-15% of the cubic capacity of the Serenity. Even with the advent of highly advanced materials and extreme exotic metal-alloys it is still hard to imagine that the Serenity would only weigh 128 tonnes. -Snocrash,29/5/14

Serenity's "extenders"

The long bars under the engine section (the "abdomen", if you will) are definitely not the "extenders" Shepherd Book refers to in the episode "Serenity." Those look to me like a protective element, so that in a rough or reckless landing, the engine section won't crack open like an egg upon contact with the ground.

According to The Official Serenity Blueprints (from Quantum Mechanix http://www.quantummechanix.com/) early versions of the Firefly class had the engine pods right next to the hull, causing buffetting when in atmosphere. Later versions (of which Serenity is one) have the engines mounted on "extenders" or wing-type structures; in other words the extenders are the "wings" of a Firefly. Makes sense I guess.

64.112.219.137 (talk) 21:14, 2 January 2008 (UTC)darthpaul@tc3net.com

Reavers/Rievers

Not sure about the spelling for these Whedon 'verse baddies. "Reavers" is used on the "Firefly" DVD. I don't recall that the word ever actually appears on the screen in the series. Perhaps someone has access to original production notes? Webster's Third New International lists both spellings as acceptable for one who robs or despoils by stealth or force. The verb is rieve/reave. Think of the more familiar modern word "bereft," meaning deprived. All these words are of Scottish origin.

So it may be that Josh Whedon had in mind the most infamous of Scottish highwaymen, the incestuous Bean Family, of the Elizabethan/Jacobean era. The Bean Family's attacks on travelers were made even more intolerable by the fact that they murdered their victims to eliminate witnesses–and subsequently cannibalized them to eliminate the evidence. Certainly there were other highwaymen along the lonely, narrow highways of the day. But when this Bean habit of cannibalism reached King James' ears, he was so scandalized that he led his army to rout them from their secret lair in a cave with an underwater entrance which could be reached only during low tide. The entire family was executed in Edinburgh, putting an end to their reiving ways.

Alberto Enriquez (talk) 01:17, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

For those interested, the written version of the story of the Sawney Bean family, is most likely an urban legend, possibly based on much earlier and less salacious events. Of course this, in now way discounts it as a possible source used by Joss, as the "Bean Clan" has an established tradition as a story telling inspiration. —MJBurrage^(T•C) 17:42, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

In modern American English it would be "reaver". The "rieve" spelling is archaic.Ken McE (talk) 20:24, 29 June 2008 (UTC)

Changes between series and movie

I'm corrently working up a rewrite of this article, and have a few questions I'm thowing out to the masses in order to further my understanding of the subject. Feel free to answer under each specific question. Clear and descriptive answers appreciated, bonus points for WP:reliable sources. Thanks in advance. -- saberwyn 11:39, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

1. What happened to the two ship-sets between the series and the film? Were they left more-or-less intact, pulled apart and reconstruced (either immediately or via a storage facility), or were they destroyed and rebuilt from scratch?
2. What changes were made to the set? (Yes, I know its in the article, but its currently unsourced) Why were these changes made?
3. What happened to the ship after filming completed? If dismantled/destroyed, are there still any sizable chunks in circulation?

Head

In the article it says:

The upper deck houses the cockpit at the front, in the "head".

In Naval terms a "head" is a restroom. And given the rest of naval references (ship, captain and so on) it may be appropriate to change it to "front of ship", "bow" or the like. --Faina windu (talk) 12:17, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

The issue is that this ship has a "head", "neck", and "thorax", like the bug the design is named after. What about "head-like" bow, or elevated bow? —MJBurrage^(T•C) 15:41, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

I think the "elevated bow" is rather descriptive. David Souther (talk) 02:44, 16 August 2008 (UTC)

That's not Serenity, or any Firefly-class ship.

The "model" of Serenity in Dr. Horrible's Sing-Along Blog isn't a model at all. It's a bunch of pots hanging from the ceiling Horrible's kitchen. While they appear in all three acts, they can best be seen as the cluster of pots they are in the second act, during the aftermath of Horrible's operation (the second Bad Horse song).Ynos (talk) 16:10, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

The claim is not that the shape is a model of the ship, rather that the pots were deliberately arranged so that the silhouette would resemble Serenity. See the cited interview for more details. —MJBurrage^(T•C) 13:53, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

ISS module

Absent some confirmation from NASA, Serenity is just a commonly used name for space (and water) related things. It was also one of four names that could be voted for just by clicking, where as Colbert and Xenu required entering a choice by typing. One could make the, as yet unsubstantiated, claim that fans of the franchise are the reason for the outcome, but one could also argue that people just chose the easy front runner as a vote against Colbert and/or Xenu. As both a Whedon and Colbert fan myself, I can say that I was voting against Colbert. —MJBurrage^(T•C) 13:53, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

Appearance in "If You Should Go"?

Are there any sources other than directly watching the video clip that can be used to show that the vessel in the clip is a Firefly type or Firefly-inspired vessel? -- saberwyn 20:26, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

Production art

There is production art of Serenity here at an archive of the official Firefly website on Fox.com. I think it might be of use, but I don't want to meddle. At worst, the link will be here on the talk. ~Cheers, TenTonParasol 22:27, 12 May 2013 (UTC)

External links modified (January 2018)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Serenity (Firefly vessel). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060318164830/http://www.newtek.com/lightwave/profiles/Serenity/index.php to http://www.newtek.com/lightwave/profiles/Serenity/index.php
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110718134453/http://boards.theforce.net/literature/b10003/16431027/p45 to http://boards.theforce.net/literature/b10003/16431027/p45

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 00:22, 25 January 2018 (UTC)