[MORALITY] Life vs. History
Chuck
changed some since then, and the original turned into a Kobiyashi Maru test
rather than a discussion, so I thought I'd try it again. At least it's
closer to being on-topic than the rape thread.
Scenario 1: You're the captain of the USS Sovereign. An alien warship is
about to fire upon the island where the new Smithsonian is located. The
island has been evacuated, but within are some of the most important
artifacts of Earth's history (not just Fonzie's jacket, but important
documents, artifacts, works of art, etc.). Six covert agents are on board
the enemy ship; they have broken cover and organized a force to seize
control of the ship, but now that the ship is lining up to fire it's obvious
they won't make it in time. Their weapons are charged and ready, which
means that if you try to disable them you'll blow up the ship. It is a
fairly primitive vessel with negligible shielding; one volley of quantums
will destroy them before they can fire, but it's impossible to actually
reach them before they fire: you're only choices are to fire or not to fire.
So, on the one hand you can choose to let the agents do their job. People
are more important than an inanimate object.
On the other hand, measured against the scale of history, a human life is
minute. Is it worth the loss of so much of our past for the sake of a few
people who will be dead in a few decades anyway?
Scenario 2: Similar to Scenario 1, except that the agents are Federation
prisoners. Once you get close enough you can disable their shields and beam
the prisoners out, but not before they destroy the island. What do you do?
Scenario 3: Similar to Scenario 2, but the ship is a KOTOR-era Republic
battleship that's been dragged out of mothballs. With all weapons, you
should be able to destroy the ship in time. If you choose not to fire, they
will most certainly escape into hyperspace and you'll never catch them, or
the prisoners. (please do not turn this into a tech debate. Kaz, I'm
looking in your direction.)
Chuck
Tyralak
news:btl8j6$8hvpo$1...@ID-64862.news.uni-berlin.de:
> This is based on a question I posted a couple years ago, but the group
> has changed some since then, and the original turned into a Kobiyashi
> Maru test rather than a discussion, so I thought I'd try it again. At
> least it's closer to being on-topic than the rape thread.
>
> Scenario 1: You're the captain of the USS Sovereign. An alien warship
> is about to fire upon the island where the new Smithsonian is located.
> The island has been evacuated, but within are some of the most
> important artifacts of Earth's history (not just Fonzie's jacket, but
> important documents, artifacts, works of art, etc.). Six covert
> agents are on board the enemy ship; they have broken cover and
> organized a force to seize control of the ship, but now that the ship
> is lining up to fire it's obvious they won't make it in time. Their
> weapons are charged and ready, which means that if you try to disable
> them you'll blow up the ship. It is a fairly primitive vessel with
> negligible shielding; one volley of quantums will destroy them before
> they can fire, but it's impossible to actually reach them before they
> fire: you're only choices are to fire or not to fire.
>
>
>
> So, on the one hand you can choose to let the agents do their job.
> People are more important than an inanimate object.
>
>
>
> On the other hand, measured against the scale of history, a human life
> is minute. Is it worth the loss of so much of our past for the sake
> of a few people who will be dead in a few decades anyway?
Federation soldiers know the risks that come with their duty. Those who
would join such a service, are willing to die for King and Country. They
also know that the mission is far more important than their individual
lives. I think you would be hard pressed to find any such person who
would not be offended if you chose their lives over the good of
humanity. My answer: FIRE.
>
>
> Scenario 2: Similar to Scenario 1, except that the agents are
> Federation prisoners. Once you get close enough you can disable their
> shields and beam the prisoners out, but not before they destroy the
> island. What do you do?
I can think of half a dozen types of distraction/delaying tactics that
could be used to achieve both ends. However all else being equal, with
no other viable option, I still say thousands of years of human history
should take precidence. Changing the groups of people around always
makes it harder. Say if the group were children. I would honestly have a
hard time making that call. I know what the logical answer is, but could
I do it? That's another matter altogether.
>
>
>
> Scenario 3: Similar to Scenario 2, but the ship is a KOTOR-era
> Republic battleship that's been dragged out of mothballs. With all
> weapons, you should be able to destroy the ship in time. If you
> choose not to fire, they will most certainly escape into hyperspace
> and you'll never catch them, or the prisoners. (please do not turn
> this into a tech debate. Kaz, I'm looking in your direction.)
I'm all for unilateral disarmement in their general direction on this
one.
