Seatbelts on the Enterprise

[A Monkey With a Gun]

I love sci-fi so this is not meant to make fun.
(O.K. maybe just a little)

Most or the Star Treks I have seen (which counting all the spin offs is quite a lot) have a battle scene in which the bridge crew get thrown around the bridge due to enemy fire. You see Kirk/Pacard/Janeway bouncing off the bulkheads. In "Generations" the frontal disc of the Enterprise crased onto a planet. The crew were flying around like they were in a cuisenart.

My question is this: With all the detail that went into these shows (a friend of mine has the "blueprints" to the original enterprise) why couldn't the Federation install a few frelling seatbelts?

[Esprix]

There have been some times (and don't ask me when) when I remember seeing restraints on starships. But maybe I just dreamt it.

Hopefully we'll see some in the new series, Enterprise.

Esprix

[Saitou]

Breaking news:
Captain Kirk sues starfleet command and the klingon empire, claims whiplash sustained during attack left him partially disabled.
More after this break!

Exploding consoles, falling bulkheads, destructing warp cores. Those ships are accidents waiting to happen


P.S. Any word yet if the redshirts are returing in the upcoming series :D

[Dragonblink]

I think we all know the "real" reason there aren't any seatbelts is for dramatic purposes. I mean, can you imagine Picard striding onto the bridge, sitting in the comfy captain's chair, buckling himself in ...*clickita clickita click clink* "Engage!"

It's worth pointing out, however, that school buses, and for that matter regular buses too, don't have seat belts. A large tippy vehicle filled with fragile children, and not a single seat belt in sight.

Part of it may be that on the Enterprise, the inertial dampeners which prevent the crew from being splattered against the scenery when accelerating to warp are expected to reduce the need for restraints, but they never seem to be effective against explosions and impacts, even when the impact is anticipated.


Dragonblink (I can't believe I'm sitting here at this ungodsly hour talking about freaking inertial dampeners)

[Muffin]

Back when the TV series began, seat belts were anti-American. Commies were trying to take over the US of A by bringing in seat belt laws.

[fierra]

Yes!!! I've thought this was stupid for years. High tech ship, inertial dampers frequently fail under attacks & no seat belts/full body webbing crash harness.

For the argument about less dramatic, it could be done as an "We're under attack!" "Battlestations everyone" and then they put their belts on as a combat readiness thing.

BTW, Dragonblink, in the UK, seatbelts are required for school buses and new coaches. They finally legislated for it. New ones are built with a different style of seat such that it has sufficient strong attachment points for seat belts.

[Kilt-wearin' man]

The first Star Trek movie featured restraints on the captains char - the chair arm consoles closed over Kirk's legs when they went to alert status. It looked dumb. They dropped it after that.

[RealityChuck]

One of the movies did feature an actual seatbelt. Kirk took one look at it, gave a "who needs this?" expression, and tossed it aside.

With all the various loopholes and scientific implausibilities over the years, is this the best you can do?

[RoboDude]

It's worth pointing out, however, that school buses, and for that matter regular buses too, don't have seat belts. A large tippy vehicle filled with fragile children, and not a single seat belt in sight.


According to Cecil (http://www.straightdope.com/classics/a981106a.html), beat belts probably don't do much good on school buses.

[OpalCat]

I think the shuttle craft have seatbelts, don't they? or roundabouts? Or something?

Something I'd love to see in Enterprise is some zero-G. Like maybe their shuttles don't have the whatever-it-is that makes gravity on the ship...

[SPOOFE]

Y'know, there were seatbelts in Spaceballs. That's what makes it a superior cinematic achievement.

[bagkitty]

Originally posted by Esprix
There have been some times (and don't ask me when) when I remember seeing restraints on starships. But maybe I just dreamt it.

Esprix

Oh hell, I can't resist.... Do you dream about restraints FREQUENTLY Esprix

giggle.

[jab1]

Originally posted by SPOOFE
Y'know, there were seatbelts in Spaceballs. That's what makes it a superior cinematic achievement. Funny, I don't recall seeing seat-belts in Star Wars, either.

[Saint Zero]

Originally posted by jab1
Originally posted by SPOOFE
Y'know, there were seatbelts in Spaceballs. That's what makes it a superior cinematic achievement. Funny, I don't recall seeing seat-belts in Star Wars, either.

