Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #101  
Old 06-08-2019, 08:00 PM
Enola Straight is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Somers Point, NJ
Posts: 6,028
I would've liked to have seen more of the XCV-330 Enterprise.
https://www.google.com/search?client...UTD_dE3av68cM:
__________________
Masochist to Sadist: "Hurt me."
Sadist to Masochist: "No."
  #102  
Old 06-08-2019, 11:22 PM
DSYoungEsq is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: Indian Land, S Carolina
Posts: 14,298
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigT View Post
The saucer section makes a lot more sense if you assume that, like the shuttles, it actually has limited warp capabilities. Why would they put that on the shuttles but not the saucer section?

It wouldn't go as fast as proper nacelles, and would likely run on something akin to batteries with a limited amount of power, rather than a generator like the Warp drive. That's how it works on the shuttles.

If they have limited warp, the distance problem mostly goes away. They aren't just sitting ducks, either. But the limited nature means landing on a nearby class-M planet and waiting for help may still be the better option at times. And it would also explain why it couldn't easily separate at warp.

In fact, I'm surprised that it says it can't go to warp at all. That seems stupid.
The shuttles have warp nacelles. Those are required for warp. The saucer doesn't have nacelles. How does it generate a warp field without them?
  #103  
Old 06-09-2019, 03:26 PM
TaoPilot is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 99
I'm fine with the saucer section. It makes sense to have a way to get the civilians out of danger when possible.

I also understand why the show barely ever used it, even in obvious situations like when Picard headed into the neutral zone.

But I never liked how the few times they did the separation, they showed scenes of people evacuating the stardrive section. Wouldn't it make sense to keep that area off limits to civilians so you could do a quicker saucer separation when you needed it?
  #104  
Old 06-09-2019, 05:44 PM
BigT's Avatar
BigT is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: "Hicksville", Ark.
Posts: 36,209
Quote:
Originally Posted by DSYoungEsq View Post
The shuttles have warp nacelles. Those are required for warp. The saucer doesn't have nacelles. How does it generate a warp field without them?
It doesn't have those predominantly Federation style back nacelles, sure. And there are no obvious nacelles on the sides. But there are those two little bits that jut out from the back that clearly drive the system.

Given how relatively small the shuttle nacelles are, and considering that the saucer nacelles would be for emergency use only, it doesn't seem like it would be that hard for them to have warp capability.

I know they canonically don't. But, honestly, it would make more sense if they did. If it were me, that would have been my excuse right away. Even if it was something like "they can't generate their own warp field, but they can sustain the one from main ship for a limited period of time, allowing them to get to the closest star system with an M-class planet". Though usually the saucer would be rescued long before that was necessary."

Anything is better than "impulse only, except when the plot would demand otherwise."
  #105  
Old 06-13-2019, 12:16 PM
TBG is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Michigan
Posts: 9,068
Couldn't a shuttle "tow" the saucer at warp speed?
  #106  
Old 06-13-2019, 09:07 PM
bionic_man is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2018
Posts: 56
Quote:
Originally Posted by Acsenray View Post
The original is the only one for me.
I like the original as wel good old 1701/
  #107  
Old 06-13-2019, 09:16 PM
Elendil's Heir is offline
SDSAB
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: my Herkimer Battle Jitney
Posts: 83,293
Quote:
Originally Posted by TBG View Post
Couldn't a shuttle "tow" the saucer at warp speed?
That'd have to be a helluva big shuttle.
  #108  
Old 06-13-2019, 11:01 PM
DSYoungEsq is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: Indian Land, S Carolina
Posts: 14,298
Quote:
Originally Posted by TBG View Post
Couldn't a shuttle "tow" the saucer at warp speed?
Presumably not. I've always thought the concept of shuttles being able to fly in warp a bit silly, but if they can, one would have to believe the warp engine is just efficient enough to move the shuttle's mass loaded, not haul around the mass of the saucer section...
  #109  
Old 06-14-2019, 05:06 AM
DorkVader's Avatar
DorkVader is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: boise idaho
Posts: 2,432
In Star Trek TOS the shuttles had engine nacelles, or what looked like them, but I don't recall them being protrayed as warp capable. In Voyager, where I primarily remember seeing them, and perhaps a few times in TNG, what seemed like the same vehicle to me was interchangeably called a shuttle or a runabout. The idea of using a warp capable shuttle to tow the saucer section at warp makes me wonder if it would be possible to extend the range a bit after a separation at warp. Not maintaining that speed, just making it go a bit longer.

