[SPOILERS]: The Treknobabble Flies By In The "Blink Of An Eye"
Bozo the Proctologist
S
P
O
I
L
E
R
S
P
A
C
E
T
H
E
F
I
N
A
L
F
R
O
N
T-
Oh, wait, that's that other show.......
Time. One of the most elemental physical units, it surrounds us, it
binds the Universe togeth- well, it's pretty important, anyway!
Voyager stops to check out the Anomaly Of The Week: a planet (?) with
sensor readings that remind Tuvok of a neutron star, rotating once per
second. Janeway orders the ship into orbit, where the Evil Gravitational
Gradient grabs them, knocks the warp and impulse engines off-line
(failure to do so would get it thrown out of the Evil Gravitational
Gradient's union) and drags them down to a low but stable-enough orbit.
Stable enough for them, anyway: the *planet* has a "tachyon core," which
is interacting with Voyager to hold them there, but which is also playing
tectonic games on the planet's crust. On the planet we see a serious
quake topple off some fruit put on an alter for one of the lights in the
sky. When our devout native looks up, he sees a bright new star
(Voyager), and sets off to make an alter for the New God On The Block.
In the reverse of what would be expected for a *real* neutron star, time
is passing far faster on the planet's surface. As Chakotay remembers
he's interested in anthropology and tells B'Elanna to program the probe
being sent to study the planet to take very fast snapshots of the
surface, the fascination of the natives with the "Ground Shaker" in their
sky is shown by a primitive king/warlord/mafioso trying to send them a
message in a hot air balloon.
As the crew look for a way out of their orbital trap, an observatory on
the planet is sending Voyager a message, to try to make contact. When
the crew slow down the message, they realize the people are aware of
them, and know that Voyager is somehow responsible for their quakes.
Fearing that biological organisms couldn't handle the temporal shift, the
Doctor is sent down, under orders to observe, NOT make First Contact (I
would have ordered him to not make "The Final Frontier <EG>).
Surprisingly enough, the transporter treknobabbles up and they can't
retrieve him after the three (planet) days they'd planned.
Chakotay remembers the Doctors fondness for opera, though, and has Kim
focus the sensors on the planet's cultural center. Once back on board,
the Doctor explains how reaching Voyager has inspired the local space
race.
A primitive capsule is soon matching orbit with Voyager. The ship is
able to mate up with a docking port (They must have ordered the
"_Voyager_ Technical Manual" from Amazon.com) and the two astronauts come
aboard to find the crew frozen in place- from the natives temporal
perspective. The two make it all the way to the Bridge before they
realize that they're in a different temporal frame and shift.
It is a physiologically traumatic event, and the female astronaut doesn't
survive. Her pilot does, though, and when the planet's technology
reaches the point of lobbing antimatter missiles (didn't they used to be
called 'photon torpedoes?') at the, the pilot returns to tell them that
Voyager isn't TRYING to shake their planet, that they're caught and are
only trying to escape themselves.
They aren't sanguine about his chances of success after a tri-cobalt
warhead takes down Voyager's shields- but then two ships pop into their
temporal frame and lift Voyager out of the planet's field. Their old
astronaut friend is able to beam back on board, but just long enough to
say good-bye- a sentiment he echoes in his old age, as he sees Voyager
finally warp out of their skies.
If you scroll too fast you'll miss the nits:
- It must have been a big shock for everyone to see the promos had been
as misleading as a politicians campaign promises.
- Someone mentioned an outside company doing Voyager's promos; the promos
showed a scene of a building on the planet fading to newer and
higher-tech designs that wasn't in the ep..... where did the promo
company get it?
- I'm not sure why the comparison to neutron stars was mentioned in the
beginning, as their severe gravity wells cause time to pass more SLOWLY
on their surfaces.
- Once again, their one and only Doctor is sent on an Away Mission.
Letting him adjust the Mobile Emitter to match the natives was a good
idea- but WHY did he STILL wear it on the outside of his frigging
clothes???
- Did they ever even think of speeding up a communicator for the Doctor
to stay in contact?
- Good thing nobody found the doctor during the (planet's) DAYS it took
the transporter to dematerialize him.
- While I know "Star Trek" doesn't exist in the Trekverse, they *should*
have video archives of a series called "Stargate SG-1." When the
"Stargate" crew send people through a new Gate to a new planet, they
always send a remote robot FIRST. Given that they're beaming the Doctor
into a unique temporal anomaly, I'd have checked to see if they could
beam anything back from the surface first.
- Did they really need to pad out this ep with Naomi's pointless walk-on?
- When the capsule is launched to intercept Voyager, they're able to
maintain contact with the ground up to a point- then it cuts out
suddenly. Ground Control sounds normal until they're cut off. As severe
as the temporal differential is on the planet, they should have realized
their own version of general relativity, noticing that time goes slower
in the valley than on top of a hill. They should have expected the
temporal differential once they boarded Voyager.
- From dialogue and visuals, Voyager had their shields up. How did they
dock?
- It's a good thing the hyperspeed aliens strolling through Voyager
didn't cause too many supersonic booms.
- How did they *just know* that Starfleet would be so suicidal as to put
the main control center out on the hull?
- And why did it take so long for them to shift? It reminded me of the
Road Runner cartoons, where once the Coyote runs off a cliff it takes
some time for gravity to *notice* he's supposed to be trading potential
for kinetic energy.
- The speeded-up radio transmissions from the planet should have been at
least IR by the time they reached Voyager.
- They wasted some time babbling on about the Prime Suggestion; there's
ample precedent for Starfleet crews to make contact with pre-warp
civilizations, and especially to *remove* themselves from a planet's
theology (TNG "Who Watches The Watchers").
- Once the planet opened fire, why not speed up a transmission from
Voyager to something they could read?
- Once Voyager's shields are down, the attack (which had been speeding up
in rate of fire) stops abruptly- yet everyone, for some unexplained
reason, assumes the astronaut's failed.
All told, though, an interesting premise, and not nearly as derivative of
TOS "Wink Of An Eye" as I'd expected (someone who's read "Dragon's Egg"
should weigh in on how similar the this ep was). No more logical lapses
than expected, either- and I liked the reference to the "Skyship Friends"
line of toys. One of this years' better eps.
NEXT WEEK: Bites so hard they didn't even show promos, just a bunch of
action clips from several eps. Be afraid. Be very afraid.
He-Who-Hopes-It-Isn't-As-Bad-As-TV-Guide-Made-It-Sound
Those who forget the pasta are condemned to reheat it.
________________________________________________________________
YOU'RE PAYING TOO MUCH FOR THE INTERNET!
Juno now offers FREE Internet Access!
Try it today - there's no risk! For your FREE software, visit:
http://dl.www.juno.com/get/tagj.
Warchild
Proctologist <cue...@juno.com> wrote:
The shots of the evolving city *were* in the episode.
>
>- I'm not sure why the comparison to neutron stars was mentioned in the
>beginning, as their severe gravity wells cause time to pass more SLOWLY
>on their surfaces.
Well placed technobabble explained whatever it was that was happening
>
>- Once again, their one and only Doctor is sent on an Away Mission.
>Letting him adjust the Mobile Emitter to match the natives was a good
>idea- but WHY did he STILL wear it on the outside of his frigging
>clothes???
>
>- Did they ever even think of speeding up a communicator for the Doctor
>to stay in contact?
That wouldnt work. It would still take just as long for the Doctor to
*compose* the message.
>
>- Good thing nobody found the doctor during the (planet's) DAYS it took
>the transporter to dematerialize him.
Well, lets us suppose he was in hiding at the time.
>
>- While I know "Star Trek" doesn't exist in the Trekverse, they *should*
>have video archives of a series called "Stargate SG-1." When the
>"Stargate" crew send people through a new Gate to a new planet, they
>always send a remote robot FIRST. Given that they're beaming the Doctor
>into a unique temporal anomaly, I'd have checked to see if they could
>beam anything back from the surface first.
They did send down a probe.
>
>- Did they really need to pad out this ep with Naomi's pointless walk-on?
God, I hate that little &6%$%$#
>
>- When the capsule is launched to intercept Voyager, they're able to
>maintain contact with the ground up to a point- then it cuts out
>suddenly. Ground Control sounds normal until they're cut off. As severe
>as the temporal differential is on the planet, they should have realized
>their own version of general relativity, noticing that time goes slower
>in the valley than on top of a hill. They should have expected the
>temporal differential once they boarded Voyager.
You assume too much, I think.
>
>- From dialogue and visuals, Voyager had their shields up. How did they
>dock?
>
>- It's a good thing the hyperspeed aliens strolling through Voyager
>didn't cause too many supersonic booms.
>
>- How did they *just know* that Starfleet would be so suicidal as to put
>the main control center out on the hull?
Gee, how would they guess that the command center would be a the top?
>
>- And why did it take so long for them to shift? It reminded me of the
>Road Runner cartoons, where once the Coyote runs off a cliff it takes
>some time for gravity to *notice* he's supposed to be trading potential
>for kinetic energy.
>
>- The speeded-up radio transmissions from the planet should have been at
>least IR by the time they reached Voyager.
>
>- They wasted some time babbling on about the Prime Suggestion; there's
>ample precedent for Starfleet crews to make contact with pre-warp
>civilizations, and especially to *remove* themselves from a planet's
>theology (TNG "Who Watches The Watchers").
>
>- Once the planet opened fire, why not speed up a transmission from
>Voyager to something they could read?
See above.
>
>- Once Voyager's shields are down, the attack (which had been speeding up
>in rate of fire) stops abruptly- yet everyone, for some unexplained
>reason, assumes the astronaut's failed.
That's called a 'Deus ex machina'.
David B.
> NEXT WEEK: Bites so hard they didn't even show promos, just a bunch of
> action clips from several eps. Be afraid. Be very afraid.
>
> He-Who-Hopes-It-Isn't-As-Bad-As-TV-Guide-Made-It-Sound
Well, it could either be very good or it's gonna suck pretty bad.
--
Dennis Miller on the Millennium: "Whorin' and warrin' but never borin'."
Alex Ireland
Bozo the Proctologist <cue...@juno.com> wrote in message
news:20000119.235153....@juno.com...
Synopsis snipped....
>
> If you scroll too fast you'll miss the nits:
>
> - It must have been a big shock for everyone to see the promos had been
> as misleading as a politicians campaign promises.
>
> - Someone mentioned an outside company doing Voyager's promos; the promos
> showed a scene of a building on the planet fading to newer and
> higher-tech designs that wasn't in the ep..... where did the promo
> company get it?
I would suspect that, much like film trailers, the promos are made before
the final edit of the ep is put together. The scene was probably cut out
after that point.
>
> - I'm not sure why the comparison to neutron stars was mentioned in the
> beginning, as their severe gravity wells cause time to pass more SLOWLY
> on their surfaces.
>
> - Once again, their one and only Doctor is sent on an Away Mission.
> Letting him adjust the Mobile Emitter to match the natives was a good
> idea- but WHY did he STILL wear it on the outside of his frigging
> clothes???
Are the clothes part of the hologram, maybe?
>
> - Did they ever even think of speeding up a communicator for the Doctor
> to stay in contact?
Well, he was supposed to be down there for three (Voyager) seconds. He
would have been able to send messages, but there would not have been time
for anyone to hear them, let alone reply.
>
> - Good thing nobody found the doctor during the (planet's) DAYS it took
> the transporter to dematerialize him.
>
> - While I know "Star Trek" doesn't exist in the Trekverse, they *should*
> have video archives of a series called "Stargate SG-1." When the
> "Stargate" crew send people through a new Gate to a new planet, they
> always send a remote robot FIRST. Given that they're beaming the Doctor
> into a unique temporal anomaly, I'd have checked to see if they could
> beam anything back from the surface first.
No one in THIS time period watches "Stargate SG-1." You're expecting it to
be incorporated into first contact protocols four hundred years from now?
(Of course, the Richard Dean Anderson series they should use is "McGuyver,"
... then the Doctor could have fashioned his own transporter out of a
flashlight, a slinky and some chewing gum, and returned to the ship right
away)
>
> - Did they really need to pad out this ep with Naomi's pointless walk-on?
I have consulted the actress's agent on this, and apparently the answer is
"yes."
>
> - When the capsule is launched to intercept Voyager, they're able to
> maintain contact with the ground up to a point- then it cuts out
> suddenly. Ground Control sounds normal until they're cut off. As severe
> as the temporal differential is on the planet, they should have realized
> their own version of general relativity, noticing that time goes slower
> in the valley than on top of a hill. They should have expected the
> temporal differential once they boarded Voyager.
Huh?
>
> - From dialogue and visuals, Voyager had their shields up. How did they
> dock?
I hate to get all into weird techno-babble from old episodes, but here I go.
Didn't O'Brien talk about shields cycling in that TNG episode where he snuck
aboard his old captain's ship? And wouldn't even a millisecond of a shield
being down during this cycle be, like, an hour and a half to the astronauts?
>
> - It's a good thing the hyperspeed aliens strolling through Voyager
> didn't cause too many supersonic booms.