The Millenium Falcon had them. They even use them in the beginning of the movie, if I recall correctly.

[Broomstick]

I don't buy the "not dramtic enough" excuse. Granted I haven't been in too many crashing starships, but my experience with violent lurches in various vehicles tells me that, even if the crew were securely strapped in you'd still have lots of loose stuff flying around. Which is one thing that now bothers me about ST that didn't used to. Why isn't there loose stuff flying around and rolling across the floor with the crew? You know - loose change, pens, small pocket computers, comunicators, phasers, combs, other personal hygiene tools....

The real reason, of course, is that it's the actors rolling around the floor and flinging themselves about while the camera gets shook. I guess it never occured to anyone to launch debris into the mess.

[wolfstu]

Why isn't there loose stuff flying around and rolling across the floor with the crew?

When you fly airplanes, you make darn sure evrything onboard is well stowed, so that it can't bounce around in flight, and so that it doesn't dmage things or jam the controls or instruments, etc. Before any manoevre likely to involve unusual attitudes, you check all of those things again, to make doubly sure nothing will fly around. It's called an 'ASCOT' or a 'HASEL' check.

I can only assume that similar procedures would be in place aboard a starship, particularly one serving with an organization like Starfleet.

Notwithstanding, there are times when you see things being disloged during spaceflight; Captain Sulu's coffee in Star Trek VI, chairs on the bridge in episodes of the old series, and lab equipment in the Generations film.

[MEBuckner]

Originally posted by Saint Zero
Originally posted by jab1
Originally posted by SPOOFE
Y'know, there were seatbelts in Spaceballs. That's what makes it a superior cinematic achievement. [/B]Funny, I don't recall seeing seat-belts in Star Wars, either.

The Millenium Falcon had them. They even use them in the beginning of the movie, if I recall correctly.
They definitely have them in the novelization:

"Luke and Ben began strapping themselves into the vacant seats in the passageway."

"Luke and Ben were already undoing their acceleration straps as Solo walked past them, moving toward the cockpit with the easy, loose-limbed stride of the experienced space."

"'We're losing a deflector shield,' Solo informed him with the air of a man about to have a tooth pulled. 'Better strap yourselves back in.'"

[MrVisible]

Oddly enough, Wing Commander, the completely unnoticed sci-fi epic, had two things that made the whole movie worthwhile for me.

The seats in the ships had entire restraint systems. It looked cool as hell to see them strapping themselves in, as if they were going into combat. The Enterpirse bridge kinda makes me think that any moment, a wine-tasting party might break out.

Also, the interiors of the ships looked like subs. Small, cramped, dark, and with lots of pipes and wiring around. The way I think military ships will really look for a long time to come.

Other than that, the movie pretty much stunk.

[Esprix]

Originally posted by bagkitty

Oh hell, I can't resist.... Do you dream about restraints FREQUENTLY Esprix

I'm not that kind of boy. ;)

Originally posted by Broomstick

Why isn't there loose stuff flying around and rolling across the floor with the crew? You know - loose change, pens, small pocket computers, comunicators, phasers, combs, other personal hygiene tools....

Simple - those particular uniforms don't have pockets. ;)

Esprix

[Hazel]

Originally posted by MrVisible


The Enterpirse bridge kinda makes me think that any moment, a wine-tasting party might break out.



Ah... That's my kind of starship!

[Kaitlyn]

The Enterprise is supposed to represent the equivilent of a navy vessel in space(Starfleet=space navy)--roughly the equilivent of a battleship. Do battleship crews strap themselves in during a battle? (I'm asking because I genuinely don't know.) Perhaps mobility is considered more important than being strapped in. In the heat of battle, someone might be required to take over navigation or tactical, repair a console, or rush to another section of the ship, and unstrapping and restrapping in would waste precious seconds.

By the way, the leg consoles did appear again. In TNG episode with the Stargazer, Picard straps himself as described above.

[SPOOFE]

Funny, I don't recall seeing seat-belts in Star Wars, either.
Quite an aggressive (and inaccurate) comment, Jabbers. I thought you didn't like aggressiveness.