Probably not, there would probably be some disasterous consequences when the saucer slowed enough to drop out of warp and the shuttle didn't that would have to be hand waved with computer programming and remote piloting and what not. Still, a mildly interesting idea nonetheless, I think.
__________________
L. Californicus Deserticola Sithae

Last edited by DorkVader; 06-14-2019 at 05:07 AM.
  #110  
Old 06-14-2019, 07:47 AM
Just Asking Questions is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 6,875
Quote:
Originally Posted by TBG View Post
Couldn't a shuttle "tow" the saucer at warp speed?
Scotty, engineering advances. Vessels this size with engines the size of shuttles!.

A starship engine the size of a shuttle? That's impossible. But I don't suppose there'd be any harm in looking over diagrams on it.
  #111  
Old 06-15-2019, 12:47 AM
Elendil's Heir is offline
SDSAB
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: my Herkimer Battle Jitney
Posts: 83,293
Quote:
Originally Posted by DorkVader View Post
In Star Trek TOS the shuttles had engine nacelles, or what looked like them, but I don't recall them being protrayed as warp capable....
The shuttles were used several times in circumstances where it was clear they weren't just scooting around inside a single star system, including "Metamorphosis" and "The Menagerie."
  #112  
Old 06-15-2019, 01:19 AM
Just Asking Questions is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 6,875
Quote:
Originally Posted by Elendil's Heir View Post
The shuttles were used several times in circumstances where it was clear they weren't just scooting around inside a single star system, including "Metamorphosis" and "The Menagerie."
Unfortunately, continuity of the original series means that isn't sufficient to prove it one way or the other.
  #113  
Old 06-16-2019, 10:08 AM
DorkVader's Avatar
DorkVader is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: boise idaho
Posts: 2,432
Quote:
Originally Posted by Elendil's Heir View Post
The shuttles were used several times in circumstances where it was clear they weren't just scooting around inside a single star system, including "Metamorphosis" and "The Menagerie."
Oops, my mistake, I forgot those episodes.
__________________
L. Californicus Deserticola Sithae
  #114  
Old 06-16-2019, 11:09 AM
Elendil's Heir is offline
SDSAB
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: my Herkimer Battle Jitney
Posts: 83,293
Quote:
Originally Posted by Just Asking Questions View Post
Unfortunately, continuity of the original series means that isn't sufficient to prove it one way or the other.
How so? Warp capability, once established, would surely be maintained. Starfleet is hardly going to make its shuttles less fast than they once were. It's a big galaxy!
  #115  
Old 06-16-2019, 12:09 PM
Alessan's Avatar
Alessan is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Tel Aviv
Posts: 24,278
Maybe the Federation reached an agreement with the Klingons and Romulans not to develop warp capable shuttles. Like the agreement not to develop cloaking.
  #116  
Old 06-16-2019, 12:24 PM
ExTank's Avatar
ExTank is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 1999
Location: Creve Coeur, MO
Posts: 6,767
Enterprise-refit (TMP) and -E (Sovereign-class) were my favorite Enterprises, tying for 1st place, but the Reliant (Miranda-class?) is still my overall favorite Star Trek ship-class.


One of my "common sense" gripes wrt Trek overall is when the main ship loses communications or sensors, and they then forget they have shuttles! And I am assuming a limited warp capability is most shipboard shuttles; the Galileo 7 model I built had discrete impulse thrusters, and mini-warp nacelles underneath.

They can launch shuttles, and form a communications relay back to Star Base (or other nearby ship) for help/rescue, or spread them out to form a kind of sensor net, relaying the info back to the main ship.
  #117  
Old 06-17-2019, 01:03 PM
Just Asking Questions is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 6,875
Quote:
Originally Posted by Elendil's Heir View Post
How so? Warp capability, once established, would surely be maintained. Starfleet is hardly going to make its shuttles less fast than they once were. It's a big galaxy!
It's clear (to this very day) that Hollywood writers have no idea how big space it, or how science works.

Memory Alpha
says TOS shuttles are sublight, stated "Interplanetary Cruising Velocity: 350 million km/hr" which is appx .3c. I don't think the show ever specifically mentioned how fast they go, but ever since 1968 I thought they were sublight, despite their mini-warp-engine-looking nacelles. That's just (lazy) design aesthetics.

But if shuttles are sublight, then it's stupid to use one to go somewhere in lieu of the warp driven starship taking you there and dropping you off. A shuttle could go a third of a light year in a year, while the Enterprise could do it in about, oh, five minutes.* There is absolutely no reason to take a shuttle farther than you can throw it.