Well, any number of nits can be raised with the whole issue of the "sped-up
aliens wandering through the real-time ship." For example, I was wondering
how they took the turbo-lift to the bridge. I suspect these nits have been
debated ad nauseum in relation to the TOS episode "Wink of an Eye." I'll
suspend my disbelief if its a good story, and this was the best Voyager
story I've seen in some time. (I will say this, though. The astronauts
walking through the freeze-framed shots of Voyager were WAY more convicing
than watching Shatner, Doohan et al trying not to move or blink while
various guest stars acted in front of them.)
>
> - How did they *just know* that Starfleet would be so suicidal as to put
> the main control center out on the hull?
Are you kidding? That monk on the planet wrote english better than I do.
They just read "bridge" on the map on the wall. There's the nit for you.
These people have monks and castles and Apollo 11 capsules and you're asking
how they found the bridge?
>
> - And why did it take so long for them to shift? It reminded me of the
> Road Runner cartoons, where once the Coyote runs off a cliff it takes
> some time for gravity to *notice* he's supposed to be trading potential
> for kinetic energy.
>
> - The speeded-up radio transmissions from the planet should have been at
> least IR by the time they reached Voyager.
>
> - They wasted some time babbling on about the Prime Suggestion; there's
> ample precedent for Starfleet crews to make contact with pre-warp
> civilizations, and especially to *remove* themselves from a planet's
> theology (TNG "Who Watches The Watchers").
If by ample precedent you mean other captains violating the Prime
Directive... This does raise an interesting question about whether in this
case the cure (further contamination of a developing society) is worse than
the disease (the confusion that the planet's limited knowledge of Voyager's
presence caused). This could have been explored more, but the fact that the
society was only going to be pre-warp for a few more hours probably made
this tricky...
Timo S Saloniemi
>If you scroll too fast you'll miss the nits:
>- Did they ever even think of speeding up a communicator for the Doctor
>to stay in contact?
How does one speed up a communicator? One could send pre-recorded
messages in accelerated bursts, but the time to decode the responses
would still mean weeks-long delays in the communication from the
viewpoint of the planetside party.
>- While I know "Star Trek" doesn't exist in the Trekverse, they *should*
>have video archives of a series called "Stargate SG-1." When the
>"Stargate" crew send people through a new Gate to a new planet, they
>always send a remote robot FIRST. Given that they're beaming the Doctor
>into a unique temporal anomaly, I'd have checked to see if they could
>beam anything back from the surface first.
Well, "SG-1" doesn't allow for two-way traffic - the probe can send
back images, but it can't get back by itself. No physical object can
travel "upstream" in the stargates. The Trek situation is similar in
that they can readily get sensor readings from the places they are
transporting to.
Perhaps they just considered the Doctor their probe for testing if
a return trip was possible? :-)
>- From dialogue and visuals, Voyager had their shields up. How did they
>dock?
Probably shields "forzen in time" aren't too much of a hindrance...
Especially because shields have a "frequency" given in Hz that
more or less means their strength is time-dependent.
>- It's a good thing the hyperspeed aliens strolling through Voyager
>didn't cause too many supersonic booms.
And how would they have opened the doors without breaking them?
>- How did they *just know* that Starfleet would be so suicidal as to put
>the main control center out on the hull?
Probably they just followed the least protected and defended internal
path (which coincidentally leads from the airlocks, the shuttlebay and
the transporter rooms or other possible locations of hostile entry
straight to the bridge).
Timo Saloniemi
Daniel Silevitch
<bri...@home.com> wrote:
> > - How did they *just know* that Starfleet would be so suicidal as to put
> > the main control center out on the hull?
>
> Where else should the bridge be?
>
> It's no good putting it in the middle of the hull. It's not the hull's
> job to protect the bridge; that's what *shields* are for. Anything
> capable of getting through Voyager's shields would also get through any
> thickness of hull plating, # of decks, etc. that they would have put up
> around the bridge.
That's a bogus argument; you are essentially asserting that anything
which gets through the shields will inevitably slice right through the
entire ship. There are lots and lots of cases of stuff getting through
the shields and causing a few decks to rupture or something. Clearly,
the ship's hull, or the Structural Integrity Field technobabble that
reinforces said hull, has a fair amount of damage-resistance capability
on its own.
The proper place for the control center is deep inside the bowels of
the ship, to minimize the chance of damage. It's not like they need to
look out the windows in order to steer/aim the guns/judge the wind/
whatever.
-dms
krom...@my-deja.com
this is the best Voyager I've ever seen, and definately among the best
Star Trek (Top 20 episodes at least).
Too bad it will only make next week's ep suck even harder by
comparison :-)
Andy K.
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
WWS
Brian Barjenbruch wrote:
>
> > - How did they *just know* that Starfleet would be so suicidal as to put
> > the main control center out on the hull?
>
> Where else should the bridge be?
>
> It's no good putting it in the middle of the hull. It's not the hull's
> job to protect the bridge; that's what *shields* are for. Anything
> capable of getting through Voyager's shields would also get through any
> thickness of hull plating, # of decks, etc. that they would have put up
> around the bridge.
See current Naval design philosophy. In the days of visual only guidance,
the bridge needed to be high and exposed (hence the name, "Bridge") This
made it a prime target during naval encounters. But as radar and other
remote sensing devices have become essential, naval designers have
realized that leaving your CNC exposed is suicidally foolish, and it is
now buried at the deepest levels of any modern ship - because there is
even now no longer any need for direct visual reconnaissance by the
command officers, the only reason to ever have it exposed in the first place.
And the logic you've applied to trek applies as well to modern ships - any
missile or weapon that makes it through the AAA screen is likely to penetrate
deeply into the ship - still, common sense dictates that the command center
be the last place hit, and can function up until the rest of the ship is
completely disabled.
(AAA protection is to modern Naval vessels what shields are to Trek)
--
__________________________________________________WWS_____________
Hence the name "Aegis".
Silverhawk
>(I will say this, though. The astronauts walking through the
>freeze-framed shots of Voyager were WAY more convicing
>than watching Shatner, Doohan et al trying not to move or blink
>while various guest stars acted in front of them.)
Was the effect as good as or better than the TNG episode "Timescape"?
Silverhawk
--
Sliders: The New Dimension
http://jump.to/sliders-rpg
Episode 6: "Sweet Dreams" - currently playing.
Episode 5: "Terminal Countdown (part 2)" - finished.
Rich Heimlich
<cue...@juno.com> wrote:
>"If I could save time in a tachyon field....."
Talk about a post filled with the most overblown observations ever
made.....
Geez, how do you manage to enjoy everyday life?
Granted this episode was not perfect, but for me, it goes down as one
of the most enjoyable episodes in the history of Star Trek of all
flavors. Right up there with the one where Picard lives a lifetime
within an episode.
My only criticism was the whole dropped storyline of the doctor's
child.
*** RTH ***
Elisabeth Anne Riba
>S
>P
>O
>I
>L
>E
>R
>S
>P
>A
>C
>E
>T
>H
>E
>F
>I
>N
>A
>L
>F
>R
>O
>N
>T-
>- I'm not sure why the comparison to neutron stars was mentioned in the
>beginning, as their severe gravity wells cause time to pass more SLOWLY
>on their surfaces.
Probably a reference to Dragon's Egg, a Robert Forward novel from the
late-seventies/early-eighties about life on a neutron star, where one
Earth hour is equivalent to hundreds of their years. As an Earth
scientific survey ship watches (initially unawares), cheela evolve from
primitive savages to more advanced technology than Earth's.
Naturally, Trek reduced the time difference and made the aliens human,
but it sounds like there are a lot of similarities between the two.
--
---------------> Elisabeth Anne Riba * l...@netcom.com <---------------
Marriage, n. The state or condition of a community consisting of a
master, a mistress and two slaves, making in all, two.
Ambrose Bierce, "The Devil's Dictionary"
Reverend Sean O'Hara
>
> > - How did they *just know* that Starfleet would be so suicidal as to put
> > the main control center out on the hull?
>
>
> It's no good putting it in the middle of the hull. It's not the hull's
> job to protect the bridge; that's what *shields* are for. Anything
> capable of getting through Voyager's shields would also get through any
> thickness of hull plating, # of decks, etc. that they would have put up
> around the bridge.
>
didn't have a big hole all the way through afterwards. Generally a
hit will just cause a hull breach on deck X, section Y. Force fields
immediately spring up to keep the breach localized. Now, with the
bridge on top, it's easier for the enemy to just aim at the bubble
dome and cause a hull breach on the bridge, whereas with the bridge
in the center of the ship some where, they'd have to get a direct hit
all the way through the axis of the ship -- and even then, unless they
knew where to aim, there's no guarantee they'd actually get a shot to
pass through the bridge.
--
Reverend Sean O'Hara
You two can be an ordained minister: http://www.ulc.org/ulc
"Now, regardless of whether you'll excuse me, I will return to
playing with the three stooges of RAST: Sean, Bill [December
Starr], and [Cronan]. They're too pitiful to be killfiled."
- Michael Martinez in rec.arts.sf.tv
Reverend Sean O'Hara
>
> > That's a bogus argument; you are essentially asserting that anything
> > which gets through the shields will inevitably slice right through the
> > entire ship.
>
>
Star Trek II: Several times the Enterprise and Reliant are hit with
their shields down, and the shots just cause hull breaches.
Star Trek III: Enterprise hits a defenseless Klingon Bird of Prey.
Ship is shaken and stirred, spins a couple of times, but the shots
don't pass all the way through.
Q Who?: The Borg cutting beam carves out a section of the Enterprise's
saucer, but does not penetrate all the way through.
Best of Both Worlds: Borg cutting beam aimed at engineering slices
through the hull, causing a breach, but does not go all the way
through the ship.
Star Trek Generations: Although the Klingons could shoot right through
the Enterprise's shields, their shots did not pass all the way through
the ship.
> > There are lots and lots of cases of stuff getting through
> > the shields and causing a few decks to rupture or something.
>
> And lots more where it'd go through the whole ship.
>
The only one I know of is a photon torpedo in Star Trek VI which hit
the saucer section at a right angle and passed all the way through --
but at that angle, it didn't have very far to go. If it hit the
saucer head on, it would've penetrated less than 1/4 of the radius.
There may have been some more examples in DS9 during the Dominion
War, but for the most part, direct hits on shieldless ships only
cause hull breaches. What's important is where the hull breaches are:
When Khan hit engineering in Star Trek II, he crippled the Enterprise,
whereas the Borg cutting out several decks in Q Who? didn't hamper
the ship's functioning.
> Besides, a few decks, on a ship as small as Voyager, is as good as
> death to the bridge no matter where it is. A huge ship such as the
> Sovereign class might make it work, but Intrepid-class ships are too
> small for that.
>
BS. The Voyager's had hull breaches before. Had some in this episode
in fact. That's why it has shields and bulkheads: to localize the
damage.
Reverend Sean O'Hara
>
> Whatever "AAA protection" is, it can't be *exactly* the same as
> shields, and can't possibly be anywhere near as protective of the ship
> as Trek's shields are. So Trek ships can rely more on their shields
> than modern Navy vessels could on "AAA."
>
Trek's shields aren't *that* great. By the time shield's drop to
30% starships are already losing structural integrity.
Reverend Sean O'Hara
>
> On Wed, 19 Jan 2000 23:51:47 -0500, Bozo the Proctologist
> <cue...@juno.com> wrote:
>
>
> made.....
>
> Geez, how do you manage to enjoy everyday life?
>
analyzing that life.
Daniel Silevitch
<bri...@home.com> wrote:
> > That's a bogus argument; you are essentially asserting that anything
> > which gets through the shields will inevitably slice right through the
> > entire ship.
>
> How can that not be true?
Does anyone want to count the times in Trek when a) the shields have
failed and b) the ship/station escaped with some deck breaches and a
threatened warp core breach? Just off the top of my head, look at the
battles in Wrath of Khan, esp. the ambush of the Enterprise at the
beginning.
>
> > There are lots and lots of cases of stuff getting through
> > the shields and causing a few decks to rupture or something.
>
> And lots more where it'd go through the whole ship.
Case a) Bridge is on the surface of the ship. A hit on the hull that
does minor damage can take out the bridge. A hit on the hull that
slices the ship in half can take out the bridge.
Case b) Bridge is in the core of the ship. A hit on the hull that does
minor damage takes out two holodecks and a galley. A hit on the hull
that slices the ship in half can take out the bridge.
I know which ship _I'd_ rather serve on. The only time when the two
ships have equal survivability is when _every_ hit that gets through
the shields is certain to destroy the ship. This is demonstrably not
the case in Trek.
> Besides, a few decks, on a ship as small as Voyager, is as good as
> death to the bridge no matter where it is. A huge ship such as the
> Sovereign class might make it work, but Intrepid-class ships are too
> small for that.
Doesn't matter. An edge is an edge. There is no rational reason for
putting the bridge on top of the hull in such an exposed position.
There is an advantage to be gained by burying it in the main hull. Even
if this is a small advantage, there is still no reason not to exploit
it.
-dms
NoOneYouKnow
news:200120001031418423%bri...@home.com...
> > See current Naval design philosophy. In the days of visual only
guidance,
> > the bridge needed to be high and exposed (hence the name, "Bridge")
This
> > made it a prime target during naval encounters. But as radar and other
> > remote sensing devices have become essential, naval designers have
> > realized that leaving your CNC exposed is suicidally foolish, and it is
> > now buried at the deepest levels of any modern ship - because there is
> > even now no longer any need for direct visual reconnaissance by the
> > command officers, the only reason to ever have it exposed in the first
place.