Anyhoo, restraints were all over the place... in the aforementioned Millenium Falcon, in all the starfighters, snowspeeders, etc.... unfortunately, we never got a good enough look at any of the seats on the large capital ships to see if they were thusly equipped. However, we also never saw if the Star Destroyers and Mon Cal Cruisers were jostled enough during combat to require the use of a strong restraint system (some novels describe such forces acting upon the crews of capital ships... but, then again, those same novels describe restraint systems).

Next time I watch the films, I'll double-check to see if any sort of seatbelts or straps are present.

Wolfstu...

When you fly airplanes, you make darn sure evrything onboard is well stowed, so that it can't bounce around in flight, and so that it doesn't dmage things or jam the controls or instruments, etc.
However, a Starfleet ship isn't like an airplane (even if they maneuver like one). Additionally, places like sickbay have loose datapads and hyposprays all over the place... any sort of shaking that's strong enough to fling someone from his/her chair would most definitely throw those little things around the room (this is assuming that the violence felt on the bridge is felt uniformly throughout the ship... and I see no reason why it wouldn't be so).

Also, the crew's personal quarters aren't always left to "airplane-quality" levels of tidiness. A single mild battle should cause enough mess to require an entire cleaning crew several days' worth of work.

The Enterprise is supposed to represent the equivilent of a navy vessel in space(Starfleet=space navy)--roughly the equilivent of a battleship.
Actually, no. The Enterprise is more like a luxury liner than anything else, used as a vessel of diplomacy, not war. Hell, more than half its interior space is given over to families and emissaries and such.

Think of it this way... how many children do you find on a modern-day battleship?

[Broomstick]

Originally posted by wolfstu
Why isn't there loose stuff flying around and rolling across the floor with the crew?

When you fly airplanes, you make darn sure evrything onboard is well stowed, so that it can't bounce around in flight, and so that it doesn't dmage things or jam the controls or instruments, etc. Before any manoevre likely to involve unusual attitudes, you check all of those things again, to make doubly sure nothing will fly around. It's called an 'ASCOT' or a 'HASEL' check.

You must hang around different pilots than I do. Yes, you're supposed to have stuff stowed. Do you really? I would expect highly disciplined military pilots to adhere to this rule, and those of a very few other organizations, but most don't. Heck, even when I went up for a couple spins that one time we thought we had stowed/secured/strapped down everything but still discovered a pen and about $1.37 in loose change from under the seats when the fun started. ("Oh, wow, look at the landscape turn - hey, is that a quarter on the windshield? Where did that come from? Oh, yeah, might want to start spin recovery...") Which was sort of my point - even in the most well-run ship, people are going to drop or overlook stuff. Human nature (and presumably others) being what it is, no one is going to be able to be 100% compliant with "keep it strapped down" 100% of the time.

Also, too, they don't always get a warning on some of the jolts - meaning you will definitely get flying debris. Except you don't, most of the time.

[Bartman]

For a laugh you should head here:
http://www.stardestroyer.net/Empire/index.html . The author is an engineer who is rather disgusted with the poor quality of the engineering on the shows. He explains dead man switches, redundancy, diversity, isolations and other principles. Here is a quote.


If Star Trek depicted a well-designed ship, the ship would never explode from a computer virus, power failures, or low-speed impact on a warp nacelle. Such problems might cause the reactor to shut down, or they might cause the antimatter pods to eject into space, or they might cause damage to systems which happen to be in the vicinity of the impact, but that's it. Can you imagine if a real-life aircraft carrier took a minor hit above the waterline and exploded as a result? Heads would roll.

[TheeGrumpy]

But... if starships had seatbelts, it would make people think they were unsafe!

Ditto circuit breakers. This technology, lost by the 24th century, would have prevented bridge consoles from exploding in a shower of sparks every time the ship takes hostile fire, no matter where it hits.

And having warp-core ejectors that function at the same time you actually *need* the warp core ejected will only cause undo stress on the crew. I mean, it's nice to know that I have an airbag in my car, and I'm sure it works most of the time. But iI feel better knowing it won't go off in the middle of a collision, when I've already got other things to worry about. ;)

[GargoyleWB]

Yep, for the same reason that German pilots in WW1 were denied the use of parachutes, because they would instill cowardice in combat. Starfleet could never confidently field a true tough-as-nails bridge crew with wussy seatbelts.

[Kaitlyn]

And Kamikazi pilots were welded into their cockpits for much the same reason.

