Unfortunately, ST:TOS explicitly made this so, in referring to orbits. Without engine power, the ship falls into the planet.
Balance of Terror strongly implied the ship was motionless, not unlike a destroyer in the South Atlantic silently waiting for sign of motion from a German U-Boat.
Sure, you can fanwank it, but that’s what they’ve shown more than once.
You think moi didn’t know that? 
Are you saying they are swine, on some sort of trek?
Art departments definitely think flames shooting out of the back of the ship look cool.
There’s no other excuse for the official NBC poster for the first season of Star Trek (which was also used as the cover for the first book of James Blish’s novelizations of the scripts) to show flames shooting out of the Warp Drive Nacelles and the Shutlecraft Deck – none of which ever belched out flames in any of the shows or movies:
https://www.worthpoint.com/worthopedia/1966-original-vintage-star-trek-nbc-1732222122
https://www.worthpoint.com/worthopedia/1966-original-vintage-star-trek-nbc-1732222122
Or, for that matter, to show stuff coming out of the back of the Shuttle from 2001: A Space Odyssey, which was never shown in the film:
and Jews.
I cringe every time Kirk (or Picard, or any other captain) says, ‘All stop!’ I’m always like, ‘Relative to what?’ The TOS Enterprise also had a habit of being all cockeyed when it was ‘stopped’ in space.
Well, there are many types of orbits, most are unstable. A close, unstable orbit would do just that.
But it’s weird that standard practice is to put the ship into a “standard orbit” that’s unstable, when we see fairly often ship engine failures that make such an orbit dangerous. Why not just pick a stable orbit that would be safe even if the chief engineer gets drunk, or “The Boy” breaks the warp core?
Well, how often did that happen? And in five years how often did they have missions that they went into close orbit and it was so unremarkable that no epi was made of it? Transporters have range, perhaps they need to be closer to be within transporter range.
Point taken - what we’re shown are the dramatic days in the life of the Enterprise. The days everything works get skipped.
This is my orbit. There are many like it, but this one is mine.
:warps away:
We just have to accept that they use the word “orbit” in reference to a planet like we use “dial” in reference to cell phones. Because if a ship was in a real orbit it would be out of contact and transporter range for half the time.
And back to the OP, the MCU space travel makes no sense, even in comparision to Star Trek. They use the bifrost, or wormholes, or some ambiguous FTL drive, or just fly light years through the universe in a jumpsuit. I can handle the questionable physics of the Hulk, or how the Iron Man suit seems to negate inertia, but their understanding of “the universe” - well, I just have to put my mind on idle for these parts.
I mean, it’s a universe where the infinity stones, created shortly after the big bang, and therefore should be billions of light years apart, are all in one galaxy, and more than one was on earth before anyone was looking for them. Clearly the writers and creative talent have no comprehension of how BIG the universe really is. *
And THAT is the worst SF trope of all.
*(when Thanos dusted half of all living things, was that half of living things on planets 15 billion light years away? Wonder what they thought happened?)
Yes, it was supposed to be half of all living things everywhere – I can’t remember if it was just this galaxy, or the entire universe.
I read somewhere that Whedon said there would be only one singular liberty taken against scientific accuracy, but (much as I love Firefly), I counted at least a couple of others beyond River’s ability; artificial gravity, antigravity (which, OK, could be argued to be the same set of phenomena) and free-floating luminous holograms, at the very least.
That must have made for interesting experiences for all those people that have never heard of the Avengers or Thanos or Infinity Stones (since there aren’t any where they are). A “literal” rapture of half the population with no explanation, and then just as mysterious reappearance five years later. Wars are fought and religions are founded on that kind of thing.
And they’ll NEVER know what happened.
Indeed. It’d make for fascinating stories.
And, It was, indeed, half of the entire universe. As per the MCU Wiki:
(Not arguing with you…)
But that goes to the basic tropes. I am not convinced anyone at Marvel can comprehend how BIG the universe it. They’ve never looked at the Hubble deep field image and actually contemplated how many zillions of life forms must be in that teeny tiny visible region. There are most likely more planets in that image than there are people who have ever lived on earth since time began.
Marvel writers don’t even understand space travel - I would not assume they have ever thought about the implications of the Snap for the rest of the unknown universe.
Of all the unscientific SF silliness, this seems to be the one people most think will actually happen. It is even used in shows based just 10-20 years in the future.
That’s what Captain Marvel is doing offscreen - going from planet to planet explaining things and helping put the pieces back together.
Probably more doable than insulting the entire Universe in alphabetical order.
Oh, can it, you knee-biter.