--
It is by caffeine alone I set my mind in motion.
It is by the beans of Java that thoughts acquire speed,
the hands acquire shakes, the shakes serve as a warning.
It is by caffeine alone I set my mind in motion.
Tyralak,
Supreme Commander Of The Imperial Romulan Warbird, Psionax
Official ASVS Token Trekkie
Paradox
"Tyralak" <Tyr...@SecureUndisclosedLocation.com> wrote in message
news:Xns946ACEA3...@216.168.3.44...
why not beam up the contents of the museum into the cargo bays?
Kazuaki Shimazaki
news:bEsLb.9594$6l1.8203@okepread03...
<snip>
> why not beam up the contents of the museum into the cargo bays?
Insufficient bandwidth / one of ten million transporter blocking things
present.
IMHO, trying to come up with these alternate methods is kind of a copout
in these scenarios. The idea is for you to contemplate the dilemma, not
find ways around it.
Kazuaki Shimazaki
news:btl8j6$8hvpo$1...@ID-64862.news.uni-berlin.de...
<snip>
> Scenario 1: You're the captain of the USS Sovereign. An alien warship
is
> about to fire upon the island where the new Smithsonian is located.
The
> island has been evacuated, but within are some of the most important
> artifacts of Earth's history (not just Fonzie's jacket, but important
> documents, artifacts, works of art, etc.). Six covert agents are on
board
> the enemy ship; they have broken cover and organized a force to seize
> control of the ship, but now that the ship is lining up to fire it's
obvious
> they won't make it in time. Their weapons are charged and ready,
which
> means that if you try to disable them you'll blow up the ship. It is
a
> fairly primitive vessel with negligible shielding; one volley of
quantums
> will destroy them before they can fire, but it's impossible to
actually
> reach them before they fire: you're only choices are to fire or not to
fire.
In this scenario, I'd curse whoever tried to send a fucking team of
special operatives into something I might have to blow up. I'd then open
fire. After that, I'd try phrases for size to write my report, intending
to absolve myself of any responsibility.
<snip>
> Scenario 2: Similar to Scenario 1, except that the agents are
Federation
> prisoners. Once you get close enough you can disable their shields
and beam
> the prisoners out, but not before they destroy the island. What do
you do?
No difference. History takes precedence. Look, even if it was the
fucking President on that ship, history takes precedence to me. Got it?
> Scenario 3: Similar to Scenario 2, but the ship is a KOTOR-era
Republic
> battleship that's been dragged out of mothballs. With all weapons,
you
> should be able to destroy the ship in time. If you choose not to
fire, they
> will most certainly escape into hyperspace and you'll never catch
them, or
> the prisoners. (please do not turn this into a tech debate. Kaz, I'm
> looking in your direction.)
[Glares at Chuck]
1) I know the rules of these scenarios. If I really disagreed with your
tech, I can concoot a scenario for myself that would do what you want
(all it really takes is a civilization that's supposedly weaker in
weapons and shielding but with a blazingly fast superluminal device.)
2) I don't know about KOTOR-era Republic battleships. Without that
certainty, I could not object to your scenario on tech grounds.
This scenario is even less of a dilemma. Open fire. Even if I could
disable it, I won't. It simply means a boarding action after that, and I
have no confidence in my redshirts to seize anything more than a Space
Shuttle, and certainly not with fewer than 6 casualties.
Enigma
news:btl8j6$8hvpo$1...@ID-64862.news.uni-berlin.de...
> changed some since then, and the original turned into a Kobiyashi Maru
test
> rather than a discussion, so I thought I'd try it again. At least it's
> closer to being on-topic than the rape thread.
>
> Scenario 1:
> are more important than an inanimate object.
>
>
> Scenario 2: Similar to Scenario 1, except that the agents are Federation
> prisoners. Once you get close enough you can disable their shields and
beam
> the prisoners out, but not before they destroy the island. What do you
do?
>
>
disable ship.
>
> Scenario 3: Similar to Scenario 2, but the ship is a KOTOR-era Republic
> battleship that's been dragged out of mothballs. With all weapons, you
> should be able to destroy the ship in time. If you choose not to fire,
they
> will most certainly escape into hyperspace and you'll never catch them, or
> the prisoners. (please do not turn this into a tech debate. Kaz, I'm
> looking in your direction.)
>
Same as before.