Originally posted by SPOOFE
The Enterprise is supposed to represent the equivilent of a navy vessel in space(Starfleet=space navy)--roughly the equilivent of a battleship.

Actually, no. The Enterprise is more like a luxury liner than anything else, used as a vessel of diplomacy, not war. Hell, more than half its interior space is given over to families and emissaries and such.

Think of it this way... how many children do you find on a modern-day battleship?

Well, maybe on TNG. On TOS, it was definitely a battleship (specifically a "heavy cruiser"), and until the Organians stepped in, the Federation was in a state of war with the Klingons.

On TNG, I would say that the luxury elements were added to the primary functionality of the military vessel. Battleships and other large military ships aren't always vessels of war. More often they function as a "big stick" to prevent armed confrontation, and to be prepared in case such confrontation is needed. I'd say that was one primary function of the Enterprise D. But I see your point about the luxury liner analogy. Let's say they're a kind of battleship/luxury liner combination.

But even the luxury liner analogy supports my main point. Are seatbelts routinely installed on such large craft? Do the seats on the bridge of a thousand foot cruise liner have seat belts? Again, I don't think so, but I ask because I don't know.

You have to remember that this isn't supposed to be a literal, or even plausible, representation of a spacecraft; it's a large navy ship in space. In Star Wars, the fighters aren't supposed to really be starfighters, they're symbolic WW2 planes.

Once you understand the controlling metaphor, the no-seatbelts thing makes more sense. By the way, I've read that the interior of the NX-1 Enterprise has been derived from submarines, which has always seemed more apt than the surface vessel paradigm that controlled most of the earlier series.

But the biggest problem with the constant exploding consoles is that the ship should never register any damage whatsoever until the shields are completely gone and the ship itself is struck. Of course this would make the space battle much less interesting to watch.

[Kaitlyn]

Then again, there's the episode "Balance of Terror" in which the Enterprise and the Romulan ship are clearly treated like submarines. It's also my pick for the single greatest battle episode of any of the ST series.

It helps if you (well, it helps me anyway) remember that almost everything in Star Trek is a metaphorical representation of something in modern society, and that, especially in TOS, continuity of the timeline, technology, and even the controlling metaphor was considered less important than finding a good story to tell and using the show to tell it.

I am such a geek. I've explained to my fiancee that I am a Star Trek geek, but I wonder if she can truly understand all the implications of what that means.

[SPOOFE]

Well, maybe on TNG. On TOS, it was definitely a battleship
True, true... I was basing my comments on TNG, since my knowledge of TOS is limited (I'm young and never get a chance to catch TOS reruns).

The biggest problem with almost all of Star Trek (and this is what makes me consider it to be an inferior series) is that they make detrimental and pointless additions/changes to the show, or introduce elements, or craft the whole universe, around the "Gee-whiz 'dat's cool" factor. Rather than staying true to the internal dynamics of the series, they pander to the lowest common denominator and, worst of all, take the easy way out when making plotlines.

And, yes, I realize that Star Wars: Episode 1 suffered from this same syndrome. Let's all just try to forget THAT monstrosity, please?

[Esprix]

Must you hijack every thread with Star Wars, you freak?!?!

Anywho ( ;) ), do not sell Star Trek's plotlines completely short. Yes, their technobabble scripts usually suck, and their character development scripts are usually forced and trite, but there are, on occassion, gems of either social relevance or just plain good sci-fi. Let's not throw the baby out with the proverbial bathwater, here...

Esprix

[SPOOFE]

Must you hijack every thread with Star Wars, you freak?!?!
In a word... yes.

[jab1]

Originally posted by MEBuckner
They definitely have them in the novelization:

"'We're losing a deflector shield,' Solo informed him with the air of a man about to have a tooth pulled. 'Better strap yourselves back in.'" I remember that scene in the movie now. They're escaping from Tatooine, some Empire Star Destroyers are chasing them and Han delivers the above lines. In response, Luke, Ben and C3PO go back to the 3-D chess table and strap themselves in. But I don't recall seeing Han or Chewie use restraints in their pilot and co-pilot seats and I don't recall Luke and Han using restraints in the chairs mounted to the big laser guns.