> > And the logic you've applied to trek applies as well to modern ships -
any
> > missile or weapon that makes it through the AAA screen is likely to
penetrate
> > deeply into the ship - still, common sense dictates that the command
center
> > be the last place hit, and can function up until the rest of the ship is
> > completely disabled.
> >
> > (AAA protection is to modern Naval vessels what shields are to Trek)
>
> shields, and can't possibly be anywhere near as protective of the ship
> as Trek's shields are. So Trek ships can rely more on their shields
> than modern Navy vessels could on "AAA."
AAA= Anti-Aircraft Artillery
And I think WWS's point was not that it was *exactly* the same, but that it
is just about as (in)effective.
---JRE---
>
> --
> "Its origin and purpose, still a total mystery."
> - Dr. Heywood Floyd, "2001: A Space Odyssey"
Captain Infinity
In article <38873CC9...@rcn.com>
Reverend Sean O'Hara wrote:
>Now, with the
>bridge on top, it's easier for the enemy to just aim at the bubble
>dome and cause a hull breach on the bridge, whereas with the bridge
>in the center of the ship some where, they'd have to get a direct hit
>all the way through the axis of the ship -- and even then, unless they
>knew where to aim, there's no guarantee they'd actually get a shot to
>pass through the bridge.
The strongest and best argument against this is that if the bridge were
in the middle of the ship its front window wouldn't look out into space,
it would open into something like the Engine Room, or a Holodeck, or the
women's showers outside the ship's gymnasium. So, duh, of course it has
to be on the top middle, so they can see what they're shooting at.
**
Captain Infinity
...plus so the women can be more at ease while showering.
Captain Infinity
In article <200120001309195749%bri...@home.com>
Brian Barjenbruch wrote:
>The viewscreen isn't actually a window--it's a screen that can be
>turned off and on.
A screen? If it were a screen wouldn't all their air get out? Plus,
space is very cold so I'm sure they would use windows instead of
screens, or they would freeze to death. Besides, I've never seen any
kind of mesh, it's always perfectly clear like TRANSPARENT ALUMINUM!!!
Remember the "The Cage", the original Trek pilot? The camera swoops in
and you can see right into the bridge. That PROVES it!
**
Captain Infinity
..."You couldn't deny that, even if you tried with both hands."
--the Red Queen, _Through The Looking Glass_
Paul D. Shocklee
: Bozo the Proctologist <cue...@juno.com> writes:
: >"If I could save time in a tachyon field....."
: >S
: >P
: >O
: >I
: >L
: >E
: >R
: >S
: >P
: >A
: >C
: >E
: >T
: >H
: >E
: >F
: >I
: >N
: >A
: >L
: >F
: >R
: >O
: >N
: >T-
: >- I'm not sure why the comparison to neutron stars was mentioned in the
: >beginning, as their severe gravity wells cause time to pass more SLOWLY
: >on their surfaces.
: Probably a reference to Dragon's Egg, a Robert Forward novel from the
: late-seventies/early-eighties about life on a neutron star, where one
: Earth hour is equivalent to hundreds of their years. As an Earth
: scientific survey ship watches (initially unawares), cheela evolve from
: primitive savages to more advanced technology than Earth's.
: Naturally, Trek reduced the time difference and made the aliens human,
: but it sounds like there are a lot of similarities between the two.
Of course, in _Dragon's Egg_ the time difference was due to the fact that
the aliens were made of nuclear matter, and hence experienced time on the
scale of nuclear reactions rather than chemical reactions. It seems plausible
that someone on the Voyager staff read the novel and mistakenly assumed
that the time dilation was due to the strong gravitational field.
--
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
( Paul Shocklee - physics grad student - Princeton University )
( "Don't let it end like this. Tell them I said something!" )
( - Pancho Villa's last words )
WWS
Reverend Sean O'Hara wrote:
>
> Brian Barjenbruch wrote:
> >
> > Whatever "AAA protection" is, it can't be *exactly* the same as
> > shields, and can't possibly be anywhere near as protective of the ship
> > as Trek's shields are. So Trek ships can rely more on their shields
> > than modern Navy vessels could on "AAA."
> >
> Trek's shields aren't *that* great. By the time shield's drop to
> 30% starships are already losing structural integrity.
It's one of the biggest tactical mistakes that Trek makes, continually.
AAA stands for anti aircraft artillery, although it also is meant to
include missile defense as well these days.
Basically, in modern naval defense, if anything ever gets within
20 miles or so of your formation, you stand a good chance of
losing a ship or two. Good strategy means that you detect and
eliminate any threat long before it has any chance of striking
the assets you're trying to protect, which means fighter screens
and missile defense in depth. The USN's shield is actually better
than Treks, because as long as it works nothing is going to even
get near any ship, much less hit it. (we're talking air threats,
not sub threats - subs are basically the "cloaked ship" problem)
Voyager might as well be fighting to save Guadalcanal, for the
defense strategies they use.
--
__________________________________________________WWS_____________
Nelson Lu
>
>It's one of the biggest tactical mistakes that Trek makes, continually.
>AAA stands for anti aircraft artillery, although it also is meant to
>include missile defense as well these days.
>
>Basically, in modern naval defense, if anything ever gets within
>20 miles or so of your formation, you stand a good chance of
>losing a ship or two. Good strategy means that you detect and
>eliminate any threat long before it has any chance of striking
>the assets you're trying to protect, which means fighter screens
>and missile defense in depth. The USN's shield is actually better
That's our current defense philosophy, but not one that Starfleet takes in
Trek; Starfleet has effectively a "no first fire" policy; with that kind of a
policy, the kind of defense you propose would be ineffective.
You can call it an unrealistic approach, but what you propose is at odds with
the philosophy of Star Trek, fundamentally.
Scott Parker
>"If I could save time in a tachyon field....."
>S
>P
>O
>I
>L
>E
>R
>S
>P
>A
>C
>E
>- Did they really need to pad out this ep with Naomi's pointless walk-on?
Perhaps the exchange between seven and Naomi was meant to be the comic
relief of the episode. Did anyone get a laugh out of it?
Scott
http://users.uniserve.com/~lparker/ (short stories, jokes, puzzles)
Mortis
<388a5ade...@news-f.std.com>, in which Infi...@world.com
(Captain Infinity) typed:
>so they can see what they're shooting at.
Shouldn't that be "...so they can see at what they're shooting."?
Mortis
Master of the Unknown, KPS
Nebulosis Defunctus
"Lions sing and hills take flight
The moon by day and the sun by night
Blind man, deaf woman, jackdaw fool
Let the Lord of Chaos rule"
-Children's Rhyme, The Fourth Age
Chad Irby
> Shouldn't that be "...so they can see at what they're shooting."?
Point are you getting what to?
--
Chad Irby \ My greatest fear: that future generations will,
ci...@cfl.rr.com \ for some reason, refer to me as an "optimist."
Brian S.Thorn
wrote:
>> That's a bogus argument; you are essentially asserting that anything
>> which gets through the shields will inevitably slice right through the
>> entire ship.
>
>How can that not be true?
Ablative armor, like the Defiant and various other ships (USS Lakota,
etc.) of DS9.
Brian
Granular
>
> Remember the "The Cage", the original Trek pilot? The camera swoops in
> and you can see right into the bridge. That PROVES it!
The camera swooped through the bubble on the top of the bridge.
--
Granular
------------------------------
"Do not taunt Happy Fun Ball."
Danny Johnson
Probably just naval tradition. I *do* agree that the bridge should be
protected better. You may only survive one additional hit, but that's
something!
BTW, I thought that the Sovreign class was about the same size as the
Intrepid.....
Daniel Silevitch wrote in message
<200120000810384918%dms...@pha.jhu.edu>...
>In article <190120002309117430%bri...@home.com>, Brian Barjenbruch
><bri...@home.com> wrote:
>
>> > - How did they *just know* that Starfleet would be so suicidal as to
put
>> > the main control center out on the hull?
>>
>> Where else should the bridge be?
>>
>> It's no good putting it in the middle of the hull. It's not the hull's
>> job to protect the bridge; that's what *shields* are for. Anything
>> capable of getting through Voyager's shields would also get through any
>> thickness of hull plating, # of decks, etc. that they would have put up
>> around the bridge.
>
>That's a bogus argument; you are essentially asserting that anything
>which gets through the shields will inevitably slice right through the
Bozo the Proctologist
> S
>
> P
>
> O
>
> I
>
> L
>
> E
>
> R
>
>
> S
>
> P
>
> A
>
> C
>
> E
>
>
> T
>
> H
>
> E
>
>
> F
>
> I
>
> N
>
> A
>
> L
>
>
> F
>
> R
>
> O
>
> N
>
> T-
>
> Oh, wait, that's that other show.......
Alex Ireland doth write thus:
<Snip>
>> - Once again, their one and only Doctor is sent on an Away Mission.
>> Letting him adjust the Mobile Emitter to match the natives was a good
>> idea- but WHY did he STILL wear it on the outside of his frigging
>> clothes???
>
>Are the clothes part of the hologram, maybe?
If that's a problem, he should have beamed down in real clothes, with his
emitter on his holoskin underneath. How many times has someone done
mischief to that exposed doohickey?
If someone innocently brushed up against it, who on the planet would even
suspect how to re-activate him?
>> - Did they ever even think of speeding up a communicator for the
Doctor
>> to stay in contact?
>
>Well, he was supposed to be down there for three (Voyager) seconds. He
>would have been able to send messages, but there would not have been
time
>for anyone to hear them, let alone reply.
"We're Starfleet; assuming nothing can go wrong is part of the job!" As
many risks as they take with the Doctor, he may as well report for duty
wearing a red shirt. <G>
>> - While I know "Star Trek" doesn't exist in the Trekverse, they
*should*
>> have video archives of a series called "Stargate SG-1." When the
>> "Stargate" crew send people through a new Gate to a new planet, they
>> always send a remote robot FIRST. Given that they're beaming the
Doctor
>> into a unique temporal anomaly, I'd have checked to see if they could
>> beam anything back from the surface first.
>
>No one in THIS time period watches "Stargate SG-1." You're expecting it
to
>be incorporated into first contact protocols four hundred years from
now?
I'd really love to know what evolutionary pressure(s) drove all the
survival instincts out of the human genome by the 24th Century. <EG>
>(Of course, the Richard Dean Anderson series they should use is
"McGuyver,"
>... then the Doctor could have fashioned his own transporter out of a
>flashlight, a slinky and some chewing gum, and returned to the ship
right
>away)
They'd have been back in the Alpha Quadrant by the end of the pilot!
>> - When the capsule is launched to intercept Voyager, they're able to
>> maintain contact with the ground up to a point- then it cuts out
>> suddenly. Ground Control sounds normal until they're cut off. As
severe
>> as the temporal differential is on the planet, they should have
realized
>> their own version of general relativity, noticing that time goes
slower
>> in the valley than on top of a hill. They should have expected the
>> temporal differential once they boarded Voyager.
>
>Huh?
General relativity: In a normal gravity field, the deeper down you are in
a gravity well, the slower time goes. Earth's gravity field is so weak,
the effect is so small that only in the last few decades has our atomic
clock tech reached the point where we can measure timeintervals small
enough to detect this.
On the "Blink" planet, the effect is inverted: time goes faster the
deeper you get into that gravity field, much, MUCH faster. The change is
so dramatic that over the centuries of development, they should have
noticed that clocks on hills ran slower than clocks in valleys, and
figured out their version of general relativity long before inventing
electricity & industry.
>> - From dialogue and visuals, Voyager had their shields up. How did
they
>> dock?
>
>I hate to get all into weird techno-babble from old episodes, but here I
go.
Resistance is futile. You will be assimilated.
>Didn't O'Brien talk about shields cycling in that TNG episode where he
snuck
>aboard his old captain's ship? And wouldn't even a millisecond of a
shield
>being down during this cycle be, like, an hour and a half to the
astronauts?
"The Wounded." I should have remembered one of TNG's best..... hmmm. A
millisecond is enough time for light to travel three hundred kilometers.
Good thing nobody ever shoots at a Starfleet ship with a laser. <EG>
>> - It's a good thing the hyperspeed aliens strolling through Voyager
>> didn't cause too many supersonic booms.
>
>Well, any number of nits can be raised with the whole issue of the
"sped-up
>aliens wandering through the real-time ship." For example, I was
wondering
>how they took the turbo-lift to the bridge.
I was wondering how Voyager's gravity gave them enough traction to
walk..... or stop.
I can't help it; it's my nature.
>I suspect these nits have been
>debated ad nauseum in relation to the TOS episode "Wink of an Eye."
No Internet way back then..... pity.
>I'll
>suspend my disbelief if its a good story, and this was the best Voyager
>story I've seen in some time.
I agree; this is one of the year's best. It's just that with nothing to
do, my analytical side WILL go and get into trouble......
>(I will say this, though. The astronauts
>walking through the freeze-framed shots of Voyager were WAY more
convicing
>than watching Shatner, Doohan et al trying not to move or blink while
>various guest stars acted in front of them.)
