Talk:Installation 00

rename to "Installation 00" (Closed)
Since we now know the installation number, why not rename?

For
Per above-- Sp art an- 781  CommCSV 10:56, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

Yes I Agree -- 75.170.129.21 21:53, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

Yep, I also agree. The Installation 04 and 05 pages aren't Alpha and Delta Halo, so neither should this be the Ark. --Roeas29 09:16, 28 September 2007 (UTC)

Neutral
I am more for a "Installation 00 (The Ark), because the forerunners also refer to it as the Ark, as do the Covenant and the Humans. --Justin Time 02:14, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

Against
Is there any solid proof that the Ark is "Installation 00"? The only thing I remember is the heading at the start of the level "The Ark", but that doesn't mean anything on an official level. 155.205.200.18 01:45, 24 October 2007 (UTC) In my opinion, the Ark sounds a lot better. Baryon15 20:32, 25 May 2009 (UTC)

Forerunner = human race?
Further evidence to suggest that the Forerunner and human race are one and the same manifests itself in one of the final cutscenes of Halo: Combat Evolved. Guilty Spark, upon scanning the files of human history aboard the severely damaged Pillar of Autumn, remarks on, "Our lost time." This subtle distinction, coupled with the knowledge that guilty spark refers to Master Chief and Miranda Keyes as the "Reclaimer" and acts as if they have met before, allows one to reasonably conclude that the human race is all that remains of the Forerunner. It's incredibly ironic, especially when one considers how the Covenant have essentially worshipped Forerunner technology and, at the same time, are driven by their dogmatic beliefs to eradicate the human race.
 * And let's not forget, the human race is believed to have come into origin in Africa, before migrating to Mesopatamia, where civilization began. - Chickenman 00:01, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

If you find all the terminals it states that the Forerunners had the Mantle of Guardianship for your galaxy and found a special race (humans) choosing to safe them from the rings firing and just for the record when Sparks tells the Chief "that you are Forerunner" he's saying that the Chief has taken on "the Mantle of Guardianship" because he not just fighting to save humanity but for all life in the galaxy like the Forerunners before him -- MCDBBlits 19:55, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

Hasn't it been determined that Humans aren't Forerunners? Also, when 343 GS says "you are Forerunner" I think he means that Chief has the same mission as the Forerunners.

That's what I said -- MCDBBlits 18:53, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

By who has it been determined? You? God? I think it all depends on how you interperet the data. And I've read every single terminal message, I know what it said. --Jaeryd 14:32, 23 December 2007 (UTC)

--Hold on

I'm pretty sure that the Forerunners are the ancestors of humans, because didn't the forerunners also stay on the Ark to be protected? I mean, why in the world would they purposefully leave the Ark to be destroyed? Maybe without their large civilization, they forgot their past technology and their civilization had to start over. Other evidence: The Gravemind says "A father's sin pass to his son", what Guilty Spark says has already been pointed out many times, and the Prophet of Truth himself says "You are were not worthy of their Great Journey then, you are the ones they left behind! You are not worthy now!" Or something similar to that (that's probably innacurate in words used and order of what he said, but the general information is all there) suggesting that they were the surviving Forerunners that renewed their civilization. Also, when you think about Noah and the Flood, when he built the Ark, He and his family had to start civilization over again, but he didn't start it with a different race of animals or anything, so if there is any relation (which it seems there is) then that biblical reference hints that the Forerunners and the Humans are the same, genetically, but possess no knowledge of their past as the most advanced race in the galaxy. Jaeryd 02:47, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

Forerunners in the Ark?
It is also believed, though this is purely speculative, that the Ark may have sheltered the Forerunners after Halo's first use, which then evolved into humanity. In the Bible, God floods the Earth to cleanse it of all life, which has grown evil and wicked. However, he saves a group of righteous humans and two of of all animals by telling them to build and seek refuge in a ship, called the Ark. Thus it is a possibility that in Halo, the Ark is a structure or device that shields those using it from the effects of the rings' activation and the Flood. The humans on Earth might have descended from those who were protected by the Ark during the first activation of the rings. This theory is purely speculative of course.

Ark is a forerunner ship?
Another speculative opinion assrets that the Ark is a forerunner ship which would jump into slipspace at the time of the activation of the seven Halo rings, thus removing the occupants from mass genocide that would purge the galaxy of all sentient life.
 * We know from Halo: Ghosts of Onyx that this cannot be the case, as the Onyx Instilsation was the doorway to the Forerunner Construct of Shield World. This is the "Shield" to the Halo rings "Sword," Unless at the center of the ark is possibly another enterance to the Shield World. -- Simaster 03:31, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

Repopulation?
How did the species hidden in the ark get back to their respective homeworlds after the firing of the Halos? Lamoid 18:31, 4 October 2007 (UTC)Lamoid

A better question is, if the Flood can go into a millenia long hibernation of their own will then how did we repopulate so fast if the Flood could easily have still be in the galaxy hibernating until we came back?