I also recall a scene in TESB where the Falcon is again being chased by the Empire and Han plays "chicken" with some Star Destroyers. Han makes another impossible aerodynamic maneuver and two Destroyers have to make a serious change in course. They cut to the Bridge of one vessel and show a few Empire officers flung against the bulkheads. (I guess the artificial gravity couldn't compensate. ;) ) I'm also pretty sure they strapped in C3PO in the scene where the Falcon was attached to the hull of a Destroyer.*

Must you hijack every thread with Star Wars, you freak?!?!

In a word... yes.Sorry, but the role of fat, bearded Star Wars freak has already been claimed by Harry Knowles (http://www.aintitcoolnews.com/). Find your own schtick. :)

I realize that Star Wars: Episode 1 suffered from this same syndrome. Let's all just try to forget THAT monstrosity, please?Fine, as long as you promise not to bring up "The Way to Eden" or "Spock's Brain"!

*BTW: In that sequence, after the Falcon blazes past the Destroyer's bridge, an officer reports it's disappeared from their scopes. The Captain says (paraphrasing), "A ship that small can't have a cloaking device."** This implies that cloaking devices exist in the SW universe. So how come the Empire ships don't have them?!?

**After this, the Captain reports the news to Darth Vader, who promptly kills him. Being Captain of a Star Destroyer under Darth Vader must have been the least-wanted position in the entire Imperial Fleet! "NOOO! I'd rather go to the Spice Mines of Kessel! Anything but that!!" :D

[SPOOFE]

This implies that cloaking devices exist in the SW universe. So how come the Empire ships don't have them?!?
'Cuz they're not as useful as ST cloaks. In SW, the best they've been able to come up with are two-way cloaks... they make the vessel completely invisible (and completely undetectable to all but a few exotic types of scanning), but come with the drawback of making the vessel unable to detect anything around it. It keeps all scans out, and all scans in, so to speak.

[MEBuckner]

Originally posted by jab1
**After this, the Captain reports the news to Darth Vader, who promptly kills him. Being Captain of a Star Destroyer under Darth Vader must have been the least-wanted position in the entire Imperial Fleet! "NOOO! I'd rather go to the Spice Mines of Kessel! Anything but that!!" :D
Yeah, but advancement can be very swift. I don't have the exact words in front of me, but consider the death of the unfortunte Admiral Ozzel:

"You've failed me for the last time, Admiral. Captain Piett, prepare to assault the Rebel base. You're in charge now, Admiral Piett."

And frankly, the Captain who fell for that "attach yourself to the side of the Star Destroyer trick" practically deserved to die. Where the hell was his TIE figher cover? Don't Star Destroyers always have TIE Fighter patrols out? "Ah, Avenger flight control, this is Blackbird One. Be advised target vessel has attached itself to your superstructure. Repeat, target vessel has attached itself to your superstructure. Over." That Captain knew it too--"I shall go on board the flagship and apologize to Lord Vader personally."

"Apology accepted."

GAAACK!

[Alessan]

My question is, how did they get from Hoth to Bespin without going into hyperspace? Did they make the whole trip in sublight speed?

Just how many years did they spend in the Falcon, anyway?

[Sultan Kinkari]

One one think that if they had developed the technology to keep their feet firmy planted to the ground they could reverse the effect so they could have Lionel Ritchie parties where they would put "Dancin' on the Ceiling" on repeat. :D

But seriously, if they installed the same unit over head, whenever they were hit by an ion pulse cannon(or whatever), both units would instantly activate(over head and under foot, or on all sides) suspending them perfectly in place. The safety feature would last only as long as the effects of the oncoming barrage were sustained which means the show would be devoid of all dramatic arm-flailing scenes that would potentially boost the ratings.

I'm catching a whiff of some serious disposition of reality. :rolleyes:

[MEBuckner]

Originally posted by wishbone
I'm catching a whiff of some serious disposition of reality. :rolleyes:
What, the big WHOOOSH! as the spaceship flies by in the opening credits didn't clue you in?

[Sultan Kinkari]

ummm... :D

[SPOOFE]

My question is, how did they get from Hoth to Bespin without going into hyperspace?
The invincible power of the Plot Device.

But seriously, if they installed the same unit over head, whenever they were hit by an ion pulse cannon(or whatever), both units would instantly activate(over head and under foot, or on all sides) suspending them perfectly in place.
Theoretically... but the propensity for system failures in Star Trek would render this safety device offline at the first opportunity to show a crew member being thrown across the bridge.