I think they digitally added the astronauts into real freeze-frames-
either that, or Neelix was pouring Final-Exam coffee for Janeway (During
finals week, the regular coffee was *powerful* enough for the spoon to
stand up in it; it wasn't considered "strong" unless the spoon
dissolved.)
>> - How did they *just know* that Starfleet would be so suicidal as to
put
>> the main control center out on the hull?
>
>Are you kidding? That monk on the planet wrote english better than I
do.
>They just read "bridge" on the map on the wall. There's the nit for you.
<Trekkie rationalizer ENABLED>
Oh, uh, well..... the universal translator works by analyzing..... it
samples and scans the...... it works REALLY REALLY well!!
<Trekkie rationalizer OVERHEATING>
>These people have monks and castles and Apollo 11 capsules and you're
asking
>how they found the bridge?
Voyager's arrival spurred the development of religion (monks) which in
turn accelerated the development of politics (castles) which stimulated
weapons development (spacecraft).
He-Who-Is-Glad-They-Didn't-Make-The-Astronaut-A-Descendant-Of-The-Doctor'
s-Son
Keyboard not found; think <F1> to continue.
________________________________________________________________
YOU'RE PAYING TOO MUCH FOR THE INTERNET!
Juno now offers FREE Internet Access!
Try it today - there's no risk! For your FREE software, visit:
http://dl.www.juno.com/get/tagj.
The Heathen
>
> Reverend Sean O'Hara wrote:
> >
> > Brian Barjenbruch wrote:
> > >
> > > Whatever "AAA protection" is, it can't be *exactly* the same as
> > > shields, and can't possibly be anywhere near as protective of the ship
> > > as Trek's shields are. So Trek ships can rely more on their shields
> > > than modern Navy vessels could on "AAA."
> > >
> > Trek's shields aren't *that* great. By the time shield's drop to
> > 30% starships are already losing structural integrity.
>
> AAA stands for anti aircraft artillery, although it also is meant to
> include missile defense as well these days.
>
> Basically, in modern naval defense, if anything ever gets within
> 20 miles or so of your formation, you stand a good chance of
> losing a ship or two. Good strategy means that you detect and
> eliminate any threat long before it has any chance of striking
> the assets you're trying to protect, which means fighter screens
> and missile defense in depth. The USN's shield is actually better
> get near any ship, much less hit it. (we're talking air threats,
> not sub threats - subs are basically the "cloaked ship" problem)
>
> Voyager might as well be fighting to save Guadalcanal, for the
> defense strategies they use.
The biggest tactical error that StarFleet ships make is to slow down
to impulse speeds, even stop, before or during a battle. Ships will
stand still in front of each other like old ironside warships
exchanging broadsides. The captain often calls for "evasive
maneuvers", but the visual only shows the ships slowly flying
*towards* to attacking ship, usually to pass over it and keep going in
a straight line. It's a lot harder to get shot when you are moving at
warp speeds. TOS did this more and better than the other series. TOS
often had a submarine feel to it (especially "Balance of Terror"),
with ships very far apart from each other working by sensors.
The Heathen
(hea...@scientist.com)
David B.
>
> Once Upon A Time,
> In article <200120001309195749%bri...@home.com>
> Brian Barjenbruch wrote:
>
> >The viewscreen isn't actually a window--it's a screen that can be
> >turned off and on.
>
> A screen? If it were a screen wouldn't all their air get out? Plus,
> space is very cold so I'm sure they would use windows instead of
> screens, or they would freeze to death. Besides, I've never seen any
> kind of mesh, it's always perfectly clear like TRANSPARENT ALUMINUM!!!
>
> and you can see right into the bridge. That PROVES it!
That's the bubble on top of the bridge. Brian is talking about the
viewscreen in the front of the bridge.
--
Dennis Miller on the Millennium: "Whorin' and warrin' but never borin'."
James Ward
>
> > > There are lots and lots of cases of stuff getting through
> > > the shields and causing a few decks to rupture or something.
> >
> > And lots more where it'd go through the whole ship.
>
> Case a) Bridge is on the surface of the ship. A hit on the hull that
> does minor damage can take out the bridge. A hit on the hull that
> slices the ship in half can take out the bridge.
>
> Case b) Bridge is in the core of the ship. A hit on the hull that does
> minor damage takes out two holodecks and a galley. A hit on the hull
> that slices the ship in half can take out the bridge.
>
> I know which ship _I'd_ rather serve on. The only time when the two
> ships have equal survivability is when _every_ hit that gets through
> the shields is certain to destroy the ship. This is demonstrably not
> the case in Trek.
OR case c) Bridge is a heavily shielded section on the surface of
the ship in comparision to rest of ship, with the engineering deck
in the middle of the ship the automatic back up if the main bridge
is taken out. Note, this is what has been shown to be the case of
Federation ships. They have referenced the bridge having extra
shielding/hull thickness before and too many time to count off the
top of my head has the captain of a ship moved command to engineering
for one reason or another.
And further more note, that this is the way that current naval ships
are designed. A fomral bridge on the top (most exposed part) of the
ship, with the engine room ( nearly dead center) as an active back up
for control of the ship.
>
> > Besides, a few decks, on a ship as small as Voyager, is as good as
> > death to the bridge no matter where it is. A huge ship such as the
> > Sovereign class might make it work, but Intrepid-class ships are too
> > small for that.
>
> Doesn't matter. An edge is an edge. There is no rational reason for
> putting the bridge on top of the hull in such an exposed position.
Then why do surface navies still to this day design ships that way?
> There is an advantage to be gained by burying it in the main hull. Even
> if this is a small advantage, there is still no reason not to exploit
> it.
There is a major advantage when *both* are done with each being an
active back up to the other.
--
James Ward
Interested in getting paid while you surf the web?
Check out this site, they pay you and all you have to
do is look at a few ads on the bottom of your screen.
James Ward
>
> In article <190120002309117430%bri...@home.com>, Brian Barjenbruch
> <bri...@home.com> wrote:
>
> > > the main control center out on the hull?
> >
> >
> > It's no good putting it in the middle of the hull. It's not the hull's
> > job to protect the bridge; that's what *shields* are for. Anything
> > capable of getting through Voyager's shields would also get through any
> > thickness of hull plating, # of decks, etc. that they would have put up
> > around the bridge.
>
> That's a bogus argument; you are essentially asserting that anything
> which gets through the shields will inevitably slice right through the
> entire ship. There are lots and lots of cases of stuff getting through
> the shields and causing a few decks to rupture or something. Clearly,
> the ship's hull, or the Structural Integrity Field technobabble that
> reinforces said hull, has a fair amount of damage-resistance capability
> on its own.
Could it perhaps be that the bridge has an obvious double or triple
thickness hull around it in the layout plans? Thus making it an
obviously important area of the ship.
>
> The proper place for the control center is deep inside the bowels of
> the ship, to minimize the chance of damage. It's not like they need to
> look out the windows in order to steer/aim the guns/judge the wind/
> whatever.
It should well be noted that on the show, it has been shown across all
of the series that with a single command the commander of the ship can
redirect control of the ship to main engineering ( ok, so in TOS it was
an actual back up control room, but it is generally accepted to have
been on the engineering deck). So just like modern day naval ships you
have a double command deck. One on the top to "look out the windows"
and the other the engine room itself. Or have you never seen the infamous
footage of a kamazee ramming the comand deck of one of the US aircraft
carriers during WW2?
James Ward
>
> > - How did they *just know* that Starfleet would be so suicidal as to put
> > the main control center out on the hull?
>
> Where else should the bridge be?
>
> It's no good putting it in the middle of the hull. It's not the hull's
> job to protect the bridge; that's what *shields* are for. Anything
> capable of getting through Voyager's shields would also get through any
> thickness of hull plating, # of decks, etc. that they would have put up
> around the bridge.
Well, for the record do we know exactly what that hall way ship
layout has on it in the way of labels? It may well be possible
that from some of the more obvious parts of the ship they were
able to understand some of the layout map.
Did it ever say how long they spent on the ship, in their time frame?
For them to have walked around as far as they did using the jefferies
tubes( which BTW implies they had to have figured out some of the
layout of the ship), it would have taken a good deal of time.
James Ward
>
> In countless episodes starships have been hit with shields down, and
> didn't have a big hole all the way through afterwards. Generally a
> hit will just cause a hull breach on deck X, section Y. Force fields
> immediately spring up to keep the breach localized. Now, with the
> bridge on top, it's easier for the enemy to just aim at the bubble
> dome and cause a hull breach on the bridge, whereas with the bridge
> in the center of the ship some where, they'd have to get a direct hit
> all the way through the axis of the ship -- and even then, unless they
> knew where to aim, there's no guarantee they'd actually get a shot to
> pass through the bridge.
You are assuming that the shielding/hull thickness around the bridge
is the same as the rest of the ship. There have been several implications
from the shows that the bridge shielding is either thicker or may even
have its own redundant shield covering it in addition to the ships main
shields.
SJohnson
>
> > See current Naval design philosophy. In the days of visual only guidance,
> > the bridge needed to be high and exposed (hence the name, "Bridge") This
> > made it a prime target during naval encounters. But as radar and other
> > remote sensing devices have become essential, naval designers have
> > realized that leaving your CNC exposed is suicidally foolish, and it is
> > now buried at the deepest levels of any modern ship - because there is
> > even now no longer any need for direct visual reconnaissance by the
> > command officers, the only reason to ever have it exposed in the first place.
> > And the logic you've applied to trek applies as well to modern ships - any
> > missile or weapon that makes it through the AAA screen is likely to penetrate
> > deeply into the ship - still, common sense dictates that the command center
> > be the last place hit, and can function up until the rest of the ship is
> > completely disabled.
> >
> > (AAA protection is to modern Naval vessels what shields are to Trek)
>
> shields, and can't possibly be anywhere near as protective of the ship
> as Trek's shields are. So Trek ships can rely more on their shields
> than modern Navy vessels could on "AAA."
Oh, *Brian*...
You can't be serious with this line of logic.
I don't care in which century ships are constructed, engineers are NOT
stupid enough to soley rely on power plant-reliant sources of protection
for one of the most strategic areas of a warship. That is not only
foolish, but highly improbable such a thing would be allowed-- again, in
ANY time period of construction.
C'mon... you've lost this one, guy. ;)
SJ
Mortis
Irby <ci...@cfl.rr.com> typed:
>ri...@mindspring.com wrote:
>
>> Shouldn't that be "...so they can see at what they're shooting."?
>
>Point are you getting what to?
Shouldn't that be "No une carez, stuped spelLing trowll!!!1!111!!11"?
Oh, wait, this isn't going to apdd.... *eg*
Gharlane of Eddore
In <cirby-135A5F....@news-server.cfl.rr.com>
Chad Irby <ci...@cfl.rr.com> writes:
>
> Point are you getting what to?
>
making-point him concept belabor seekingly explicate else concept.
shootingly at-which apperceptly-prior-dependence sequence stated
positive target acquisition base precept green. bangly.
Tim Bruening
Timo S Saloniemi wrote:
> In article <20000119.235153....@juno.com> Bozo the Proctologist <cue...@juno.com> writes:
> >"If I could save time in a tachyon field....."
> >
> >If you scroll too fast you'll miss the nits:
> Munch.
>
> >- From dialogue and visuals, Voyager had their shields up. How did they
> >dock?
>
> Probably shields "forzen in time" aren't too much of a hindrance...
> Especially because shields have a "frequency" given in Hz that
> more or less means their strength is time-dependent.
>
If the shields couldn't block the capsule on account of the temporal differential, how did they block the
planet's antimatter torpedoes and tri-colbalt devices?
Tim Bruening
Brian Barjenbruch wrote:
> > Well, "SG-1" doesn't allow for two-way traffic - the probe can send
> > back images, but it can't get back by itself. No physical object can
> > travel "upstream" in the stargates.
>
> Then how can anyone ever get back home?
The SG personnel simply use the "Dial Home Device" to open the Stargate
back to Earth.
Antifrance
> making-point him concept belabor seekingly explicate else concept.
>
> shootingly at-which apperceptly-prior-dependence sequence stated
> positive target acquisition base precept green. bangly.
Excuse me Mr. Eddore, but I tried ROT-13 Unscramble on this and it
didn't help.
--
Brendan Dillon (aka Antifrance),
General Purpose God
antif...@yahoo.com
http://ducttape.simplenet.com
"Any group that is proposed here between 12/28/94 -
1/3/95 I WILL CREATE! This is the time to get those
newsgroups started that the alt.config elitists
would never start for you! ANYTHING proposed will
be created begining with my next logon."
-Tom Servo, alt.config
Timo S Saloniemi
>> Well, "SG-1" doesn't allow for two-way traffic - the probe can send
>> back images, but it can't get back by itself. No physical object can
>> travel "upstream" in the stargates.
>Then how can anyone ever get back home?
Well, the idea is that each gate has a "dialing system" (the one on Earth
is human-built since the original dialing table was destroyed, but most
of the other gates have their original dialing consoles). One can
travel from the location where one did the dialing to the location
specified by the dialing, but not vice versa. So to get back home, you
have to dial "Earth" at the other end. The robot probes aren't capable
of dialing (they are simple trusty 1970s-80s tech without any sci-fi
bells or whistles), so once they get from Earth to the alien planet, they
are stuck...