The Defiant, which Kirk said had impulse engines, somehow made it to the edge of the galaxy(!). Romulans waged interstellar war apparently without warp drive, according to BoT. The Botany Bay was obviously STL, but somehow it ended up hundreds of light years from earth. So the writers clearly don't understand how big space it.

I submit the writers just didn't understand space at all. Shuttles are like speedboats to them. You can take your CVN-65 Enterprise to Europe in 4 days, and your "shuttle" cabin cruiser/cigarette boat can get to Europe in let's say two weeks. So writers think starships are the same. But the Galileo 7 is more like tying yourself to a piece of wood and floating to Europe. Except 1000 times longer still.

In ST:TMP it was a special warp-capable shuttle that brought Spock to meet the Enterprise, implying that normal shuttles are not. If TOS shuttles were FTL, it makes sense in The Menagerie and Metamorphosis, but not much else. Why not send a warp-driven shuttle to drop off the urgent medical supplies in Obsession (or, why not have the Yorktown come to them?)? Why not use a shuttle to take Spock to Vulcan in Amok Time? These only make sense if it takes a Starship to get anywhere in a hurry. Why not send a shuttle to get help in Paradise Syndrome?

Of course, we have no idea what kind of engines Harry Mudd had, nor Dr. Sevrin, had. They must have had FTL drive, so that makes it seem small warp engines exist.







*speed is plot driven

Last edited by Just Asking Questions; 06-17-2019 at 01:07 PM.
  #118  
Old 06-17-2019, 11:28 PM
Elendil's Heir is offline
SDSAB
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: my Herkimer Battle Jitney
Posts: 83,293
Agreed that ST (and many sf) writers had and have no idea how vast space actually is. As to why not use FTL shuttles more often, I'd fanwank it to suggest that perhaps some regions of space are more dangerous than others, due to pirates, Klingons, navigational hazards, etc. For high-value cargoes and VIP passengers, it's Starfleet policy to convey them via starship rather than shuttle wherever possible.
  #119  
Old 06-18-2019, 01:01 AM
DSYoungEsq is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: Indian Land, S Carolina
Posts: 14,298
Or maybe shuttles can only manage warp 2, or maybe 3, which is pretty darn slow, compared to the Enterprise warping around at warp 5 or 6 (to say nothing of 8 or 9!).
  #120  
Old 06-18-2019, 04:47 AM
Alessan's Avatar
Alessan is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Tel Aviv
Posts: 24,278
My guess is that most SF TV writers know exactly how big space is, but they have stories to write and deadlines to meet, and they hope - correctly, it turns out - that audiences either don't know this stuff or won't be too bothered by it.

Last edited by Alessan; 06-18-2019 at 04:48 AM.
  #121  
Old 06-18-2019, 11:37 AM
spifflog is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 2,394
Quote:
Originally Posted by Just Asking Questions View Post
It's clear (to this very day) that Hollywood writers have no idea how big space it, or how science works.
I'd argue that it's clear to this day that viewers have no idea how 1960s TV worked.

While Star Trek took a lot of time to get things right and with some level of continuity, the "long pole in the tent" as we say today was screenwriting. There just weren't enough quality scrips, written on time to allow for great TV and for continuity errors to be corrected.

I remember hearing Robert Conrad talk years ago as some type of "Wild Wild West convention." After about the third nitnoid question about some issue in one episode he went nuts. He correctly pointed out that these shows would mostly be shown twice. Once in the first run, and once in re-runs. You might get lucky and catch syndication, but that wasn't a guarantee and there wasn't a lot of money in it. They just didn't worry about all of these to them minor issues.

In short the producers of had no way to know that we'd be picking the show apart 50 plus years later.

Last edited by spifflog; 06-18-2019 at 11:38 AM.
  #122  
Old 06-18-2019, 12:03 PM
Just Asking Questions is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 6,875
Quote:
Originally Posted by spifflog View Post
I'd argue that it's clear to this day that viewers have no idea how 1960s TV worked.

While Star Trek took a lot of time to get things right and with some level of continuity, the "long pole in the tent" as we say today was screenwriting. There just weren't enough quality scrips, written on time to allow for great TV and for continuity errors to be corrected.

I remember hearing Robert Conrad talk years ago as some type of "Wild Wild West convention." After about the third nitnoid question about some issue in one episode he went nuts. He correctly pointed out that these shows would mostly be shown twice. Once in the first run, and once in re-runs. You might get lucky and catch syndication, but that wasn't a guarantee and there wasn't a lot of money in it. They just didn't worry about all of these to them minor issues.

In short the producers of had no way to know that we'd be picking the show apart 50 plus years later.
That's true,

But unlike WWW, there was a writer's guide that was there to teach writers how things worked in the show. Plus Roddenberry and Justman were there every day, and they tried at least to keep it "real", or at least, consistent. They asked scientists to review scripts. They actually listened to advice.