Tyralak
news:bEsLb.9594$6l1.8203@okepread03:
That was my first response, but I didn't think that was what he was
looking for.
Tyralak
news:btlqha$8jqss$1...@ID-144261.news.uni-berlin.de:
It's not that hard to believe. You find that kind of thing all the time
as a plot device in sci-fi novels. Niven's "Known Space" novels come to
mind.
Wouter Valentijn
"Chuck" <sonn...@sfdebris.com> schreef in bericht
news:btl8j6$8hvpo$1...@ID-64862.news.uni-berlin.de...
> This is based on a question I posted a couple years ago, but the group has
> changed some since then, and the original turned into a Kobiyashi Maru
test
> rather than a discussion, so I thought I'd try it again. At least it's
> closer to being on-topic than the rape thread.
>
> Scenario 1: You're the captain of the USS Sovereign. An alien warship is
> about to fire upon the island where the new Smithsonian is located. The
> island has been evacuated, but within are some of the most important
> artifacts of Earth's history (not just Fonzie's jacket, but important
> documents, artifacts, works of art, etc.). Six covert agents are on board
> the enemy ship; they have broken cover and organized a force to seize
> control of the ship, but now that the ship is lining up to fire it's
obvious
> they won't make it in time. Their weapons are charged and ready, which
> means that if you try to disable them you'll blow up the ship. It is a
> fairly primitive vessel with negligible shielding; one volley of quantums
> will destroy them before they can fire, but it's impossible to actually
> reach them before they fire: you're only choices are to fire or not to
fire.
>
>
>
> So, on the one hand you can choose to let the agents do their job. People
> are more important than an inanimate object.
Err, you said that the agents won't make it in time, so that part of their
job they can't do.
>
>
>
> On the other hand, measured against the scale of history, a human life is
> minute. Is it worth the loss of so much of our past for the sake of a few
> people who will be dead in a few decades anyway?
Ship based phasers can stun (see 'A Piece of the Action').
If the shields are indeed that week a decent stun volley might do the job.
Shields down, crew (and agents) out of it, send in a boarding party.
If stunning isn't possible.... Try to fire anyway. Phasers, not torps.
>
>
>
> Scenario 2: Similar to Scenario 1, except that the agents are Federation
> prisoners. Once you get close enough you can disable their shields and
beam
> the prisoners out, but not before they destroy the island. What do you
do?
That the agents are prisoners makes no difference. You still have a
responsibility towards them
Same scenario as the first.
>
>
>
> Scenario 3: Similar to Scenario 2, but the ship is a KOTOR-era Republic
> battleship that's been dragged out of mothballs. With all weapons, you
> should be able to destroy the ship in time. If you choose not to fire,
they
> will most certainly escape into hyperspace and you'll never catch them, or
> the prisoners. (please do not turn this into a tech debate. Kaz, I'm
> looking in your direction.)
There is still an island to protect?
Fire.
--
Wouter Valentijn
www.zeppodunsel.nl http://www.angelfire.com/ego/zeppodunsel/ With fanfics
and essays. Some in Dutch. Some in English.
www.nksf.nl De Nederlandstalige Nieuwsgroep voor SF, Fantasy en Horror.
Pessimistic = Realistic; Optimistic = Fantastic
Kazuaki Shimazaki
news:btmrdq$90i1b$1...@ID-43412.news.uni-berlin.de...
<snip>
> Ship based phasers can stun (see 'A Piece of the Action').
> If the shields are indeed that week a decent stun volley might do the
job.
> Shields down, crew (and agents) out of it, send in a boarding party.
> If stunning isn't possible.... Try to fire anyway. Phasers, not torps.
What? SHIP-BASED PHASERS CAN DOUBLE AS ION CANNONS and DECAPITATE PEOPLE
ONBOARD? Wow, we've been searching for years, and we finally get
something Trek is superior to Wars on. Tell me more :-)
Think of the situation like a Star Destroyer going against a Fed ship.
You "stun" the other ship hard enough to do what you said, the thing
blows due to loss of active systems.
I think the scenario presumes that you have no time to be discriminate
with your phasers.
<snip>
> There is still an island to protect?
> Fire.
Obviously. If the scenario presumes the KOTOR battleship (I checked,
they had Invincibles 3000 years ago) had its true capablity, there's
nothing the Sovereign can do. The agents or prisoners onboard have the
life expectancy of ...