Perhaps they dont have a natural hibernation and they were kept in stasis by the machines of Halo? I am not sure I am rusty on my history and couldnt really get throught Dietz's book. --Justin Time 21:23, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

Halo inside earth?
Some people have speculated that there is a halo inside the earth itself, The designs on the outside of the halos, the rings things look exactly like the ark structure, and that the forerunner ship is the key to unlock the halo, or installation 01 the first ring.--Darth nexes 20:23, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

The Ark in Ghosts of Onyx
I personally believe the Mini-Dyson Sphere / Halo Bomb Shelter is the ark. it does make sense, considering that it's the only thing in the galaxy that can keep them safe from something that can wipe out all sentient life (Sound familiar? Noah's ark.

-VikedaL, profile available at wikipedia.


 * Except that the storyboard says Ark. --Dragonclaws 02:15, 6 December 2006 (UTC)


 * So? think it could have been a recieveing beacon from the Sphere or something? it doesn't say The Ark, it says earth_ark_09 -V
 * A Dyson sphere is a sphere, the thing in question is decidably not. -- ED ( talk )(shockfront) 17:33, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

The only thing about that is that the Forerunners had a "Shield" and a "Sword." The Ark would be the sword. The "Halo Bomb Shelter" would logically be the shield. It can defend against Halo.

What if the Mini-Dyson Sphere is the prototype Ark as the thing in the Halo 3 trailer is the same basic design as the entry to the Mini-Dyson Sphere just on a bigger scale -- MCDBBlits 19:20, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

The 'sword' was a reference to the Halos and the Sheild to the micro dyson spheres which do not exsist in normal space but are actuall held within a slipspace bubble. Since you can see the milky way from the ark, the ark cant be a sheild world installation.

Flash of Light
What if that huge flash of light was being angled towards the moon to awaken the ark there. What if it was some sort of signal or pulse laser communication to a different planet.--Halo3Halo3

Intresting very possible but maybe it's just the power of this thing activating.
 * We'll have to wait and see. -- ED ( talk )(shockfront) 17:32, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

The Ark or Ark

 * Talk pages keep disappearing, including the Reach talk page and the Ark talk page. i've posted valid arguments on some things in both articles, and the day after i post them, they disappear. odd. Vikedal 01:48, 17 December 2006 (UTC)
 * The vandal you refer to is User:RelentlessRecusant who on 16:58, 9 December 2006 moved the article "The Ark" to "Ark" but didn't move the Talk page with comments on it. -- Esemono 04:19, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

Vote for Article Name

 * Change to The Ark (2)
 * Change to Ark (4)


 * Change to The Ark - Now I propose that this be reversed as "The Ark" is a better name for the article -- Esemono 04:19, 17 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Agreed The Ark--User:JohnSpartan117 05:30, 17 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Ark - there is never a "the" in the article name, as per Wikipedia standards! -49 Proximal Secant [ Relentless  Recusant [[Image:Jedi_Order.jpg|20px]]] 20:16, 17 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Halopedia is not Wikipedia. -- Esemono 03:02, 18 December 2006 (UTC)


 * Why does it matter if they redirect to each other anyway?--User:JohnSpartan117 23:00, 17 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Besides broken redirects, it's not really a big issue. This vote is more to prevent users from switching it back and forth every couple of weeks. If there is a consensus then we can point to this vote and say this article title has been deemed "The Ark" or "Ark" -- Esemono 03:02, 18 December 2006 (UTC)
 * I would like to remind my esteemed colleagues that Wikipedia is the basis of all Wikias, and its guidelines are upheld by many Wikias, including the greatest in size of them all: Wookieepedia. Cheers, -49 Proximal Secant [ Relentless  Recusant [[Image:Jedi_Order.jpg|20px]]] 03:39, 18 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Again Halopedia IS NOT wikipedia or Wookiepedia for that matter -- Esemono 23:10, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

Vikedal 19:28, 18 December 2006 (UTC)
 * The Ark Simply because it's the name of the object O_o. As much as wikipedia standards say "No The in the title", this is halopedia, not wikipedia.
 * Ark Not because of Wikipedia, but because it's simpler. To have an article say "Why, the Ark, of course." is more natural than "Why, The Ark, of course." --Dragonclaws 19:42, 18 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Ark I change my mind, it should be Ark because "The" is not part of the name. The Master Chief dosnt have "The" in the name of the article, so neither should the Ark.--User:JohnSpartan117 09:04, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Master Chief doesn't have a The because it's his rank of Master Chief Petty Officer, not The Master Chief Petty Officer.


 * I know...but they kind of use it to refer to him now! And in the third person its "the Master Chief" and the same goes for "the Ark". So ergo the page should be called Ark--User:JohnSpartan117 20:55, 24 December 2006 (UTC)


 * [Coughs to cover his snickering at John's sudden vote change...]  SPARTAN-091  [[Image:UNSC.jpg|15 px]] HelmetComm undefined Juliet  22:52, 26 December 2006 (UTC)


 * Ark Its jus the way things should be.-- ryan  n  green  day 21:01, 10 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Ark i don't think the "The" is neccessary. -- SpecOps306 04:40, 29 January 2007 (UTC)