What can I say... those ST ships are fragile things.

[jab1]

Hey, you think it's easy to design and build a starship that can go 1,000 times the speed of light? You want reliability too?

As far as the artificial gravity is concerned, how come people aren't attracted to the overhead? After all, the overhead is just someone else's deck, right? How come the artifical gravity attracts in just one direction? wishbone's idea ought to work all the time! People ought to be suspended in mid-air all the time since they would be attracted with equal force in both directions, up and down. Just how did they solve that little problem?

[Balance]

It's not that simple, jab. If they're using generators in every deck, then the gradient must be pretty steep--otherwise they'd crush people on the upper decks with the cumulative effects. So you'd get a discernibly different gravitic acceleration at different heights above each deck. People with, shall we say, low centers of gravity (like myself, hobbit that I am) would walk on the floor, because our centers of mass would be below the null plane in the middle of the corridor (assuming Starfleet-standard corridor height). We might feel a trifle light-headed, of course. :D

If we jumped properly, though, and got our entire frames into the opposite gravity well, we could turn that about and walk on the ceiling. The odds are against anyone actually floating as such are low, unless they deliberately aligned themselves horizontally along the null plane and swam along. All of this would make a very cool movie scene as well as allowing more traffic in a given corridor.

Unfortunately, it seems simpler to have one set of grav generators down in the bottom deck affecting all of the decks, as well as stuff outside the ship.

[SPOOFE]

Hey, you think it's easy to design and build a starship that can go 1,000 times the speed of light? You want reliability too?
Well, if I were a Starfleet officer, I'd get annoyed that systems on the bridge fail whenever the ship gets hit on Deck 12. Or why the Warp Core seems to go critical even when there isn't any damage taken anywhere in the vicinity of Engineering.

[jab1]

SPOOFE, it was a joke.

Originally posted by Balance
Unfortunately, it seems simpler to have one set of grav generators down in the bottom deck affecting all of the decks, as well as stuff outside the ship. So how come Picard, Worf and sacrificial lamb Lt. Hawk* needed magnetic boots to walk on the exterior of the ship in the movie First Contact?

It's been a while since I read a Technical manual, but I'm sure I recall reading that Star Fleet uses small generators in each deck with multiple backups, which is why you never see the artificial gravity fail. ;)

*I knew the guy was gonna be killed the minute they introduced him!

[Tuckerfan]

[Andy Rooney voice]Why is it that they have only one warp core on a starship? Wouldn't it make sense to have two small warp cores instead of one big one? That way if you had to eject one, you could still make it home at warp speed. Okay, so maybe you could only go warp 5 with one core, but wouldn't that be better than not being able to use warp speed at all? [/Andy Rooney voice]

Plus, you have the added benefit of being able to use a warp core as a kick-ass weapon of last resort. Bad guys start killing more than red-shirts, you set one of the warp cores to overload, eject it towards their ship, and use your other warp core to take you out of range before the thing goes up!

[Kaitlyn]

Originally posted by Tuckerfan
[Andy Rooney voice]Why is it that they have only one warp core on a starship? Wouldn't it make sense to have two small warp cores instead of one big one? That way if you had to eject one, you could still make it home at warp speed. Okay, so maybe you could only go warp 5 with one core, but wouldn't that be better than not being able to use warp speed at all? [/Andy Rooney voice]

Plus, you have the added benefit of being able to use a warp core as a kick-ass weapon of last resort. Bad guys start killing more than red-shirts, you set one of the warp cores to overload, eject it towards their ship, and use your other warp core to take you out of range before the thing goes up!

Well, for the same reason there's only one reactor on a submarine. The things are huge and require a large crew to maintain. By having a single warp core, the number of crew members needed to maintain it is reduced, and you don't need two seperate engineering sections.

And, they do have a second warp nacelle for the very reason you describe.

Artificial gravity: Each deck has it's own artificial gravity generators. The decks themselves are designed to be opaque to the field generated, so it only effects the one deck.

[Balance]

Originally posted by jab1
So how come Picard, Worf and sacrificial lamb Lt. Hawk* needed magnetic boots to walk on the exterior of the ship in the movie First Contact?