Wouter Valentijn
"Kazuaki Shimazaki" <kazuaki_...@hotmail.com> schreef in bericht
news:btnmeh$9cokb$1...@ID-144261.news.uni-berlin.de...
> "Wouter Valentijn" <WouterValenti...@home.nl> wrote in message
> news:btmrdq$90i1b$1...@ID-43412.news.uni-berlin.de...
> <snip>
> > Ship based phasers can stun (see 'A Piece of the Action').
> > If the shields are indeed that week a decent stun volley might do the
> job.
> > Shields down, crew (and agents) out of it, send in a boarding party.
> > If stunning isn't possible.... Try to fire anyway. Phasers, not torps.
>
> What? SHIP-BASED PHASERS CAN DOUBLE AS ION CANNONS and DECAPITATE PEOPLE
> ONBOARD? Wow, we've been searching for years, and we finally get
> something Trek is superior to Wars on. Tell me more :-)
Ion cannons?
I was referring to a scene in the TOS episode 'A Piece of the Action'.
Kirk and co. are trapped in some house, and the house is surrounded by
gangsters.
He orders the Enterprise to fire phasers and you see this green glow of
phasers-on-stun setting surrounding the gangsters. They all fall down on the
street unconscious. It was the only instance the ship's phasers were used
that way.
>
> Think of the situation like a Star Destroyer going against a Fed ship.
> You "stun" the other ship hard enough to do what you said, the thing
> blows due to loss of active systems.
I doubt it would work on a Star Destroyer.
The gangsters were only 'protected' by that planet's atmosphere. I figured
(hoped really) that a weak ship might have no defence against it.
>
> I think the scenario presumes that you have no time to be discriminate
> with your phasers.
I think you are correct.
>
> <snip>
> > There is still an island to protect?
> > Fire.
>
> Obviously. If the scenario presumes the KOTOR battleship (I checked,
> they had Invincibles 3000 years ago) had its true capablity, there's
> nothing the Sovereign can do. The agents or prisoners onboard have the
> life expectancy of ...
They could become pow's.
Matt Huang
> changed some since then, and the original turned into a Kobiyashi Maru test
> rather than a discussion, so I thought I'd try it again. At least it's
> closer to being on-topic than the rape thread.
>
> Scenario 1: You're the captain of the USS Sovereign. An alien warship is
> about to fire upon the island where the new Smithsonian is located. The
> island has been evacuated, but within are some of the most important
> artifacts of Earth's history (not just Fonzie's jacket, but important
> documents, artifacts, works of art, etc.). Six covert agents are on board
> the enemy ship; they have broken cover and organized a force to seize
> control of the ship, but now that the ship is lining up to fire it's obvious
> they won't make it in time. Their weapons are charged and ready, which
> means that if you try to disable them you'll blow up the ship. It is a
> fairly primitive vessel with negligible shielding; one volley of quantums
> will destroy them before they can fire, but it's impossible to actually
> reach them before they fire: you're only choices are to fire or not to fire.
>
Do a mini-warp jump so that the Sov is in between the alien warship
and Earth and take the hit until either the agents take control or
abandon the ship. If it's impossible to get close enough in time to
do that, the new Smithsonian is screwed anyways.
If the agents can't get the job done with the added time, use phasers
to cut out the hostile ships weapons after they've fired so the ship
won't blow up, beam the agents back, and cripple the ship by disabling
engines and life support. That should make them pretty eager to
surrender.
If the agents can get the job done with the extra time.
In either case, prep the brig and beam the hostile crew directly into
the brig to be held as POW's (they've attacked Federation Space and
thus committed an act of war).
>
>
> So, on the one hand you can choose to let the agents do their job. People
> are more important than an inanimate object.
>
>
>
> On the other hand, measured against the scale of history, a human life is
> minute. Is it worth the loss of so much of our past for the sake of a few
> people who will be dead in a few decades anyway?
>
>
>
> Scenario 2: Similar to Scenario 1, except that the agents are Federation
> prisoners. Once you get close enough you can disable their shields and beam
> the prisoners out, but not before they destroy the island. What do you do?
>
Same thing as Scenario 1, only a lot faster since I don't have to wait
for the agents to try and commandeer the vessel.
>
>
> Scenario 3: Similar to Scenario 2, but the ship is a KOTOR-era Republic
> battleship that's been dragged out of mothballs. With all weapons, you
> should be able to destroy the ship in time. If you choose not to fire, they
> will most certainly escape into hyperspace and you'll never catch them, or
> the prisoners. (please do not turn this into a tech debate. Kaz, I'm
> looking in your direction.)