 * I'd just like to bring up the quote from spiderman. He said "It's spiderman not the spiderman." Fork 23:36, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

halo.wikia.com/wiki/Arbiter. You'll note that when we talk about the Master Chief or the Arbiter, we talk about the Master Chief, not The Master Chief. Its the same with the Ark. We talk about the Ark not The Ark.--RotBrandon 04:36, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Ark - The is an adjective that doesn't belong in titles. If I am sereaching for the Master Chief or the Arbiter, I don't put halo.wikia.com/wiki/The_Arbiter, I just put

picture name
does anyone notice that the sketch of the ark at the bottom of the page says "Earth_Ark"? and that it says "Chief/Dervish(the arbiter?)" something to think about :p lol- SPARTAN-410 I noticed that too and was about to post the same thing. Possible choice level or a clue that the Arbiter is going to return with

a diffrent name. Envy  Skull  Effects  00:17, 21 March 2007 (UTC)


 * "Dervish" was the old name for "Arbiter" that Bungie changed to be politically correct. -- Dragonc laws ( talk ) 20:22, 3 April 2007 (UTC)


 * Bungie changed it because they thought it would be offensive to muslims. --Lord Lycan 02:45, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

Ark Location
If the Ark is truly is the structure on Earth, it is not on Mombasa Island, or even Mombasa mainland. It is because the Ark is completely outside the city boundary. I say this is because of what can be concluded from the Halo 3 trailer. In the trailer, the remains of a harp type cable-stayed bridge, similar Kilindini bridge, can be seen. Studying the surrounding terrain, it can be noted that this is not Kilindini bridge, and the Ark is 1-2 km away. Further more, there is a dirt road, (there are no dirt roads in Mombasa); except for the rubble in immediate vicinity of Master Chief, there is no evidence of that there had ever been human built structures; and finaly, there is a different geography and natural flora. The uncovering of the Ark is unrelated to the slipspace detonation caused by Regret's Flagship.


 * Good point. FYI, the structures in the distance are bridge-like, but are actually parts of the giant tower that fell when Regret's explosion destroyed the base. -- Dragonc laws ( talk ) 11:12, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

Wondering about Ark...
Human history began, as far as we can tell, in Africa. Maybe Earth was a last-ditch emergency option. If the rings were fired, and the Forerunner didn't make it to the "Shield worlds", perhaps they left early forms of themselves and other animals on Earth, to hopefully reattain the Forerunner's legacy. Maybe?

Similarity to structure on High Charity
Doesn't this structure that most assume is the Ark look just like a structure on High Charity? If you look at a picture of the entire city/planetoid of High Charity, you can see a similar-looking structure on the end opposite the broken half with the light/energy-spire. Whelk 20:52, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

Yeah I have sceen something like that is the game way below the level High Charity. Odd.Trooper117 22:04, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

Time Gate
Perhaps the Ark contains some means of time-travel, allowing the Forerunners to travel to the future where the Flood has been starved to death.

“This is how it all begins. Just in time to once again dance on the knife-edge of oblivion, to re-live what the Halos had hoped to destroy and more. For two enemies now stand where before there was only one. The fate we escaped a fate we may relive. I almost convinced myself that no one was listening, that the waves of the past had rolled through once again, but a chance remains to change the Universe anew. Learn of our past. Take these keys and dip from the wells of history. Perhaps there are others of us you may find how to save us all.”

Ark on earth?
Could the Ark be the forerunner structure on earth in the trailer? The Ark is said to be the place where one can remotely activate the rings, thus destroying all sentient life. As the forerunner structure seems to activate on earth in the Halo 3 trailer you hear Cortana say; 'This is the way the world ends' meaning this is how all life is destroyed; by activating the rings from the Ark, and that the forerunner ship is the key to activating it. --Arbiter117

Server 05/ forerunners aren't humans
In server 05 they alluded to the fact that the ark was meant to save the humans from the halos. Interesting concept.AJ 03:01, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

What if the ark is actully Earth, and that it projects some kind of Halo-proof shield over the planet.

That would be kind of impossible seeing as how its in the ground. AJ 22:25, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

Just because it's in the ground, doesn't mean it can't be uncovered. The Forerunners were technologically advanced. They could have found a way to make it work.

I see your point. But I don't believe that the ark is actually Earth. Because in Server 05 they said that the inhabitants of this world need to be researched; they may hold answers to our own secrets; this building may save them; it will be a wonderful world.Please note that this is not a direct quote. The building is the Ark, the inhabitants are humans, and "this world" is Earth. So, in turn, the forerunners cannot be humans, but the forerunners favored humans. One of my friends came up with a point that maybe humans were saved to get the forerunners out of the Ark. Just sayin. AJ 22:41, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

I'm saying the ark was meant to preserve the humans for eventual study.

Interesting theory. So you are saying that the forerunners treated humans like the flood? AJ 22:45, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

No, I'm saying they created a temporary safe zone to keep the humans alive during the halo activation. Maybe they saw a potential in the humans to discover and take over the Forerunners "empire". Sort of like picking a successor to a company before you quit, or in this case, die.

hmm. interesting. My personal theroy is that the Ark was made to save humans and the forerunners were grooming humans to take thier place in the galaxy after the flood were gone... which agrees with your theory. AJ 22:53, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

I think a lot of people can learn from our knowledge here.

This isn't so much about knowledge as it is interpretation of facts. I just brought up a valid fact and we conversed over it. AJ 22:56, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

Whatever. We supplied them with viewpoints to make their own theories with. That's all.

Here is the quote:

The anomalous world is in a perilous location beyond the line.

{The secrets it holds must be preserved.}

{Plans within plans within plans}

The inhabitants; these unique denizens, must be researched.