Actually, it's a pretty nifty system. The creators of the TV show apparently
thought it through, which is more than can be said about the makers
of the original movie. What you dial in is a set of coordinates - not
a simple "phone number" which you could get right by trying a sufficient number
of random keypresses, but a specific set of six symbols out of a group of
perhaps 30-40 that corresponds to a spot in space. And then you give
the code of the sending gate (the reason apparently being that there can
be several gates next to each other, and the weird hyperspace wormholes
have to know which one to connect to), and hit "send". A one-way tunnel
to the destination will open if there is another stargate at that destination.
Normally, the tunnel stays open for a minute or so, but one can forcibly hold
it open for up to half an hour. When a tunnel from gate A to gate B has
been opened, gate B can no longer dial - it can only receive what's coming
from gate A. It cannot forcibly close the connection. One can simply
physically block the gate, though, so that travelers slam into a titanium
wall at hyperlight speeds. It creates a very satisfactory "thump" sound...
The dialing table sends signals to the actual gate, which then rotates like
a combination lock to select the destination. One can also manually rotate
the gate (which is what the heroes have done several times), but one has
to feed lots of electricity into it if one doesn't have the dialing table
to feed the power (the heroes have done a Ben Franklin with lightning,
for example).
As you see, there are a lot of rules, and the show's production staff
handles them admirably - there have been extremely few slip-ups in the
two seasons I've seen of the show. Fans of SG-1 have it easy compared
to Trek fans.
Timo Saloniemi
Arthur Levesque
BD>Excuse me Mr. Eddore, but I tried ROT-13 Unscramble on this and it
BD>didn't help.
You need to use ROT 3.1415926i to translate Eddorian.
--
/\ Arthur M Levesque 2A4W <*> b...@boog.orgy =/\= http://boog.org __
\B\ack King of the Potato People <fnord> "Ia! Ia! Cthulhu fhtagn!" (oO)
\S\lash Member of a vast right-wing conspiracy (-O-) Urban Spaceman /||\
\/ I was a lesbian before it was fashionable "I hate rainbows!"-EC
Captain Infinity
In article <3887b827$0$68...@news.execpc.com>
Granular wrote:
>> Remember the "The Cage", the original Trek pilot? The camera swoops in
>> and you can see right into the bridge. That PROVES it!
>
>The camera swooped through the bubble on the top of the bridge.
So you're saying that the bubble is transparent but the window is
actually a screen?
That's WHACKO man! That's a fly in the face of logic! As a friend of
mine might say, that's BOZOTIC!
Look, I remember seeing the inside of the bubble in the first Star Trek
Motion Picture. It was white, not transparent. If it was transparent,
what would they need the windshield for? (Or, in treknobabble, the
"viewscreen", even though it's not made of mesh.)
But I'll concede the point anyway, just so we can get back to the
original discussion. Let's say the bubble *is* transparent. It still
only makes sense to put the bridge on top of the saucer, so they can
look out at where they're going or at what they're shooting. It would
hardly make sense to put a transparent bubble around a room that's
inside the ship, don't you agree? If the bridge was inside the ship,
all they would look out on is the inner decks. Or should I say "look
out at"? Oy! Now I'm getting confused! The whole idea is just so
bizarre I don't even know why we're discussing it! Are you trolling me?
**
Captain Infinity
..."Infinity has its uses, but its just not real. We can imagine
it, so long as we don't imagine too hard. Then we start to see
the contradictions. The boundaries, far from artificial, are
the limits of that concept's usefulness to us." --Kyle Bennett
mumford
>In article <200120000908299971%bri...@home.com>, Brian Barjenbruch
><bri...@home.com> wrote:
>
>> Besides, a few decks, on a ship as small as Voyager, is as good as
>> death to the bridge no matter where it is. A huge ship such as the
>> Sovereign class might make it work, but Intrepid-class ships are too
>> small for that.
>
>Doesn't matter. An edge is an edge. There is no rational reason for
>putting the bridge on top of the hull in such an exposed position.
>if this is a small advantage, there is still no reason not to exploit
>it.
Just to chyme in with a bit of useless knowledge. There is at least one
rational reason: the bridge is meant to be an easily replaced part of
the whole ship. The TNG tech manual states the bridge is modular and
designed to be removed/replaced easily.
--
Glenn Lamb - mum...@netcom.com. Finger for my PGP Key.
Email to me must have my address in either the To: or Cc: field. All other
mail will be bounced automatically as spam.
PGPprint = E3 0F DE CC 94 72 D1 1A 2D 2E A9 08 6B A0 CD 82
Rich Heimlich
<oha...@rcn.com> wrote:
>> Geez, how do you manage to enjoy everyday life?
>>
>It's called criticism. It has nothing to do with enjoying life, but
>analyzing that life.
Good critcism is fine as long as it's constructive. This was nothing
more than a long list of overly sensitive nitpicking for very little
purpose.
Oh, and nice try attempting to have all replies to your posts sent to
"alt.sex.jesus". Very nice for someone masquerading as a man of the
cloth. Plus it helps to totally blow any credibility your posts might
have contained.
*** RTH ***
Masked Man
ships can be targeted, the weapons are moving too slow to hit the
target, even on intercept vectors.
On Thu, 20 Jan 2000 19:11:05 -0800, The Heathen
<hea...@scientist.com> wrote:
|The biggest tactical error that StarFleet ships make is to slow down
|to impulse speeds, even stop, before or during a battle.
Who was that masked man?
Leatherman
Here's my 2 cents on the whole viewscreen discussion:
1. The viewscreen is NOT mesh nor a window. Ever see the flat Panasonic TV
that will hang on a wall?
It's the same principle (heck, my little ol' laptop has the same kind of
"viewscreen"). That's why they can
magnify or zoom images, along with viewing overlays of astrometrical
data.
2. I've got two theories on the bubble dome over the center of the bridge.
a. it was just the "magic of the movies" that caused it to appear
transparent. (Other scenes of this "magic"
include the zoom-in on Picard (as Locutus) inside the Borg cube or
the long shot that ran down the side of the
generational ship (on Voyager) and into the room with Harry Kim and
his girlfriend). That shot through the top
could have been just a really cool visual effect.
b. perhaps the dome is a type of polarized LCD screen which can be set
to transparent or opaque. (this technology
is even available for home windows right now.). I have to admit that
I think this is probably the correct explanation
since whatever the dome is did shatter and blue sky could be seen
when the Enterprise crashed in Generations.
mIkIE
Masked Man
|You need to use ROT 3.1415926i to translate Eddorian.
Masked Man----->Or, email Mentor of Arisia....where's a disembodied
brain when you need him anyways?
Arthur Levesque
BS>You need to use ROT 3.1415926i to translate Eddorian.
Masked Man (kemo...@skyenet.net) wrote:
MM>Or, email Mentor of Arisia...
Only necessary if you don't have a lens of your own -- of course,
without a lens, you really can't contact Mentor.
Richard Van Fossan
"Masked Man" <kemo...@skyenet.net> wrote in message
news:388b8b0b...@news.mindspring.com...
> Masked Man----->Battle is not possible at warp speeds. Even if the
> ships can be targeted, the weapons are moving too slow to hit the
> target, even on intercept vectors.
Phaser beams have hit ships at warp--they apparently propagate at very hight
superluminal velocities. Also, if a class 9 probe can do a rendevous with a
ship at warp, it could be equipped with a powerful antimatter charge
(BOOM!).
>
> On Thu, 20 Jan 2000 19:11:05 -0800, The Heathen
> <hea...@scientist.com> wrote:
>
> |The biggest tactical error that StarFleet ships make is to slow down
> |to impulse speeds, even stop, before or during a battle.
>
Richard Van Fossan
"Mortis" <ri...@mindspring.com> wrote in message
news:388c9071...@news.mindspring.com...
> I used my telepathic powers to read
> (Captain Infinity) typed:
> >so they can see what they're shooting at.
>
> Shouldn't that be "...so they can see at what they're shooting."?
"End a sentence with a preposition? That is something up with which I will
not put."
Winston Churchill
Arthur Levesque
MM>Battle is not possible at warp speeds.
False.
MM>Even if the ships can be targeted
They can, since ships are able to detect, see, follow (etc.) each
other while in warp...
MM>the weapons are moving too slow to hit the target
That **may** be true for the weapons they're **currently** using (do
phasers travel at the speed of light, even when the ships are in warp, or
is there some sort of technobabble involved? And what about photon
torpedoes, do they achieve warp speeds? Soran's missile (and the
resulting explosion of the star Veridian) both happened at faster than the
speed of light)...
MM>even on intercept vectors.
You (and TPTB) are showing a remarkable lack of imagination... Just
as no one's bothered beaming photon torpedoes directly into an enemy's
warp core or using a number of other obvious attacks, there are quite a
few ways that ships can destroy each other at warp speeds...
There's no reason why warp drives and computers can't be put on
missiles using Trek tech (think of them as small ships with an auto-pilot
programmed to chase and ram the opponent).
If another ship is chasing you, there's no reason why you can't dump
some mines (or some technobabble particles or whathaveyou) out the back of
your ship for them to collide with... think of the spikes and oil that
spew out the back of James Bond's car. Or dump plenty of that crap in
their path if you know where they'll be going. Cloak the mines if need
be; check for a loophole that says the Fed just can't cloak SHIPS...
Even at warp speeds, the ships can communicate with them, so some
sort of signals/energy can travel from one ship to the other. Hike up the
power of your signal to blow out their systems. Focus and concentrate
it. Or stick a virus in your signal -- other races do that to Federation
ships all the time, so it's certainly possible with Trek tech. That lets
you end a battle without firing a shot or killing anyone -- you'd think
that would be right up the UFP's alley...
Need more? I'll get back to you later, I have a job interview at the
Daystrom Institute...
Richard Van Fossan
> Oh, *Brian*...
>
> You can't be serious with this line of logic.
>
> I don't care in which century ships are constructed, engineers are NOT
> stupid enough to soley rely on power plant-reliant sources of protection
> for one of the most strategic areas of a warship. That is not only
> foolish, but highly improbable such a thing would be allowed-- again, in
> ANY time period of construction.
You mean the way no prudent engineer would rely on the computers for control
of the primary power to critical systems? How many times have they been
unable to shut down something because the computers wouldn't let them? The
main breaker on my house is mechanical in nature. No computer virus possible
will keep me from pulling the big red switch. I've seen several episodes
when, if I were Geordi, instead of trying to crack someone's computer codes
to shut something down, I'd have a low-ranking (i.e., dispensible) Red Shirt
phaser a critical power connection.
Richard Van Fossan
"Danny Johnson" <P.r.o.g.m.a.n.2.0.0.0.@.u.s.a...n.e.t> wrote in message
news:868f8p$h5h$1...@sooner.brightok.net...
> (crossis-postus maximus)
>
> Probably just naval tradition. I *do* agree that the bridge should be
> protected better. You may only survive one additional hit, but that's
> something!
Actually, on TOS, there was auxillary control, which is deep inside the
Engineering section, and which can withstand just about anything that
doesn't destroy the ship outright.
>
> BTW, I thought that the Sovreign class was about the same size as the
> Intrepid.....
>
>
> Daniel Silevitch wrote in message
> <200120000810384918%dms...@pha.jhu.edu>...
> >In article <190120002309117430%bri...@home.com>, Brian Barjenbruch
> ><bri...@home.com> wrote:
> >
> >> > - How did they *just know* that Starfleet would be so suicidal as to
> put
> >> > the main control center out on the hull?
> >>
> >> Where else should the bridge be?
> >>
> >> It's no good putting it in the middle of the hull. It's not the
hull's
> >> job to protect the bridge; that's what *shields* are for. Anything
> >> capable of getting through Voyager's shields would also get through
any
> >> thickness of hull plating, # of decks, etc. that they would have put
up
> >> around the bridge.
> >
> >That's a bogus argument; you are essentially asserting that anything
> >which gets through the shields will inevitably slice right through the
> >entire ship. There are lots and lots of cases of stuff getting through
> >the shields and causing a few decks to rupture or something. Clearly,
> >the ship's hull, or the Structural Integrity Field technobabble that
> >reinforces said hull, has a fair amount of damage-resistance capability
> >on its own.
> >
> >The proper place for the control center is deep inside the bowels of
> >the ship, to minimize the chance of damage. It's not like they need to
> >look out the windows in order to steer/aim the guns/judge the wind/
> >whatever.
> >
> >-dms
>
>
Masked Man
| Only necessary if you don't have a lens of your own -- of course,
|without a lens, you really can't contact Mentor.
Masked Man----->Nice to know that Doc Smith's genius lives on....He
would have been a helluva science advisor for Trek, though I dont
think I want him doing character development....
John R Stobo
Trek ships drop out of warp to use their phasers, which can only shoot out
at light speed. The ships' captains seem to always drop out of warp when
they come up to a possibly combatant situation.
Photon torpedos have mini-warp engines in them, which allow them to be
used at warp speeds. As ships can communicate with each other as well as
scan as scan at warp speeds using sub-space devices, they probably could
use a sub-space radar to track ships they're attacking. However, in most
cases I can recall photon torpedos seem to be shot rather blindly in the
general direction of a foe if it is far off and depend upon an exploding
mine field effect to destroy/disable the enemy ship.