Obviously, it's because Starfleet is too cheap to hire good engineers, or even clever folks like us, to design their ships.

They do supposedly have grav generators in each deck--that gravitic insulation must be cheap to make. With that in mind, why don't they insulate the whole ship with it and eliminate that nasty decaying orbit problem? I mean, if you can make your ship effectively immune to gravity, wouldn't it simplify things? What about all the trouble they have staying out of the sun when they use the slingshot effect?

I seem to recall that the gravity is adjustable in the crew quarters--at least, I see no reason not to have a gravity control right there by the thermostat. I'm not sure it was ever brought up in any of the series, but I remember one of the better-written short stories mentioning a "gravity shelf"--a transition between 1G and Vulcan gravity--at the door of Spock's quarters, and people stumbling when they crossed it the first time.

[Mr. Miskatonic]

Originally posted by SPOOFE
Hey, you think it's easy to design and build a starship that can go 1,000 times the speed of light? You want reliability too?
Well, if I were a Starfleet officer, I'd get annoyed that systems on the bridge fail whenever the ship gets hit on Deck 12. Or why the Warp Core seems to go critical even when there isn't any damage taken anywhere in the vicinity of Engineering.

While your at it:

When does StarFleet's equivelant of OCEA come in and shut down those dangerous holograph decks? 90% of the plots from TNG on involve accidents there.

Shuttles aren't much better. Crashing more often than actually arrving at their destination. If an epsiode starts with characters in a shuttle, you can kiss that shuttle good-bye in a few.

Exploding consoles. I think Farscape made fun of this at one point when Chriton outright yells "Haven't you people ever heard of circuit breakers?"

So when does star fleet start making hologram ships or soliders? (Ha Ha! We can shoot you but you can't hit us!)Nothing but a big generator with holographicly supported weapon arrays and an artificial crew that can work in conditions lethal to most real beings.

And Remember B5 Did have full harnesses for the crew. Especially for those ships that didn't spin to make gravity.

[jab1]

Originally posted by Mr. Miskatonic
So when does star fleet start making hologram ships or soliders? (Ha Ha! We can shoot you but you can't hit us!)Nothing but a big generator with holographicly supported weapon arrays and an artificial crew that can work in conditions lethal to most real beings.Where's the fun in that?

[Kaitlyn]

Originally posted by jab1
Originally posted by Mr. Miskatonic
So when does star fleet start making hologram ships or soliders? (Ha Ha! We can shoot you but you can't hit us!)Nothing but a big generator with holographicly supported weapon arrays and an artificial crew that can work in conditions lethal to most real beings.Where's the fun in that?

With the exception of The Doctors remote holo-emitter, the holograms can only be generated inside a room especially designed for that purpose. The only way that holographic ships would work is if you built a really, really, really, big holodeck around an entire star system, and even then you'd have to trick the hostile aliens inside.

Also, it is well established in both TOS and TNG that computers are not permitted to make tactical decisions. Otherwise, a human crew wouldn't be needed on the ships at all.

[Tuckerfan]

Originally posted by Number Six
Well, for the same reason there's only one reactor on a submarine. The things are huge and require a large crew to maintain. By having a single warp core, the number of crew members needed to maintain it is reduced, and you don't need two seperate engineering sections.

And, they do have a second warp nacelle for the very reason you describe.



Yeah, but if the reactor on a nuke sub goes out, the longest they're going to have to wait for help to arrive is what, a month? A starship could eject it's warp core someplace out in deep space and have to wait years for help to arrive, if ever! I'd like a little redundancy in my critical systems, please.

[SPOOFE]

With the exception of The Doctors remote holo-emitter, the holograms can only be generated inside a room especially designed for that purpose. The only way that holographic ships would work is if you built a really, really, really, big holodeck around an entire star system, and even then you'd have to trick the hostile aliens inside.
Ah, not quite. There have been instances where area-effect hologenerators have been created, creating a space where holograms can be kept active a certain distance away from the generator.

Also, it is well established in both TOS and TNG that computers are not permitted to make tactical decisions. Otherwise, a human crew wouldn't be needed on the ships at all.
Just because they're not permitted, that doesn't mean they're not capable. The Doctor altered his programming in one episode of Voyager to make himself a backup bridge officer. And, supposedly, he was pretty damn good.