They may hold answers to our own mysteries.

{What irony that we discovered this treasure, only at the end of things.}

{But what fortune that we still had time to save them.}

The thing we built on that world will vouchsafe their lives,

{But perhaps one day it will be used for its intended purpose.}

If the plan succeeds, and they are saved, it will be a good world.

If the plan fails,

{And the adversary succeeds,}

it will remain an enigma forever

{With no-one left to reclaim it.}

We can learn guess the following: 1) Earth was beyond the line of the Halo's but the Forerunners thought it was uninhabited. There are secrets there that most be preserved. The inhabitants, humans, must be studied (meaning Forerunners are not humans). The Ark protected us, but it had another true purpose.

My guess is Bungie is saying another Biblical references: The Ark saved us from the Flood. -- Lordofmonsterisland "Roar to me"  23:13, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

I can see that. Thanx for the qoute. I just watched episode 5 for the like 6th time. AJ 23:15, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

This totally blows a hol in my theory. Oh well.

I know this mentioned above, but do you think that the "thing" is a portal to the same micro-dyson sphere in Ghosts of Onyx. This would mean that the two functions are teleportation and activation of the Halos

forerunner theory
My theory is that the forerunners created the flood as a way to become immortal. But something went horribly wrong, the flood developed sentient consciousness and became a parasitecitic void. The forerunners inishal goal was to keep peace in the universe, but over time they became more manlvent. Until they created an omnipotent empire that sought to conquer the galaxy. After they created the flood, their leaders realized they could rule the galaxy with the flood. They constructed the seven halos, shield world, and the ARK to not control, but RELEACE the flood, and then use the ark to destroy most of the flood. when seven halos fire, the blast carries cells of flood DNA, so all sentient beings within three radii are turned to flood. The ARK itself is actually control center/weapon, first the ark signals all seven halos, then when the ARK fires, the rings magnify the ark's blast to destroy the flood. They also made it so that the halos must be on standby phase, the act of onyx being active, and the "KEY" be used to actvate the ARK.-- Admiral Sozai Nexes  FLEETCOMM 01:35, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

The forerunners said that the flood have an extragalatical orgin, and they are confused by them in Iris. They did not create the flood. Terin 13:50, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

ARG Coordinates
The article says no location has been released by Bungie but during the course of the ARG we've gotten coordinates to a giant area near Mount Kilimanjaro, which has a giant basin at the top of it. I don't have the coordinates, but was wondering, why are they missing? Cody2526 07:06, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

A theory
What if the Ark and that thing mentioned in GoO are the same. Like a teleporter. What if the Forerunners build the Ark as a portal for humans to go through to the sheild world and in the sheild world is the place to activate all the Halos. Really why would you go somewhere to active all the Halos if you would be destroyed too. It just doesn't make sense.Trooper117 22:08, 17 September 2007 (UTC)


 * The Ark is over 3 radii out from the galactic centre - well beyond any of the Halo's firing range. That's the point of it - to act as the safe control centre to nuke the galaxy if the need arose and safeguard any sentient species with promise who would otherwise be within the firing range of the Halos.

Hey wtf? i was right!(in a way)
This was my post on the E3 2007 Halo trailer guys...--CHr0n0sPh3r3 00:02, 4 October 2007 (UTC)cHr0n0sPh3r3

Hey i just thought of this, but could Earth NOT be the Ark?but in stead a Gateway of sorts to the Ark? I mean noone really confirmed thething on Earth WAS the Ark, people just had a bunch of evidence, see the scene with the Peli's going from a CCS to what appears to be a Halo? There are 2 crests not one in a ring, but 2. If what i just said is right, then wouldnt Truth's ship in actual fact BE a key, but not the Ark but it's gate way? Hell Humans being called Reclaimers, because they are going to set out and reclaim what was theirs as Gate keepers? If u ask i got the idea from Homeworld 2, dont ask i just did ok?--CHr0n0sPh3r3 12:30, 29 July 2007 (UTC)cHr0n0sPh3r3

Good catch. Rapturous 14:55, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

Sunlight on the Ark
SPOILERS (but you shouldn't be here in the 1st place if you haven't finished the game) SPOILERS

So I've just realized I never looked up during those 5 or so levels, but did anyone else? My question is, where does the daylight that shines on the Ark come from? If it's so far away from the galactic rim that you can see the Milky Way in the sky, how does it seem like daylight on the Installation? Is there a sun floating in the middle of nowhere?Mr Toad 01:48, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

Probably artificially created by the Forerunners. 67.70.60.219 15:35, 5 October 2007 (UTC)Lamoid

Obviously your not looking hard enough, There is a sun on most of the levels and can be seen while on the Halo being eclipsed by one of the Ark's arms ProphetofTruth 21:23, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

picture
there was a picture of a hologram of the ark what happened to it?- Croix129

still there

Question
If the rings were designed to kill all the food for the flood rather than just killing the flood its self what use would activating the ring above the ark as it would just kil all the humans and covernant but the flood would still be alive just here food would be dead

The ring wasn't fully completed at time of firing, hence why 343 GS stops Johnson from priming it. GS knows a premature firing will damage the installation and will result in massive damage to the ark.

how???
first question did the ark build all the halos at that exact location of the ark or did the forerunners build the halos where they are now second question if the the halos were built at the exact location of the ark how would the halos get to there current location