Geoduck
<leath...@reigningpages.com> wrote:
(snip)
>2. I've got two theories on the bubble dome over the center of the bridge.
> a. it was just the "magic of the movies" that caused it to appear
>transparent. (Other scenes of this "magic"
> include the zoom-in on Picard (as Locutus) inside the Borg cube or
>the long shot that ran down the side of the
> generational ship (on Voyager) and into the room with Harry Kim and
>his girlfriend). That shot through the top
> could have been just a really cool visual effect.
> b. perhaps the dome is a type of polarized LCD screen which can be set
>to transparent or opaque. (this technology
> is even available for home windows right now.). I have to admit that
>I think this is probably the correct explanation
> since whatever the dome is did shatter and blue sky could be seen
>when the Enterprise crashed in Generations.
FWTW, I seem to remember a TOS episode in which Kirk looks into the
bridge of a miniaturized Enterprise through the upper bubble.
--
Geoduck
geo...@usa.net
http://www.olywa.net/cook
Arthur Levesque
JRS>Photon torpedos have mini-warp engines in them, which allow them
JRS>to be used at warp speeds... However, in most cases I can recall
JRS>photon torpedos seem to be shot rather blindly in the general
JRS>direction of a foe if it is far off and depend upon an exploding
JRS>mine field effect to destroy/disable the enemy ship.
Evidence of stupidity on the part of the writers / Starfleet
techies... I mean, we have guided and homing missiles NOW. They acted
like it was so clever when they did it in ST6, why not do it more often?
Nelson Lu
Arthur Levesque <b...@boog.orgy> wrote:
> You (and TPTB) are showing a remarkable lack of imagination... Just
>as no one's bothered beaming photon torpedoes directly into an enemy's
>warp core or using a number of other obvious attacks, there are quite a
Actually, Voyager used something very similar to that one on the Borg once
(in "Dark Frontier").
Mike Dicenso
On Thu, 20 Jan 2000, it was written:
> (crossis-postus maximus)
>
> Probably just naval tradition. I *do* agree that the bridge should be
> protected better. You may only survive one additional hit, but that's
> something!
>
> BTW, I thought that the Sovreign class was about the same size as the
> Intrepid.....
The Sovreign class is 685 meters long, while the Intrepidclass is only 344
meters.
-Mike
Mortis
(Masked Man) typed:
Yeah, he'd probably try to kill off the entire crew or something, and
then call the various robots "bubble-headed boobies".
hehe, I quoted someone who said "boobies", hehe
WWS
IIRC, it's Requiem for Methusalah, when Leonardo da Vinci puts the Enterprise
into a glass display case.
Okay, so that part was lame. The girl was still hot, though.
--
__________________________________________________WWS_____________
I just think the Enterprise came with all the options, including
a sunroof.
Bozo the Proctologist
>> So you're saying that the bubble is transparent but the window is
>> actually a screen?
>
>I never thought the bubble was transparent. It seems fairly obvious
>that it isn't. Not on any starship I've ever seen. In "The Cage" the
>viewpoint of the camera did swoop through the bubble, but this was
>simply for *dramatic license*. It was a cool special effect, but never
>meant to be authentic.
It looked very transparent in TNG's pilot "Encounter at Farpoint," in one
of the panning shots when Picard or Riker came on the Bridge. Also at
the end of "Degenerations," the shot up through the broken dome showed it
to be transparent.
He-Who-Wonders-If-The-Klingons-*Borrowed*-"Today-Is-A-Good-Day-To-Die"-Fr
om-The-Humans
A Magick Book that sticks with you: The VELCRONOMICON!
________________________________________________________________
YOU'RE PAYING TOO MUCH FOR THE INTERNET!
Juno now offers FREE Internet Access!
Try it today - there's no risk! For your FREE software, visit:
http://dl.www.juno.com/get/tagj.
Bozo the Proctologist
>A while ago, Daniel Silevitch <dms...@pha.jhu.edu> begot:
>>In article <200120000908299971%bri...@home.com>, Brian Barjenbruch
>><bri...@home.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Besides, a few decks, on a ship as small as Voyager, is as good as
>>> death to the bridge no matter where it is. A huge ship such as the
>>> Sovereign class might make it work, but Intrepid-class ships are too
>>> small for that.
>>
>>Doesn't matter. An edge is an edge. There is no rational reason for
>>putting the bridge on top of the hull in such an exposed position.
>>There is an advantage to be gained by burying it in the main hull. Even
>>if this is a small advantage, there is still no reason not to exploit
>>it.
>
>Just to chyme in with a bit of useless knowledge. There is at least one
>rational reason: the bridge is meant to be an easily replaced part of
>the whole ship. The TNG tech manual states the bridge is modular and
>designed to be removed/replaced easily.
Like L'Ursa and B'Tor tried to do in "Degenerations?" "Target the
Bridge!"
With transporters, why wouldn't the Bridge be just as modular and easily
removed/replaced from the center of the saucer?
He-Who-Is-Still-Waiting-For-The-Motors-That-Rotate-Voyager's-Nacelles-Up-
To-Fail
"When two patterns combine, in a way serpentine, that's a moir!"
Bozo the Proctologist
><snip>
>
>> Oh, *Brian*...
>>
>> You can't be serious with this line of logic.
>>
>> I don't care in which century ships are constructed, engineers are NOT
>> stupid enough to soley rely on power plant-reliant sources of
protection
>> for one of the most strategic areas of a warship. That is not only
>> foolish, but highly improbable such a thing would be allowed-- again,
in
>> ANY time period of construction.
Another point to consider: maybe Starfleet engineers really, really DON'T
LIKE Starfleet Captains and crews? That would explain a LOT of starship
engineering......
>You mean the way no prudent engineer would rely on the computers for
control
>of the primary power to critical systems? How many times have they been
>unable to shut down something because the computers wouldn't let them?
How many holodeck and "An alien entity tries to take over the ship"
episodes have they done? <G>
>The
>main breaker on my house is mechanical in nature. No computer virus
possible
>will keep me from pulling the big red switch. I've seen several episodes
>when, if I were Geordi, instead of trying to crack someone's computer
codes
>to shut something down, I'd have a low-ranking (i.e., dispensible) Red
Shirt
>phaser a critical power connection.
As much as we carp about the over-use of the reset button on Voyager,
isn't it ironic that they've LOST the ability to build reset buttons into
computers.
Well before "Contagion," I found myself yelling "Geordi, just do the
three-fingered-salute and REBOOT THE DAMNED MACHINE!!!"
He-Who-Is-Always-Amazed-By-How-Much-The-Writers-Are-Ignorant-About-Comput
ers
29A: The hexadecimal Beast.
James Ward
>
> Elisabeth Anne Riba (l...@netcom.com) wrote:
> : Bozo the Proctologist <cue...@juno.com> writes:
>
> : >"If I could save time in a tachyon field....."
>
> : >S
>
> : >P
>
> : >O
>
> : >I
>
> : >L
>
> : >E
>
> : >R
>
> : >S
>
> : >P
>
> : >A
>
> : >C
>
> : >E
>
> : >T
>
> : >H
>
> : >E
>
> : >F
>
> : >I
>
> : >N
>
> : >A
>
> : >L
>
> : >F
>
> : >R
>
> : >O
>
> : >N
>
> : >T-
>
> : >- I'm not sure why the comparison to neutron stars was mentioned in the
> : >beginning, as their severe gravity wells cause time to pass more SLOWLY
> : >on their surfaces.
The opening mentions them detecting a *planet* sized object with
a neutron stars density. A real neutron star is only around 20
to 30 km wide ( or was that the radius, either way far smaller than
a planet or even a moon). That was just their excuse for stoping
by the planet in the first place.
>
> : Probably a reference to Dragon's Egg, a Robert Forward novel from the
> : late-seventies/early-eighties about life on a neutron star, where one
> : Earth hour is equivalent to hundreds of their years. As an Earth
> : scientific survey ship watches (initially unawares), cheela evolve from
> : primitive savages to more advanced technology than Earth's.
>
> : Naturally, Trek reduced the time difference and made the aliens human,
> : but it sounds like there are a lot of similarities between the two.
>
> Of course, in _Dragon's Egg_ the time difference was due to the fact that
> the aliens were made of nuclear matter, and hence experienced time on the
> scale of nuclear reactions rather than chemical reactions. It seems plausible
> that someone on the Voyager staff read the novel and mistakenly assumed
> that the time dilation was due to the strong gravitational field.
In the episode there was stated to be a tacyhon field around the planet
that was the cause of the time difference. It was not supposed to have
been from the planet's gravity.
--
James Ward
Interested in getting paid while you surf the web?
Check out this site, they pay you and all you have to
do is look at a few ads on the bottom of your screen.
James Ward
>
> Timo S Saloniemi wrote:
> > Munch.
>
> >
> > >- From dialogue and visuals, Voyager had their shields up. How did they
> > >dock?
> >
> > Probably shields "forzen in time" aren't too much of a hindrance...
> > Especially because shields have a "frequency" given in Hz that
> > more or less means their strength is time-dependent.
> >
>
> If the shields couldn't block the capsule on account of the temporal differential, how did they block the
> planet's antimatter torpedoes and tri-colbalt devices?
They probably modified the shields after realizing that the orbiter
traveled through the shields so easily. There is also the issue that
the orbiter would have been coasting through the shields, which from
other episodes seems to not be a problem, while the weapons probably
either detonated at a certain range or hit at full speed.
James Ward
>
> >> - When the capsule is launched to intercept Voyager, they're able to
> >> maintain contact with the ground up to a point- then it cuts out
> >> suddenly. Ground Control sounds normal until they're cut off. As
> severe
> >> as the temporal differential is on the planet, they should have
> realized
> >> their own version of general relativity, noticing that time goes
> slower
> >> in the valley than on top of a hill. They should have expected the
> >> temporal differential once they boarded Voyager.
> >
> >Huh?
>
> General relativity: In a normal gravity field, the deeper down you are in
> a gravity well, the slower time goes. Earth's gravity field is so weak,
> the effect is so small that only in the last few decades has our atomic
> clock tech reached the point where we can measure timeintervals small
> enough to detect this.
>
> On the "Blink" planet, the effect is inverted: time goes faster the
> deeper you get into that gravity field, much, MUCH faster. The change is
> so dramatic that over the centuries of development, they should have
> noticed that clocks on hills ran slower than clocks in valleys, and
> figured out their version of general relativity long before inventing
> electricity & industry.
Watch the episode again, it is specficily said that it was the
tachyon field around the planet that was the cause of time being
speed up on the surface. They *never* said it was the planet's
gravity doing it.
> >Didn't O'Brien talk about shields cycling in that TNG episode where he
> snuck
> >aboard his old captain's ship? And wouldn't even a millisecond of a
> shield
> >being down during this cycle be, like, an hour and a half to the
> astronauts?
>
> "The Wounded." I should have remembered one of TNG's best..... hmmm. A
> millisecond is enough time for light to travel three hundred kilometers.
> Good thing nobody ever shoots at a Starfleet ship with a laser. <EG>
Actually we have seen ships can coast through shields before. Remember
how they rescued Picard/Locuts in the second part of "Best of Both
Worlds"?
Allen W. McDonnell
>> putting the bridge on top of the hull in such an exposed position.
>
>
Modern Naval vessels are commanded from CIC deep within the hull, not from
the Bridge. When the ship goes to battle stations the Captain and his key
personel move from wherever they are to CIC.
--
Life is what YOU make of it, so why are you sitting there reading this?
Allen W. McDonnell
AIM Tanada1945
Email Tan...@provide.spam.net
David B.
>
> On Thu, 20 Jan 2000 22:47:08 -0800, "David B." <both...@hotmail.com>
> wrote:
> >Captain Infinity wrote:
> >> Once Upon A Time,
> >> In article <200120001309195749%bri...@home.com>
> >> Brian Barjenbruch wrote:
> >>
> >> >The viewscreen isn't actually a window--it's a screen that can be
> >> >turned off and on.
> >>
> >> A screen? If it were a screen wouldn't all their air get out? Plus,
> >> space is very cold so I'm sure they would use windows instead of
> >> screens, or they would freeze to death. Besides, I've never seen any
> >> kind of mesh, it's always perfectly clear like TRANSPARENT ALUMINUM!!!
> >>
> >> Remember the "The Cage", the original Trek pilot? The camera swoops in
> >> and you can see right into the bridge. That PROVES it!
> >
> >That's the bubble on top of the bridge. Brian is talking about the
> >viewscreen in the front of the bridge.
>
> I think you missed the Captain's point. I thought it was pretty funny.
> (hint: he's being deliberately obtuse, referring to a window screen)
I see that now. I missed it before.
--
Dennis Miller on the Millennium: "Whorin' and warrin' but never borin'."
Reverend Sean O'Hara
>
> OR case c) Bridge is a heavily shielded section on the surface of
> the ship in comparision to rest of ship, with the engineering deck
> in the middle of the ship the automatic back up if the main bridge
> is taken out. Note, this is what has been shown to be the case of
> Federation ships.
Not quite. A few times (Brothers) engineering has been used because
the bridge is inoperable. However, the preferable model would be
the original Enterprise which had an auxiliary bridge (which looked
like the engineering set with the mesh moved around) deep in the bowels
of the ship. One could argue that the battle bridge of the Enterprise
D served the same purpose (too bad it was used all of four times in
the series).