>
Knights of the Old Republic-era? Not a SW tech expert here, but I'd
warp to the area with the least weapons coverage (most likely rear but
maybe ventral hull) & barrage them enough to take out shields (and
armor plating for ventral hull). Once their shields and armor are
down, I'd beam my people back, and kill their drives, since SW ships
don't have anything to the effect of warp manouvering for capships,
I'd have enough time to do that.
>
>
> Chuck
Kazuaki Shimazaki
<snip>
> Ion cannons?
> I was referring to a scene in the TOS episode 'A Piece of the Action'.
> Kirk and co. are trapped in some house, and the house is surrounded by
> gangsters.
> He orders the Enterprise to fire phasers and you see this green glow
of
> phasers-on-stun setting surrounding the gangsters. They all fall down
on the
> street unconscious. It was the only instance the ship's phasers were
used
> that way.
Interesting capability nevertheless.
<snip>
> I doubt it would work on a Star Destroyer.
> The gangsters were only 'protected' by that planet's atmosphere. I
figured
> (hoped really) that a weak ship might have no defence against it.
Wouter? How many years have we known each other? What makes you think
I'm going to propose it'd work on a Star Destroyer? :-)
<snip>
> They could become pow's.
Depends on the mood of the KOTOR battleship's captain :-)
Kazuaki Shimazaki
news:7751cbfa.04011...@posting.google.com...
<snip>
> Do a mini-warp jump so that the Sov is in between the alien warship
> and Earth and take the hit until either the agents take control or
> abandon the ship. If it's impossible to get close enough in time to
> do that, the new Smithsonian is screwed anyways.
It takes approximately four seconds for your ship to get up to over 1C
(as can be determined visually.) Given typical ST engagement ranges,
your order for a mini-warp will result in your ship coming out about 8
seconds later, hundreds of thousands of kilometers away. That gives them
a nice chance to fire. Face it, we have visuals that demonstrate that a
typical maneuvering velocity of a ST ship in combat is about 300m/s.
Or, rewrite the scenario so that the enemy may be primitive, but they do
have some powerful weapons (it's not really that hard, a homing version
of the SS-18 Mod 3 with a 20MT warhead can be a significant threat to a
Fed ship.) If you try and block the blow, even if you could be in
position, you will suffer severe damage that would jeopardize your
ability to further intervene.
Stop trying to think of ways to get around the dilemma this scenario is
supposed to present, people.
> If the agents can't get the job done with the added time, use phasers
> to cut out the hostile ships weapons after they've fired so the ship
> won't blow up, beam the agents back, and cripple the ship by disabling
> engines and life support. That should make them pretty eager to
> surrender.
>
> If the agents can get the job done with the extra time.
>
> In either case, prep the brig and beam the hostile crew directly into
> the brig to be held as POW's (they've attacked Federation Space and
> thus committed an act of war).
Can't. Metals in the way. You know transporters. If your transporters
really can do that, you should conduct both ops simultaneously. You
should get those agents out so they definitely won't get killed trying,
while disabling the ship. Then start beaming the hostile crew out while
you are shooting.
<snip>
> Knights of the Old Republic-era? Not a SW tech expert here, but I'd
> warp to the area with the least weapons coverage (most likely rear but
> maybe ventral hull) & barrage them enough to take out shields (and
> armor plating for ventral hull). Once their shields and armor are
> down, I'd beam my people back, and kill their drives, since SW ships
> don't have anything to the effect of warp manouvering for capships,
> I'd have enough time to do that.
Your attempt to be discriminate will give the ship time to engage the
drive and leave. Obviously, we are presuming they are OUT of the gravity
well. They can run at any time.
Kazuaki Shimazaki
<snip>
> Ion cannons?
Forget that. I thought what you meant was that in a ST episode, the
Enterprise goes up against an enemy warship they can't kill for some
darn reason. So, in the usual one-time-wonder fashion, the phasers are
"recalibrated" and set onto "modulations" that would allow them to
nicely disable the enemy ship and the people onboard :-)
Obviously, I gave ST ships too much credit. Again...
C.S.Strowbridge
> This is based on a question I posted a couple years ago, but the group has
> changed some since then, and the original turned into a Kobiyashi Maru test
> rather than a discussion, so I thought I'd try it again. At least it's
> closer to being on-topic than the rape thread.