Slipspace jumps --MCDBBlits 21:24, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

Portal
Someone named that section the Maginot Sphere... Which is speculated to be the name of the dyson sphere, not the Portal. ProphetofTruth 00:48, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

Galaxy which The Ark is located in....(And the sphere inside The Ark.)
Well back in the ARG for Halo 3 before the opening of Server 04 the site of The Arks Location was located before the Server was open mainly brute forced guessing by random members from different communities, Well most of use think the ark is actually located in the Boomerang Galaxy which is the picture from Server 4 and other coincidences (SP?) from the level "The Ark" when one of the Sanghelis said "Is that?" and then shortly Ship Master Rtmas interupped him. That galaxy bares image to the Boomerang Galaxy which is at the right point from the Halo firings. ;)

On another note when you are on the Halo level and if you go on saved films you can see that the core actually bares resemblence to our own planet Earth with some of the continents in the Early stages from the movement of the plates. Maybe our own Earth was attacked during the Forerunner-Flood war?

Sincerely, Zero Args.Bungie.Org ( I have mistaken the Maginot Sphere for the Earth but they do resemble each other.)

so wtf
WTF is the thing in the middle of it? I know its the core, but WHAT is it, like what is its purpose? Just wondering

Spartan-118 05:21, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

Its a forge, if you read any of the terminals they mention it. It builds Halos, and I'm guessig it will attempt to repair the ark. ProphetofTruth 12:26, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

What do you mean, I read some of them (damn hacks, couldn't fully read it all) and it never mentioned a "forge" in the middle of the ark

Spartan-118 03:32, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

Pic interpetation
Is it just me or does the core of the ark pic look like a giant eye?

I does and it kind of relates to one of the murals in a deleted scene of Halo 2Tsunami-058 18:00, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

The Ark's Core / The new Halo
Later in Halo 3, we learn a new Halo is being built to replace Installation 04, and will be ready to fire in 3 days. We also learn from the map description of Construct that creating installations requires large amounts of resources - and so it would. Perhaps the Ark's core is the planet which was used to create the "new" Halo?

But if this is the case...

1) Why is there only one of these planets, what if more than one of the installations were destroyed?

2) Does this planet have any significance?

On the subject of the new Halo, (I'm just throwing this out there)

how on earth would it get to its location at Installation 04? Would it go through some sort of portal? And what was building this new Halo - Forerunner machines within the Ark? And how the heck did they manage to build it so fast? It fascinates me that these massive rings, which we'd think took hundreds of years to build, could be built so quickly.

--Pizzanator 06:35, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

-Due to the Forerunner's advanced knowledge of slipspace and teleportation, they are likely capable of transporting an object that size to a desired location. -The planet at the core was either a planet transported to the core using slipspace/teleportation technology; or creating a gravitational field in which various objects and resources placed there would be pushed and formed into a single mass. -The Forerunners were able to construct Installation 04 at such speed because the number of constructors they had, for one thing, and perhaps they already had pre-constructed halo "parts" at the ready in case they needed a quick reconstruction of a halo. Also,the could have used the broken parts of the first Installation 04, merely reconnecting the pieces and remodeling new buildings, which could explain the control room on Installation 04 (II) to be slightly different from the first one.

lovemuffin 22:36, 4 January 2008 (UTC)Lovemuffin

Somethign Cortana said about the Ark...
I'm curious about this one thing;

After retrieving the message from cortana from the flood controlled covenant ship on the floodgate level, she mensions in the following cutscene that there's a way on the Ark to defeat the flood without firing the halo rings. Yet, by the end of the game, this solution obviously wasn't realized when they fired the replacement 04.

So, what was it? Why didn't Cortana decide to use it?

Sorry if this is something everyone but me knows, but I haven't found anything on this...

(This has nothing to do (at least I dont think it does) with my question above, but I also noticed that there is some kind of tubing coming out from the Sun in the Ark's solar system. They look like sun rays but when you zoom in with the sniper rifle you see there are pulses coming from them, and that silhouettes of what could be ribs in the tubing appear as the energy pulse passes by...) --Zapped One 04:25, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

Those are interesting points but i have no idea, it seems odd that bungie would add somthing like an alternative unless they planned for the Flood to return later and a new means of victory to be found. Any thoughts? -- Climax-Void   Chat  or  My Contributions

I'd say when she said "remaining Halo rings" she meant the ones actually in the galaxy hat would kill us. If I was her, I would've done the same, luring the Flood to the Ark to blow them up there. The appearance of a new Halo probably simplified the problem for Cortana. But if there is another way that didnt get used, then I'd be very interested how that gets dealt with...  Specops306 ,  Kora  'Morhek  23:32, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

She might've had the intention to, after luring the Flood to Installation 00, keep the Flood contained there, while the humans/elites could retreat, and ultimately blow the Ark to hell. The emergence of Installation 04 (II) probably simplified things a lot... Blue Ninja 15:13, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

Galaxy in the Sky
Please don't remove the "another galaxy." It is another galaxy - sure as hell that isnt the Milky Way, and if it was it would be far larger in proportion to the space it would take up.  Specops306 ,  Kora  'Morhek  01:39, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

-Not if you look at the dimensions. The milky way is ~100,000 light years across. If you're on 00 more than 200,000 light years away from the blast radius (3x galactic radai (which is 50,000 * 3 = 150,000 light years)) you're 350,000 LY away from the galaxy. This is enough to see the whole structure of the milky way galaxy as seen overhead in the level "the ark". Say it's the Milky Way, b/c it is. The marine is about to say that, when Johnson cuts him off.