> They have referenced the bridge having extra
> shielding/hull thickness before and too many time to count off the
> top of my head has the captain of a ship moved command to engineering
> for one reason or another.
>
Engineering isn't much safer. How many times have the Borg cut the hull
right outside the engine room?
> And further more note, that this is the way that current naval ships
> are designed. A fomral bridge on the top (most exposed part) of the
> ship, with the engine room ( nearly dead center) as an active back up
> for control of the ship.
>
Wrong. Engineering is a horrible place to command a ship. In Star Trek
it makes some sense since the whole vessel is heavily automated and
all the computer systems seem to run from engineering. However, the
engine room of a modern naval vessel just wouldn't work -- there's
no way to get tactical information. Modern warships have a CIC
in the bowels of the ship where all the tactical information can
be accessed, but it's not an engine room.
> > Doesn't matter. An edge is an edge. There is no rational reason for
> > putting the bridge on top of the hull in such an exposed position.
>
> Then why do surface navies still to this day design ships that way?
>
Because the bridge of a warship is for every day running, not
battles.
--
Reverend Sean O'Hara
You two can be an ordained minister: http://www.ulc.org/ulc
"Now, regardless of whether you'll excuse me, I will return to
playing with the three stooges of RAST: Sean, Bill [December
Starr], and [Cronan]. They're too pitiful to be killfiled."
- Michael Martinez in rec.arts.sf.tv
Reverend Sean O'Hara
>
> Masked Man----->Battle is not possible at warp speeds. Even if the
> ships can be targeted, the weapons are moving too slow to hit the
> target, even on intercept vectors.
>
blasts an asteroid.
Encounter at Farpoint: The Enterprise battle section fires torpedoes
at the Q Globe while traveling at high warp velocity.
Q Who?: Picard and crew debate the merits of firing photon torpedoes
at the pursuing Borg. At their range, the torpedoes would take out
the Enterprise.
Masked Man
<cue...@juno.com> wrote:
|A Magick Book that sticks with you: The VELCRONOMICON!
Masked Man---->Bumper sticker:
Cthulu Cthucks!
Gharlane of Eddore
>
> making-point him concept belabor seekingly explicate else concept.
>
> shootingly at-which apperceptly-prior-dependence sequence stated
> positive target acquisition base precept green. bangly.
>
In <38885ABD...@yahoo.com> Antifrance <antif...@yahoo.com> writes:
>
> Excuse me Mr. Eddore, but I tried ROT-13 Unscramble on this and it
> didn't help.
>
Descramblingly cognition-seek failure-fraught, unright tool.
Use neverly. Plaid.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
\|/ __\/ \|/ \|/ _\/_ \|/ \|/ \/__ \|/ \|/\/___ \|/
@~/ Oo\~@ @~/ Oo \~@ @~/Oo \~@ @~Oo \~@
/_( \__/)_\ /_( \__/ )_\ /_(\__/ )_\ /_\__/ )_\
\___U/ \__U_/ \_U__/ \U___/
+ +
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
( merge the two " + " characters for 3-D effect. (c) GoE, 1997 )
SJohnson
>
> <snip>
>
> > Oh, *Brian*...
> >
> > You can't be serious with this line of logic.
> >
> > I don't care in which century ships are constructed, engineers are NOT
> > stupid enough to soley rely on power plant-reliant sources of protection
> > for one of the most strategic areas of a warship. That is not only
> > foolish, but highly improbable such a thing would be allowed-- again, in
> > ANY time period of construction.
>
> of the primary power to critical systems? How many times have they been
> main breaker on my house is mechanical in nature. No computer virus possible
> will keep me from pulling the big red switch. I've seen several episodes
> when, if I were Geordi, instead of trying to crack someone's computer codes
> to shut something down, I'd have a low-ranking (i.e., dispensible) Red Shirt
> phaser a critical power connection.
LOL!!
SJ
SJohnson
> Actually, it's a pretty nifty system. The creators of the TV show apparently
> thought it through, which is more than can be said about the makers
> of the original movie. What you dial in is a set of coordinates - not
> a simple "phone number" which you could get right by trying a sufficient number
> of random keypresses, but a specific set of six symbols out of a group of
> perhaps 30-40 that corresponds to a spot in space. And then you give
> the code of the sending gate (the reason apparently being that there can
> be several gates next to each other, and the weird hyperspace wormholes
> have to know which one to connect to), and hit "send". A one-way tunnel
> to the destination will open if there is another stargate at that destination.
> Normally, the tunnel stays open for a minute or so, but one can forcibly hold
> it open for up to half an hour. When a tunnel from gate A to gate B has
> been opened, gate B can no longer dial - it can only receive what's coming
> from gate A. It cannot forcibly close the connection. One can simply
> physically block the gate, though, so that travelers slam into a titanium
> wall at hyperlight speeds. It creates a very satisfactory "thump" sound...
The sounds of all those warriors 'thumping' into the iris was rather...
*whoa*!
> The dialing table sends signals to the actual gate, which then rotates like
> a combination lock to select the destination. One can also manually rotate
> the gate (which is what the heroes have done several times), but one has
> to feed lots of electricity into it if one doesn't have the dialing table
> to feed the power (the heroes have done a Ben Franklin with lightning,
> for example).
Which has happened a *lot*. But, unlike some VOY spur-of-the-moment
'rigs', these looked like they would actually WORK. That helps a lot in
the enjoyment of the series.
> As you see, there are a lot of rules, and the show's production staff
> handles them admirably - there have been extremely few slip-ups in the
> two seasons I've seen of the show. Fans of SG-1 have it easy compared
> to Trek fans.
Since DS9, "Stargate SG-1" is now my #1 sci-fi series/outting. This is
the first time in my life that some sorta Trek encarnation (TOS, TNG,
DS9, or VOY) is not holding the top position. Even great programs like
"Battlestar Galactica" couldn't dislodge the old decade-old TOS eps from
such a perch in my heart. A rather sad commentary on the way VOY has
affected me lately.
SJohnson
Trek Barnes
James Ward <jgw...@eos.ncsu.edu> wrote in message
news:388822BD...@eos.ncsu.edu...
their ships.
Micheal Keane
>>Doesn't matter. An edge is an edge. There is no rational reason for
>>putting the bridge on top of the hull in such an exposed position.
Even
>>if this is a small advantage, there is still no reason not to
exploit
>>it.
>
>Just to chyme in with a bit of useless knowledge. There is at least
one
>rational reason: the bridge is meant to be an easily replaced part
of
>the whole ship. The TNG tech manual states the bridge is modular and
>designed to be removed/replaced easily.
Why? What would you replace it with? Another bridge in case the first
gets destroyed? Why not just make sure the first one doesn't get
wasted in the first place? Or is it to help with refits or something?
GeneK
battle at warp with the old starship Enterprise,
nor did any of his adversaries. TOS ships
manuevered and fired both phasers and photon
torpedos at warp speeds. Apparently, someone
changed the laws of subspace physics between
the 23rd and 24th centuries.
GeneK
Lizard
>Oh, wait, that's that other show.......
><snip>
to a low but stable-enough orbit.
>
>Stable enough for them, anyway: the *planet* has a "tachyon core," which
>is interacting with Voyager to hold them there, but which is also playing
>tectonic games on the planet's crust. On the planet we see a serious
>quake topple off some fruit put on an alter for one of the lights in the
>sky. When our devout native looks up, he sees a bright new star
>(Voyager), and sets off to make an alter for the New God On The Block.
>
<snip>
I missed this ep, so all I have is your description, but I sure hope
they payed Robert L. Forward for ripping off "Dragon's Egg"...
*----------------------------------------------------*
Evolution doesn't take prisoners:Lizard
"I've heard of this thing men call 'empathy', but I've never
once been afflicted with it, thanks the Gods." Bruno The Bandit
http://www.mrlizard.com
James Ward
>
> > They have referenced the bridge having extra
> > shielding/hull thickness before and too many time to count off the
> > top of my head has the captain of a ship moved command to engineering
> > for one reason or another.
> >
> Engineering isn't much safer. How many times have the Borg cut the hull
> right outside the engine room?
The actually engineering room we see is not supposed to be on the hull.
>
> > And further more note, that this is the way that current naval ships
> > are designed. A fomral bridge on the top (most exposed part) of the
> > ship, with the engine room ( nearly dead center) as an active back up
> > for control of the ship.
> >
> Wrong. Engineering is a horrible place to command a ship. In Star Trek
> it makes some sense since the whole vessel is heavily automated and
> all the computer systems seem to run from engineering. However, the
> engine room of a modern naval vessel just wouldn't work -- there's
> no way to get tactical information. Modern warships have a CIC
> in the bowels of the ship where all the tactical information can
> be accessed, but it's not an engine room.
Ok, so I don't know where exactly they place the CIC thing on new
ships, but the point still stands modern ships still have a "fancy"
bridge on top of the ship like they always did. It is granted more
for show, but they still have them.
>
> > > Doesn't matter. An edge is an edge. There is no rational reason for
> > > putting the bridge on top of the hull in such an exposed position.
> >
> > Then why do surface navies still to this day design ships that way?
> >
> Because the bridge of a warship is for every day running, not
> battles.
It still doesn't answer they question, why even have the "fancy" bridge
on top of the ship if the CIC in the center is all you need?
James Ward
>
> > So you're saying that the bubble is transparent but the window is
> > actually a screen?
>
> I never thought the bubble was transparent. It seems fairly obvious
> that it isn't. Not on any starship I've ever seen. In "The Cage" the
> viewpoint of the camera did swoop through the bubble, but this was
> simply for *dramatic license*. It was a cool special effect, but never
> meant to be authentic.
Actually in the 7th(?) movie, when they crash the E-D, they show the
crew seeing the dirt on top of the ship through that window. At least
on the E-D it was supposed to be a clear window.
James Ward
>
> > > "The Wounded." I should have remembered one of TNG's best..... hmmm. A
> > > millisecond is enough time for light to travel three hundred kilometers.
> > > Good thing nobody ever shoots at a Starfleet ship with a laser. <EG>
> >
> > Actually we have seen ships can coast through shields before. Remember
> > how they rescued Picard/Locuts in the second part of "Best of Both
> > Worlds"?
> >
> But those are BORG shields. The Borg are stupid enough to let you beam on to
> their ships.
>
Actually it have been mentioned on a couple of other occasions, even
with reguard to ST shields. And remember they couldn't beam through
the Borg shields once they were up either.
Mortis
<liz...@mrlizard.com> typed:
>I missed this ep, so all I have is your description, but I sure hope
>they payed Robert L. Forward for ripping off "Dragon's Egg"...
Strangely, those were my thoughts exactly. *grin*
Captain Infinity
in article <20000121.174855....@juno.com>
Bozo the Proctologist wrote:
>He-Who-Wonders-If-The-Klingons-*Borrowed*-"Today-Is-A-Good-Day-To-Die"-Fr
>om-The-Humans
I first heard it in "Little Big Man", a wonderful movie starring Dustin
Hoffman.
**
Captain Infinity
Heck
"Revenge is a dish best served cold." was not originated in an ST
script, was it?
Mortis
<bri...@home.com> typed:
>> "Revenge is a dish best served cold." was not originated in an ST
>> script, was it?
>
"Young Sherlock Holmes" the movie
I swear!
Reverend Sean O'Hara
>
> I used my telepathic powers to read
> <230120000132342996%bri...@home.com>, in which Brian Barjenbruch
> <bri...@home.com> typed:
> >> "Revenge is a dish best served cold." was not originated in an ST
> >> script, was it?
> >
> >No, it's a real saying. Don't know whose, though.
>
> "Young Sherlock Holmes" the movie
>
> I swear!
>
I seem to remember it, but I much prefer:
"I'd rather die a gruesome and horrible death."
"I'll gladdly oblige."
Chris Applegate
Wings (like hockey is more important than Trek ... even bad Trek), and said
it would be shown at the "special time" of Saturday at 7. Lo and behold, I
turn on the TV Saturday at 7, only to find "The Fresh Prince of Bel Air" and
"Martin." So tonight, I finally get to see it.
On with the comments...
>
> tectonic games on the planet's crust. On the planet we see a serious
> quake topple off some fruit put on an alter for one of the lights in the
Didn't the idiot read Genesis? A god wants meat!
>
> able to mate up with a docking port (They must have ordered the
> "_Voyager_ Technical Manual" from Amazon.com) and the two astronauts come
Lots of discusion about the VTM on Rick's NG. Won't be coming out for a
while.
>It is a physiologically traumatic event, and the female astronaut doesn't
Not to mention the fact that they should be suffering from temporal narcosis.
> survive. Her pilot does, though, and when the planet's technology
> reaches the point of lobbing antimatter missiles (didn't they used to be
> called 'photon torpedoes?') at the, the pilot returns to tell them that
Torpedoes are launched from ships. Missiles are launched from the surface.
> They aren't sanguine about his chances of success after a tri-cobalt
> warhead takes down Voyager's shields- but then two ships pop into their
Interestingly enough, several episodes have mentioned that tricobalts are
weaker than photorps. Maybe the thumbprint-forehead people decided to be
gentle?