>
> Scenario 1:
> fire
History is more important than the lives of agents who knew the risk
when they joined up.
> Scenario 2: Similar to Scenario 1, except that the agents are Federation
> prisoners. Once you get close enough you can disable their shields and beam
> the prisoners out, but not before they destroy the island. What do you do?
So the prisoners are being used as human shields? Open fire. Otherwise
you'll just encourage that behaviour.
> Scenario 3: Similar to Scenario 2, but the ship is a KOTOR-era Republic
> battleship that's been dragged out of mothballs. With all weapons, you
> should be able to destroy the ship in time. If you choose not to fire, they
> will most certainly escape into hyperspace and you'll never catch them, or
> the prisoners. (please do not turn this into a tech debate. Kaz, I'm
> looking in your direction.)
Fire, you'll lose the prisoners either way. And who knows what they'll
do to them.
C.S.Strowbridge
C.S.Strowbridge
> why not beam up the contents of the museum into the cargo bays?
It's a morality test, you're not supposed to look for other alternatives.
C.S.Strowbridge
Graeme Dice
Not true. The prof. in my engineering ethics class only gave full marks
for a similar question on the midterm if we _did_ look for alternatives
in our exploration of how act and duty utilitarianism would see a
situation differently.
Graeme Dice
--
"It is odd, but on the infrequent occasions when I have been
called upon in a formal place to play the bongo drums, the
introducer never seems to find it necessary to mention that I
also do theoretical physics."
-- Richard Feynman.
Kazuaki Shimazaki
news:384Mb.52957$JQ1.40275@pd7tw1no...
<snip>
> > It's a morality test, you're not supposed to look for other
alternatives.
>
> Not true. The prof. in my engineering ethics class only gave full
marks
> for a similar question on the midterm if we _did_ look for
alternatives
> in our exploration of how act and duty utilitarianism would see a
> situation differently.
Being able to come up with something the prof apparently couldn't to get
around a dilemma should get you extra marks. But since the idea is to
make you think about dilemmas, do you get good marks if you ONLY tried
to avoid the problem rather than face the dilemma?
Beeblebear
"Kazuaki Shimazaki" <kazuaki_...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:btqaek$9rcq1$1...@ID-144261.news.uni-berlin.de...
> "Matt Huang" <Shadow...@aol.com> wrote in message
> news:7751cbfa.04011...@posting.google.com...
> <snip>
> > Do a mini-warp jump so that the Sov is in between the alien warship
> > and Earth and take the hit until either the agents take control or
> > abandon the ship. If it's impossible to get close enough in time to
> > do that, the new Smithsonian is screwed anyways.
>
> It takes approximately four seconds for your ship to get up to over 1C
> (as can be determined visually.) Given typical ST engagement ranges,
> your order for a mini-warp will result in your ship coming out about 8
> seconds later, hundreds of thousands of kilometers away. That gives them
> a nice chance to fire. Face it, we have visuals that demonstrate that a
> typical maneuvering velocity of a ST ship in combat is about 300m/s.
I refer you to ST:TNG The Battle.
In this episode, we find out that The Picard Maneuvre consists of doing a
mini warp jump and confusing the enemy sensors by effectively moving
instantaneously and being in 2 places near enough at once. The maneuvre is
used and works instantly. The dialogue of the episode supports the
supposition that it is not the only time the tactic is used, just the only
time the E-D used it in the TV series.
>
--
--
Chris Lyth (CLyt...@ifis.org.ukshoot the president to reply)
The optimum committee has no members. -- Norman Augustine
Kazuaki Shimazaki
news:btrg1i$k5q$1...@news5.svr.pol.co.uk...
<snip>
> > It takes approximately four seconds for your ship to get up to over
1C
> > (as can be determined visually.) Given typical ST engagement ranges,
> > your order for a mini-warp will result in your ship coming out about
8
> > seconds later, hundreds of thousands of kilometers away. That gives
them
> > a nice chance to fire. Face it, we have visuals that demonstrate
that a
> > typical maneuvering velocity of a ST ship in combat is about 300m/s.
>
> I refer you to ST:TNG The Battle.