[Kaitlyn]

Tuckerfan said
Yeah, but if the reactor on a nuke sub goes out, the longest they're going to have to wait for help to arrive is what, a month? A starship could eject it's warp core someplace out in deep space and have to wait years for help to arrive, if ever! I'd like a little redundancy in my critical systems, please.

If the reactor on a nuke sub goes out, most likely nobody's going to be alive to wait for help. Which brings up another point. Two warp cores would mean twice the chance of a critical failure. But I don't think you can have two active warp cores at the same time in the same ship, because the warp core creates a warp field and two warp fields wouldn't be compatable with each other. I think that the size issue is the key. The entire drive section is built primarily to house and operate the warp core and (I think) impulse engines. There isn't room for another one.

What you're arguing for is a backup that can be used in case of failure, and those are kept at starbases, and can be transported to ships that need them in case of emergency. Ejecting the warp core is a very rare event.

SPOOFE said
Ah, not quite. There have been instances where area-effect hologenerators have been created, creating a space where holograms can be kept active a certain distance away from the generator.

You have a point there. But you still have to set up an area within which the holograms can exist. Unless the hostile aliens were to enter the area where the holograms are being generated, the holographic ships would be useless.

Just because they're not permitted, that doesn't mean they're not capable. The Doctor altered his programming in one episode of Voyager to make himself a backup bridge officer. And, supposedly, he was pretty damn good. Of course the computers are capable of running the ship without human intervention. But it is one of the fundamental tenants of Starfleet policy that a sentient being must always make the decisions. If they wanted to build crew free ships, they certainly have the technology to do so even without using holograms. They would probably be much more stable and deadly, too, because there would be no need for artificial gravity, inertial dampers, life support, etc. However, since the primary purpose of Starfleet is exploration and contact, you have to have people on the ships.

In the episode to which you refer, Captain Janeway initially refuses to allow him to train for bridge officer status for the very reason I posted. She does later relent and allow him to train, but that is clearly an exception to the general rule, made partly because the Doctor is sentient.

On TNG, there is an episode in which (I'm kinda fuzzy on the details) the crew is tempted to turn control of the ship over to the computer, and despite the chance that they might be destroyed, Picard does not permit it.

And before you bring up Data, I am well aware that he was a bridge officer and on many occasions made tactical decisions. He, as second officer, was in charge during night shifts and during crisis situations. He is also the only sentient android in Starfleet, so he is not an exception to the rule.

Star Trek geek: One who posts to message boards at 3:00 a.m.

[SPOOFE]

You have a point there. But you still have to set up an area within which the holograms can exist. Unless the hostile aliens were to enter the area where the holograms are being generated, the holographic ships would be useless.
True. I think the original idea was to build a central reactor (for power generation) and slap a hologenerator onto it, then have the rest of the ship around it composed entirely of holographic material.

And before you bring up Data, I am well aware that he was a bridge officer and on many occasions made tactical decisions. He, as second officer, was in charge during night shifts and during crisis situations. He is also the only sentient android in Starfleet, so he is not an exception to the rule.
I wasn't going to bring up Data. Keep in mind that the original question wasn't about whether or not they can, but whether or not they would.

[Mr. Miskatonic]

Originally posted by SPOOFE
You have a point there. But you still have to set up an area within which the holograms can exist. Unless the hostile aliens were to enter the area where the holograms are being generated, the holographic ships would be useless.
True. I think the original idea was to build a central reactor (for power generation) and slap a hologenerator onto it, then have the rest of the ship around it composed entirely of holographic material.


Yup. Although I think the weapons arrays would need to be 'real' items as well. ALbeit supported by Holographic structures.

I based this on a rerun of Voyager I just watched where there were rebellious holograms running around hunting another species. They had only a generator to keep them up[ and running.

I don't think the rather clumsy writers of Voyager realized what a can of worms they opened up with this little plot twist.

[jab1]

In one of his ST novels (Dark Victory), William Shatner had a ship with an all-holographic crew. But there are some things to remember:

1) The novels are not canon. (For example, in filmed Trek, Captain Kirk is as dead as George Washington. In Shatner's novels, he was revived.)

2) In spite of assistance from Judith and Garfield Reeves-Stevens, the novels are TERRIBLE. You'd be better off to take my word for it that there is a ship with an all-holographic crew in that novel.