 * From what I saw, it wasn't the Milky Way. Not only was it further away than the real Milky Way should be, it also looks different.  Specops306 ,  Kora  'Morhek  01:56, 23 March 2008 (UTC)


 * There was also the fact that you are NOT 350,000 lightyears away. You're 2000000000000000000 lightyears away. And galaxies are far larger than most people think; even as far as the Ark is, the Milky Way would be much larger in the sky. So therefore, it can't be the Milky Way.  Specops306 ,  Kora  'Morhek  19:42, 31 March 2008 (UTC)


 * I have read many encyclopedic things about atsronomy and the all place the milky way at ~98,000-99,000 light-years across. some galexys dwarfe that but that is the rough size of the milky way

Colors
Please do not delete the newly colored Terminal 3 dialog, that took me forever to get just right. Ghost elite 09:39, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

a theroy of Halo 4
CORTANA-SPOILERS-ENDOFHALO3-AFTERCREDITS-PHRASE: "When we fired halo we destroyed it, and AND DID A NUMBER ON THE ARK possibly meaning the ark WAS NOT destroyed! halo 4? June? CONNECTION 2 MARITHON? mor halo ins4 recreations? --66.38.66.107 01:52, 23 March 2008 (UTC) (User:Ptowery)

Nope. That's it for the Master Chief. There's Halo Wars and Halo: Chronicles in the works, but that's it for now.  Specops306 ,  Kora  'Morhek  01:54, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

Not quite, microsoft bought the rights to Halo, Bunjie always said there was going to be only 3 'Halo' games, but if you think Microsoft wont cash in the Halo universe for another triolgy of games revolving round Master Chief your in for a surprise.

Milky Way
As for all that speculation about the galaxy in the sky above the ark, well you can put it to rest. The only explanation is that this is the Milky Way, because according to the technology tree, Tier 0 technology is required for intergalactic travel, and the Forerunners were only Tier 1. Besides, the only galaxy that the Halos were present in was the Milky Way galaxy, and the Ark is exactly 262,144 light years away from the galactic centre. It could not be any other galaxy, because the nearest galaxy to the Milky Way is over 2.5 million light years away (thus exceeding the 262,144 LY distance).

The size of a galaxy is open to discussion, they are as they are, and no amount of argueing is goung to change that. They do not appear bigger than they actually are. If the Ark is 260,000 LY from the galactic centre, then the galaxy would not take up the entire sky. Its a matter of triangulation: imagine an observer on the Ark looking at the Milky Way. Imagine a distance double the diameter of the galaxy between the galactic centre and the Ark, and draw a line through the galaxy (representing its diameter) then connect both ends of this line to the point on which the observer stands. You should end up with a triangle, and you will see that the observer is at a sufficient distance to see the Milky Way at the size it appears in Halo 3.

Rider890, 3:30pm 11 July 2008

Installation 00-B?
Do you think they would begin to rebuild The Ark? Like they did with Installation 04? Possibly using Earth as a Core? Or, if The Ark was still intact, would the Flood possibly use High Charity's slipspace engines to teleport the remnants of The Ark to Earth to invade it? Eh? Eh? --Lord Lycan 02:40, 28 September 2008 (UTC)


 * not very likely, but could be possibleMaiar 09:15, 2 December 2008 (UTC)

In the event that a Halo ring is destroyed, the Ark will manufacture a replacement. Therefore, it is only logical that if the Ark was completely destroyed (and could not be repaired), another facility would manufacture another Ark. At first, I theorized that the sentinels of all the other Halos would be instructed to work together and build another one. Then I realized that the Halo rings don't have a core from which to get materials to build a new Ark. The most likely scenario is that the Forerunner homeworld is equipped with all the necessary machinery to rebuild the Ark and warp it to it's rightful location. Either that, or a facility was built for the sole purpose of constructing a new Ark. That could even be where the first Ark came from. X Super Gamer Talk 23:29, June 15, 2010 (UTC)

I think that the Ark was made to repair Halos. And if the Halos are destroyed then their screwed. OR. Like was Super Gamer said that the Sentinels would come together to build it. And then if they went to the Ark and they needed something(like titanium) then they would send part of the Sentinels to go to some planet or something like that and retrieve that material. Then they would bring it back and use it to build that part back. But think about this for a little bit. The reuniting of Mendicant Bias and the Gravemind. Because think about it! After the Gravemind got High Charity it must have had access to Mendicant Bias! So what if part of the Gravemind was torturing Cortana and another part of it was "talking" with Mendicant Bias! Wait, now I just thought of something. Wouldn't Mendicant Bias have a weapon like Guilty Spark had except better? So then now that the "Oracle" has realized that he was wrong why didn't he try to use his weapon against the Gravemind? Maybe the weapon was part of it that was taken away after Offensive and Mendicant fought?Thank you taking time to listen to my post! 06:19, June 16, 2010 (UTC)!