Chris
TROC
Mortis
which Reverend Sean O'Hara <oha...@rcn.com> typed:
>Mortis wrote:
>> I used my telepathic powers to read
>> <230120000132342996%bri...@home.com>, in which Brian Barjenbruch
>> <bri...@home.com> typed:
>> >> "Revenge is a dish best served cold." was not originated in an ST
>> >> script, was it?
>> >
>> >No, it's a real saying. Don't know whose, though.
>>
>> "Young Sherlock Holmes" the movie
>>
>(As opposed to "Young Sherlock Holmes" the flame-thrower?)
Ja! Tatsächlich habe ich "Jungen Sherlock Holmes" der Flamethrower in
meinen Hosen im Augenblick! Warten Sie eine Sekunde! Ich trage keine
Hosen!
Timo S Saloniemi
>Once Upon A Time,
>Granular wrote:
>
>>> Remember the "The Cage", the original Trek pilot? The camera swoops in
>>> and you can see right into the bridge. That PROVES it!
>>
>
>So you're saying that the bubble is transparent but the window is
>actually a screen?
>
>mine might say, that's BOZOTIC!
Tone it down, man. It may have been funny the first time around,
but it's wearing off fast.
For the record, in the history of Star Trek, NOBODY has ever taken
a look through the transparent ceiling bubble of a starship bridge.
Not to steer the ship, not to fire the guns, not to gape slack-jawed
at the spatial anomaly of the week. The characters don't even so much
as turn their faces up when their eyes are closed. Only the camera
occasionally shows us a pretty glimpse of the big window on the ceiling
of the Enterprise-D. Whether any other ship had a window up there is
questionable - the TOS ship might have had, but the camera couldn't
show us that private part of the bridge set because there were only
spotlights and scaffoldings there.
When somebody really wants to have a look through a window, they walk
away from the bridge and go to the lower decks, as in TNG "Justice".
Beats me why Geordi couldn't just rotate the ship and peer out
through the bridge ceiling window in that episode. Certainly the
viewscreen didn't suffice for that purpose.
Timo Saloniemi
Timo S Saloniemi
>> So you're saying that the bubble is transparent but the window is
>> actually a screen?
>
>that it isn't. Not on any starship I've ever seen. In "The Cage" the
>viewpoint of the camera did swoop through the bubble, but this was
>simply for *dramatic license*. It was a cool special effect, but never
>meant to be authentic.
The E-D did have a window up there, even though nobody ever looked
through it (not until it was cracked by the crash landing in "Generations",
at any rate).
The original TOS ship may have had a window of some sort, both in the
"The Cage" version and the later series version. At least in "Requiem
for Metusaleah", Kirk apparently is able to peer into his shrunken
ship through the top of the bridge! I'd hazard a guess that a window
was indeed installed in these old ships because of unreliable viewscreens
or something, but dropped from all later versions, except for decorative
purposes on the E-D luxury liner.
Timo Saloniemi
Timo S Saloniemi
>Masked Man----->Battle is not possible at warp speeds. Even if the
>ships can be targeted, the weapons are moving too slow to hit the
>target, even on intercept vectors
Tell that to all the people who fight their battles at warp speeds
in various Trek shows.
There has AFAIK never been a hint at some weapon being too slow
to be used at warp speeds. Photon torpedoes are fired regularly
in warp-speed chases, both forward at the fleeing ship and aft
at the pursuer. Phasers are also regularly used at warp, as are
Jem'Hadar phased polaron beams (but Klingon disruptor beams
are not seen in warp fights for some reason).
It is just in various books that the claim is made that phasers or
other weapons cannot travel at warp speeds. This is unsubstantiated
by the episodes so far.
Timo Saloniemi
Timo S Saloniemi
>Masked Man (kemo...@skyenet.net) wrote:
>MM>the weapons are moving too slow to hit the target
>
> That **may** be true for the weapons they're **currently** using (do
>phasers travel at the speed of light, even when the ships are in warp, or
>is there some sort of technobabble involved? And what about photon
>torpedoes, do they achieve warp speeds? Soran's missile (and the
>resulting explosion of the star Veridian) both happened at faster than the
>speed of light)...
Phasers sure are faster than light whenever they need to be. There is
never any technobabble involved, so one is led to think that this is no
big deal. It seems as if warp-speed phasers are a regular run-of-the-mill
weapon every ship of every self-respecting race is supposed to have.
Of course, the Tech Manuals make a big fuss about this, claiming that
phasers move at lightspeed and require special annular confinement
beams to go at FTL speeds. It just doesn't seem to jibe with what
we see on screen.
> There's no reason why warp drives and computers can't be put on
>missiles using Trek tech (think of them as small ships with an auto-pilot
>programmed to chase and ram the opponent).
These might be a bit on the expensive side, though. It might still be
a better ides to fire large numbers of relatively "dumb" photon torpedoes
than to program complex "chase" techniques into a smaller number of
missiles.
> If another ship is chasing you, there's no reason why you can't dump
>some mines (or some technobabble particles or whathaveyou) out the back of
>your ship for them to collide with... think of the spikes and oil that
>spew out the back of James Bond's car. Or dump plenty of that crap in
>their path if you know where they'll be going. Cloak the mines if need
>be; check for a loophole that says the Fed just can't cloak SHIPS...
There's the navigational deflector to take care of inert debris, so
just dumping "spikes" won't work. But minelaying is certainly possible.
The TNG folks did it all the time - they just laid photon torpedoes
instead of mines from the aft torpedo tube!
And one can certainly dump "oil". In Voyager's "Non Sequitur", we saw
Kim spray verterons at a chasing starship, and out of warp it dropped
like a stone.
> Even at warp speeds, the ships can communicate with them, so some
>sort of signals/energy can travel from one ship to the other. Hike up the
>power of your signal to blow out their systems. Focus and concentrate
>it. Or stick a virus in your signal -- other races do that to Federation
>ships all the time, so it's certainly possible with Trek tech. That lets
>you end a battle without firing a shot or killing anyone -- you'd think
>that would be right up the UFP's alley...
The Maquis did that to the poor Malinche in "For the Uniform", now didn't
they? Not at warp speeds, though. And to the Defiant, sort of. But
in actual combat, ships are probably very careful with what they
agree to receive from enemy transmitters.
Timo Saloniemi
Timo S Saloniemi
>
>
>Trek ships drop out of warp to use their phasers, which can only shoot out
>at light speed. The ships' captains seem to always drop out of warp when
>they come up to a possibly combatant situation.
...Except when one of them doesn't want to, which is when we get a chase.
And there are plenty of chases where phasers are used at warp speeds
(VOY "Basics", DS9 "Time to Stand", "Treachery, Faith.." etc.).
Or when one ship is disabled and forced to slow down to impulse, but
the other still is warp-capable and wants to make use of it. Both
sides can score hits on the opponent in such a fight (TOS "Journey
to Babel", "Elaan of Troyius", VOY "Maneuvers").
>Photon torpedos have mini-warp engines in them, which allow them to be
>used at warp speeds. As ships can communicate with each other as well as
>scan as scan at warp speeds using sub-space devices, they probably could
>use a sub-space radar to track ships they're attacking. However, in most
>cases I can recall photon torpedos seem to be shot rather blindly in the
>general direction of a foe if it is far off and depend upon an exploding
>mine field effect to destroy/disable the enemy ship.
Agreed on that. One could say that photorps are in fact pretty smart
weapons, but jammers are even smarter, which is why torps generally
don't manage to track anybody. While at warp, ships always tend
to launch volleys of multiple torpedoes in order to score a hit
(except in DS9 "Time to Stand", where the Centaur fires a single
torp forward in a warp chase and still scores a nice hit).
Timo Saloniemi
Timo S Saloniemi
>John R Stobo (jr...@columbia.edu) wrote:
>JRS>Photon torpedos have mini-warp engines in them, which allow them
>JRS>to be used at warp speeds... However, in most cases I can recall
>JRS>photon torpedos seem to be shot rather blindly in the general
>JRS>direction of a foe if it is far off and depend upon an exploding
>JRS>mine field effect to destroy/disable the enemy ship.
>
> Evidence of stupidity on the part of the writers / Starfleet
>techies... I mean, we have guided and homing missiles NOW. They acted
>like it was so clever when they did it in ST6, why not do it more often?
Could simply be a sign of efficient jamming technology. I kinda liked
it in B5 when big ships would open up on each other and score sixteen
clear misses with first broadside volley (like that Narn cruiser during the
"filmed like a newscast" episode in the second season). I never understood
why they didn't use wider spreads to score even one hit, though...
Timo Saloniemi
Timo S Saloniemi
>Capt. Kirk had no difficulty at all engaging in
>battle at warp with the old starship Enterprise,
>nor did any of his adversaries. TOS ships
>manuevered and fired both phasers and photon
>torpedos at warp speeds. Apparently, someone
>changed the laws of subspace physics between
>the 23rd and 24th centuries.
The only place where warp-speed combat is impossible in the 24th
century is in the Tech Manuals. The episodes themselves frequently
feature photon torpedoes fired at warp, and less frequently phasers
or other beam weapons used at warp. Never is there even a single
line of technobabble to explain why or how this is possible. This
exceptionally rare failure to use a chance to feed us technogobbledigook
must be taken as a sign that warp-speed phasering really isn't a big
deal after all! It simply requires no explanation, any more than the
existence of warp drive or human-looking aliens does.
Timo Saloniemi
Arthur Levesque
BS>There's no reason why warp drives and computers can't be put on
BS>missiles using Trek tech (think of them as small ships with an
BS>auto-pilot programmed to chase and ram the opponent).
Timo S Saloniemi (tsal...@alpha.hut.fi) replied:
TSS>These might be a bit on the expensive side, though.
"Expensive"? In a socialist utopia with no money, limitless power,
and replicators on demand?
TSS>It might still be a better ides to fire large numbers of relatively
TSS>"dumb" photon torpedoes than to program complex "chase" techniques
TSS>into a smaller number of missiles.
Not given any realistic consideration of the ships' speeds and sheer
volumes of space in question (of course, given that the writers never make
such considerations either...)
BS>Even at warp speeds, the ships can communicate with them, so some
BS>sort of signals/energy can travel from one ship to the other. Hike
BS>up the power of your signal to blow out their systems. Focus and
BS>concentrate it. Or stick a virus in your signal -- other races do
BS>that to Federation ships all the time...
TSS>The Maquis did that to the poor Malinche in "For the Uniform", now
TSS>didn't they?
Which means that the writers think it's a "dirty trick" that would be
"beneath" Starfleet...
TSS>But in actual combat, ships are probably very careful with what they
TSS>agree to receive from enemy transmitters.
Given any sort of realistic writing, certainly. But that is not the
case in the Trek universe. Aliens and computer viruses and anything else
can routinely get onboard a Starfleet ship at any time. If the UFP had
any sort of reasonable defenses, they would have them running in the
computer system ALL THE TIME. Don't Starfleet computers have multitasking
and TSR capability? I leave the antivirus programs on my computer active
at all times...
For an example of Starfleet's competence in a combat situation, just
watch how the Enterprise crew LET the Klingons destroy their ship in
"Generations".
--
/\ Arthur M Levesque 2A4W <*> b...@boog.orgy =/\= http://boog.org __
\B\ack King of the Potato People <fnord> "Ia! Ia! Cthulhu fhtagn!" (oO)
\S\lash Member of a vast right-wing conspiracy (-O-) Urban Spaceman /||\
\/ I was a lesbian before it was fashionable "I hate rainbows!"-EC
Timo S Saloniemi
>> survive. Her pilot does, though, and when the planet's technology
>> reaches the point of lobbing antimatter missiles (didn't they used to be
>> called 'photon torpedoes?') at the, the pilot returns to tell them that
>Torpedoes are launched from ships. Missiles are launched from the surface.
Actually, the Ferengi fired "missiles" from their ship in "Force of
Nature".
Perhaps missiles only move at sublight, and torpedoes have the warp-speed
option? Naah, won't work - the Dreadnought from the episode of the same
name was warp-capable, yet a missile, and the Maquis were supposed to
have launched warp-speed missiles against Cardassia in "Blaze of Glory".
Perhaps missiles track, while torps fly straight? This is a bit less
impossible, although we do see a nicely tracking torpedo in STVI.
>> They aren't sanguine about his chances of success after a tri-cobalt
>> warhead takes down Voyager's shields- but then two ships pop into their
>Interestingly enough, several episodes have mentioned that tricobalts are
>weaker than photorps. Maybe the thumbprint-forehead people decided to be
>gentle?
It's interesting that in TOS "A Taste of Armageddon", tricobalts seem
to be primitive weapons, in VOY "Caretaker" they are simply nondescript
weapons, in "The Voyager Conspiracy" they seem like advanced (and
illegal?) subspace weapons, and now they are back to something a
fledging space power could choose to fire.
Perhaps tricobalts are indeed primitive and cheap, yet they have a
side effect that most of the primitive users are not aware of, namely
the subspace effect mentioned in "..Conspiracy"?
As for their power, it's probably misleading to say that they are weaker
or stronger than photorps. Photorps have a variable yield - perhaps
it is also possible to construct both weak and strong tricobalt
devices? Perhaps it is easier and cheaper to construct a medium-yield
tricobalt device than a low-yield photorp, but impossible to construct
a high-yield tricobalt that would match the best photorps?
Timo Saloniemi