> In this episode, we find out that The Picard Maneuvre consists of
doing a
> mini warp jump and confusing the enemy sensors by effectively moving
> instantaneously and being in 2 places near enough at once. The
maneuvre is
> used and works instantly. The dialogue of the episode supports the
> supposition that it is not the only time the tactic is used, just the
only
> time the E-D used it in the TV series.
The Picard Maneuver can't be that instantaneous if they can recognize
it, ask for a defense, find out there is none, improvise something, and
wait for Data to blab out the whole plan, which as I understood it they
executed.
If ships can really keep moving instantaneously over short distances,
what we would have been seeing in ST:FC would resemble a DBZ battle
where the ships keep appearing and disappearing.
The accelerative phase of a ST ship's runup can be observable just about
every episode. AFAIK, it has remained fairly consistent.
Wouter Valentijn
> "Wouter Valentijn" <WouterValenti...@home.nl> wrote in message
> news:btpdmq$9qec7$1...@ID-43412.news.uni-berlin.de...
> <snip>
> > Ion cannons?
> > I was referring to a scene in the TOS episode 'A Piece of the Action'.
> > Kirk and co. are trapped in some house, and the house is surrounded by
> > gangsters.
> > He orders the Enterprise to fire phasers and you see this green glow
> of
> > phasers-on-stun setting surrounding the gangsters. They all fall down
> on the
> > street unconscious. It was the only instance the ship's phasers were
> used
> > that way.
>
> Interesting capability nevertheless.
Yup. Pity they only used it once in an episode.
The only other instance it was mentioned was in a novel ("The Brave and the
Bold"), but that doesn't count.
>
> <snip>
> > I doubt it would work on a Star Destroyer.
> > The gangsters were only 'protected' by that planet's atmosphere. I
> figured
> > (hoped really) that a weak ship might have no defence against it.
>
> Wouter? How many years have we known each other? What makes you think
> I'm going to propose it'd work on a Star Destroyer? :-)
We've known each other since the summer of 2000.
And no, I don't think you would propose something like that.
>
> <snip>
> > They could become pow's.
>
> Depends on the mood of the KOTOR battleship's captain :-)
Hmm, maybe he could drink a soothing cup of tea first, before he made his
decision. ;)
Wouter Valentijn
> "Wouter Valentijn" <WouterValenti...@home.nl> wrote in message
> news:btpdmq$9qec7$1...@ID-43412.news.uni-berlin.de...
> <snip>
> > Ion cannons?
>
> Forget that. I thought what you meant was that in a ST episode, the
> Enterprise goes up against an enemy warship they can't kill for some
> darn reason. So, in the usual one-time-wonder fashion, the phasers are
> "recalibrated" and set onto "modulations" that would allow them to
> nicely disable the enemy ship and the people onboard :-)
>
Err, no. The guys they shot from orbit were ground based targets, dressed
like gangsters from the 1920's or so.
> Obviously, I gave ST ships too much credit. Again...
Wouter Valentijn
"C.S.Strowbridge" <csstro...@shaw.ca> schreef in bericht
news:h04Mb.53937$X%5.7449@pd7tw2no...
> Chuck wrote:
>
> > This is based on a question I posted a couple years ago, but the group
has
> > changed some since then, and the original turned into a Kobiyashi Maru
test
> > rather than a discussion, so I thought I'd try it again. At least it's
> > closer to being on-topic than the rape thread.
> >
> > Scenario 1:
>
> > fire
>
> History is more important than the lives of agents who knew the risk
> when they joined up.
Indeed.
>
> > Scenario 2: Similar to Scenario 1, except that the agents are Federation
> > prisoners. Once you get close enough you can disable their shields and
beam
> > the prisoners out, but not before they destroy the island. What do you
do?
>
> So the prisoners are being used as human shields? Open fire. Otherwise
> you'll just encourage that behaviour.
Err, human shields?
I think Chuck means that the prisoners are some kind of 'Dirty Dozen'.
Or not?
>
> > Scenario 3: Similar to Scenario 2, but the ship is a KOTOR-era Republic
> > battleship that's been dragged out of mothballs. With all weapons, you
> > should be able to destroy the ship in time. If you choose not to fire,
they
> > will most certainly escape into hyperspace and you'll never catch them,
or
> > the prisoners. (please do not turn this into a tech debate. Kaz, I'm
> > looking in your direction.)
>
> Fire, you'll lose the prisoners either way. And who knows what they'll
> do to them.
--
Chuck
respect for you has gone up with this thread. Good on ya.
Chuck