It looks so...unrealistic
I don't think the shape of the Ark is very realistic. If you've noticed, there's no "up" or "end" to a planet, or a Halo ring. To denote there's an "up" in the universe, in which direction the Ark points towards, is rather disagreeable.

Another biblical reference
Couldn't the ark be a reference to the Ark of the Covenant? (ARK of the COVENANT) This is easily explained by the great journey and Truth attempting to fire the Ark. The only biblical reference on the page is Noah's ark. 24.192.97.166 20:45, 27 February 2009 (UTC)


 * I could be a reference to the stories of the Qu'ran or the Hebrew texts as well. Not everything is centered around Christianity. Baryon15 20:34, 25 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Not everything is Islamo-centric either. Stop changing the text.  Smoke Sound off! 13:58, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

forerunner citys on the surface?
If ou look at the survace of the ark from space,ou can clearly see forests,seas,...earth like envirements but if you look very good at the arms of the ark you can see bleu lights,and those bleu lights look like city lights,so it's maybe possible that the forerunners have built citys on the ark


 * Its more likely that these are assembly plants for the purpose of building the new Installations. The Ark may possess a habitable environment and biosphere, but it is very much abandoned, and apart from the temple ruins on Delta Halo there has never been any indication that the Forerunners actually lived on their Halo Installations. --  Administrator  Specops306  -  Qur'a 'Morhek   Honour Light Your Way!  22:25, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

Flood facility on the Ark
According to this article there is no flood containment facility on the Ark, but what about the Halo 3 map Isolation, which takes place at the Ark.


 * I believe Isolation is more of an observation centre rather than an actual containment facility for wildlife... oh, the Flood Hive you see is the result of the Flood invasion in Halo 3...-  5 əb'7 aŋk (7alk ) 19:47, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

The Ark's Fate
Did the destruction of the replacement ring destroy the Ark or just damage it? It says in the article it got damaged but in the after-movie it just shows the half of the ship that Master Chief and Cortana got left behind in. It doesn't show the Ark. So did it actaully get engulfed by the flames?--99.237.222.73 22:02, October 12, 2009 (UTC)


 * According to Halo Waypoint the Ark was destroyed by Installation 04 II's premature firing. I actually put this in the trivia section, know people would not appreciate me just changing the article, but it has since been deleted.

Antony X1000 09:51, December 20, 2009 (UTC)


 * I was just on Halo: Waypoint Word for word this is what it says.


 * "As the Halo Installation fires, falling apart in the process, the survivors make their escape aboard a single human frigate, but not without cost. Though the Arbiter passes safely through the portal back to Earth, the Chief, and Cortana remain in the aft section of the vessel as the gateway suddenly closes."

It mentions nothing about the falling apart ring destroying the Ark. Further given the Ark's shear size I don't believe that the pieces of Installation 04 II could destroy it. Damage it yes, but not destroy it. As for the Halo effect, the cleansing blast the rings fire. In Halo: Legends we saw that it did no damage to anything, except The Flood, and all other Sentient Life not protected.--Subman758 04:29, March 9, 2010 (UTC)

How could Cortana NOT know?
When Cortana was on 04 she must have gotten data about the Ark and the other Installations SOMEWHERE? Or maybe it is because when they went to Earth Cortana stored all the data she didn't need so she "forgot it"?193.200.150.152 23:35, March 1, 2010 (UTC)!!


 * She deleted the Forerunner data after escaping 04, because it was bad for her health by shortening her lifespan.--  Fore  run  ner  23:52, March 1, 2010 (UTC)
 * I don't think it's ever stated what she did with the data. Maybe she gave it to ONI without looking through it. In any case, 343 Guilty Spark indicates that the Forerunners didn't give him knowledge of their whole operation just in case he was captured by the Flood. It's reasonable to presume that specifics of the Ark were not detailed in Installation-04's main computer. --Dragon<font color="#F28500">c laws (<font color="#4D56B1">talk ) 19:21, March 2, 2010 (UTC)


 * Remember also, she still needed to defragment and unpack the data. She had it stored to conserve space, and even then part of it had been corrupted by the compression process. What was left may not have been as legible as she would have liked, not to mention being written in Forerunner. --  Specops306   Autocrat     Qur'a 'Morhek   03:31, 1 November 2010 (EDT)

Defenses?
As we've seen the the Halo Anniversary Terminals, Halo Installations have a defense system so no ship could land on it, so it seems very likely that the Ark would have some form of defense system as it can fire every Halo ring. Bush Wookie Camper

Why the Monitor Killed Johnson
I just played through Halo 3 again, and I don't believe it was because the Monitor was (just) trying to defend the new Halo. Instead, he seemed to know what the Ark was and was defending it. Just wanted to make a note of that here before I confirm this and edit accordingly. Crowdsourced 06:53, 16 October 2011 (EDT)
 * Went ahead and made edits. I'm unsure how to interpret one part of what Guilty Spark says: "You are a child of my makers. Inheritor of all they left behind. ... But this ring is mine." This could be read to say that humans can destroy the Ark if they wish because it was left for them. Crowdsourced 08:33, 16 October 2011 (EDT)
 * The array was also left to the reclaimers; 343GS assumed ownership (as opposed to caretakership") of the new ringworld. He was defencive over the ring's premature firing's risk to the Ark as well as to itself.-- Fore  run  ner '' 09:47, 16 October 2011 (EDT)