And not knowing how big space is, or the uses and limitations of a shuttlecraft, are basic questions. We're not talking how how biodiversity is achieved in a species that is born pregnant, or whether or not a silicon-based lifeform would burst into flame in an oxygen atmosphere.

And the shuttle questions were obvious to me the very first time I watched it. And I was 8.
  #123  
Old 06-18-2019, 12:07 PM
Elendil's Heir is offline
SDSAB
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: my Herkimer Battle Jitney
Posts: 83,293
Quote:
Originally Posted by spifflog View Post
...I remember hearing Robert Conrad talk years ago as some type of "Wild Wild West convention." After about the third nitnoid question about some issue in one episode he went nuts....
A wizard, er, Dr. Miguelito Loveless did it.
  #124  
Old 06-18-2019, 12:20 PM
Alessan's Avatar
Alessan is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Tel Aviv
Posts: 24,278
Quote:
Originally Posted by Just Asking Questions View Post
And not knowing how big space is, or the uses and limitations of a shuttlecraft, are basic questions. We're not talking how how biodiversity is achieved in a species that is born pregnant, or whether or not a silicon-based lifeform would burst into flame in an oxygen atmosphere.
But it's not about knowing or not knowing, it's about writing a story. If space was too big for the story they wanted to tell, then they made space smaller.
  #125  
Old 06-18-2019, 03:23 PM
spifflog is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 2,394
Quote:
Originally Posted by Just Asking Questions View Post
That's true,

But unlike WWW, there was a writer's guide that was there to teach writers how things worked in the show. Plus Roddenberry and Justman were there every day, and they tried at least to keep it "real", or at least, consistent. They asked scientists to review scripts. They actually listened to advice.

And not knowing how big space is, or the uses and limitations of a shuttlecraft, are basic questions. We're not talking how how biodiversity is achieved in a species that is born pregnant, or whether or not a silicon-based lifeform would burst into flame in an oxygen atmosphere.

And the shuttle questions were obvious to me the very first time I watched it. And I was 8.
I'm not trying to pick a fight on this issue at all, but I'll say this. Most TV shows have a writer's guide, more commonly refereed to as the bible. But from my fairly extensive reading about TOS (I'm not an expert and don't purport to be one) Roddenberry knew that the last season was it and he had largely checked out. And the rest of the writers and producers were just trying to get a script that would work to the actors in time to film. It wasn't this well oiled machine that we have been led to believe. The same script writing issues occurred on TNG as well, to a lesser extent.

I just think that these series are less "tight" for lack of a better word than we (or at least I) generally thought they were. As I noted up thread, no one at the time believed that the episodes would be dissected line by line, shot by shot by millions for half a century and counting.

The show(s) have given me untold hours of pleasure and for that I give them my eternal gratitude.
  #126  
Old 06-18-2019, 03:30 PM
Elendil's Heir is offline
SDSAB
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: my Herkimer Battle Jitney
Posts: 83,293
Quote:
Originally Posted by spifflog View Post
...The show(s) have given me untold hours of pleasure and for that I give them my eternal gratitude.
Hear, hear!
  #127  
Old 06-18-2019, 05:18 PM
Andy L is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Posts: 6,329
Quote:
Originally Posted by spifflog View Post
I'm not trying to pick a fight on this issue at all, but I'll say this. Most TV shows have a writer's guide, more commonly refereed to as the bible. But from my fairly extensive reading about TOS (I'm not an expert and don't purport to be one) Roddenberry knew that the last season was it and he had largely checked out. And the rest of the writers and producers were just trying to get a script that would work to the actors in time to film. It wasn't this well oiled machine that we have been led to believe. The same script writing issues occurred on TNG as well, to a lesser extent.
Roddenberry was definitely out for the last season (Fred Freiberger was in charge that season). I think there was a "Show bible" but it probably had much less detail than we would consider sufficient these days.
  #128  
Old 06-18-2019, 05:26 PM
Andy L is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Posts: 6,329
Here's a link to the Star Trek Show Bible http://leethomson.myzen.co.uk/Star_T...39;s_Guide.pdf
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:39 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.

Send questions for Cecil Adams to: cecil@straightdope.com

Send comments about this website to: webmaster@straightdope.com

Terms of Use / Privacy Policy

Advertise on the Straight Dope!
(Your direct line to thousands of the smartest, hippest people on the planet, plus a few total dipsticks.)

Copyright 2018 STM Reader, LLC.

 
Copyright © 2017