Here dude, read this: ''343 Guilty Spark is the Monitor of Installation 04 and was created by the Forerunners! After the Forerunners were assaulted by the Flood they created the Halo Array to destroy the Flood. The Forerunners set up Monitors to oversee the Halo Installations and to control Sentinels incase of a Flood out brake. To insure that the Halo's wouldn't be destroyed very easily is that they only provided the Monitors with enough information to maintain the Halo installations; and if they were to fall into the hands of the Gravemind they would not have the location of the other installations. And to help these Monitors if they fell into the Gravemind they were programed to stop the Flood at all costs. And they also had a protocol that stated that if even a tiny wire on the ring got a tiny bit damaged the Monitor was to fix it immediate. The Monitor also sends all knowledge of this incident to the Knowing. They would also destroy every Flood Spore in an area. And if they didn't account for every microscopic Flood Spore then that whole area was destroyed. And another thing as I said above is that the Halo rings must be at perfect condition at all times in case of a Flood out brake. And the Monitor will do anything to make sure that the ring is always ready to fire. One particular example accord on Installation 04b when Avery Junior Johnson attempted to activate a partially constructed Halo. The Monitor of that Installation 343 Guilty Spark witnessed this. And 343 Guilty Spark couldn't let this happen. Because 343 Guilty Spark knew that it could destroy the Ark and then there would be nothing to make large-scale repairments to the Installations. And that would go against protocol and eventually all the Installations will need large-scale repaiments and there would be nothing to make the replacements! And then if there was a Flood out-brake the whole UNIVERSE could become consumed! So in order to preserve the Ark and the whole Universe 343 Guilty Spark attacked Avery Junior Johnson and successfully stopped this threat that could destroy the whole Universe and put his makers to shame. Unfortunately, soon afterwards, 343 Guilty was "deactivated". The Ring was forced to fire and the Ring was torn apart. The current status of the Ark is unknown, there is a 100% chance that the ring is severely damaged.''

So yeah, I think Guilty Spark is totally justified in what he did. Also, go to the |343 Guilty Spark talk page. There is already a discussion talking about this. I would be glad for you to add your thoughts to it. Vegerot goes RAWR! Vegerot ( talk )  11:48, 16 October 2011 (EDT)

Gallery
Can you give me (and others) a link to the source of first two images in gallery. http://www.halopedian.com/File:ArkRough.jpg http://www.halopedian.com/File:Waypoint_concept_12_03_copy.jpg They kinda don't look very much like something official. PatrickRus 18:34, 12 March 2012 (EDT)

http://thegallery.forwarduntodawn.com/index.php/  (or so it says in the sacred caves) Vegerot!'' 21:34, 12 March 2012 (EDT)!

Yes, it is official, I found it at Paul Russel's gallery: https://plus.google.com/photos/114253662089061571624/albums/5573887131326181105 PatrickRus 14:52, 14 March 2012 (EDT)

Status
Is it really appropriate to label Installation 00 as "Destroyed"? Yes, it was severely damaged by Halo's explosion, and that "did a number on it", but as far as I know the majority of the Ark's superstructure itself still largely exists. Putting aside the unlikelihood of Installation 04B obliterating the entire Ark, we know UNSC forces descended on the structure after the war and is now experiencing severe weather patterns as a result of the damage it took. So yes, the Ark is probably very badly damaged, but evidently the structure still exists in a malfunctioned state. So is it really appropriate to state that it was "Destroyed"? What I read indicates damage, not total destruction. Big difference, really. Anyone else think this is a little off?262VigilantGuardian (talk) 01:01, 26 March 2013 (EDT)


 * Well maybe "irreparably damaged" would be more appropriate. Colonel Grade One.png Col.  Snipes  4  50 Colonel Grade One.png 11:30, 26 March 2013 (EDT)


 * The Ark's status is listed as "destroyed" because The Essential Visual Guide and a few Waypoint videos describe it as such. Now that the Eleventh Hour reports have shown that it's still around, I would say that it's more appropriate to list the Ark as "severely damaged". --Courage never dies. (talk) 12:23, 26 March 2013 (EDT)


 * Just to respond to the recently-deleted portion here: Why is it so difficult to believe that an exploding Halo ring could destroy an installation only 10 times its size when the original 10,000km-wide Alpha Halo was destroyed by a 1km-long cruiser. The difference is staggering and yet everyone accepts the Autumn destroyed a Halo ring.


 * Another thing to bear in mind is that the word 'destroyed' is not necessarily synonymous with 'obliterated'. If the Ark was inoperable and it's habitats were gone you could call it destroyed and yet the entire superstructure could still be intact. Saying it was destroyed does not imply it was vaporized, but that sounds like some of the interpretations here from the comments. Be mindful of the language used. -ScaleMaster117 (talk) 21:56, 25 October 2013 (EDT)

At this point, I'm no so sure it's appropriate to say the Ark was 'destroyed' anymore in any capacity. Structurally it is still intact, it's its environments and life support systems that were damaged. But the Ark itself is still largely whole, as is the moon it strip-mines at its core. So should we still be saying destroyed with these newer revelations?262VigilantGuardian (talk) 21:58, 20 August 2015 (EDT)