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.
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…
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.
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?
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.
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.
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.
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.
And Kamikazi pilots were welded into their cockpits for much the same reason.
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.
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.
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?
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…
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.*
Sorry, but the role of fat, bearded Star Wars freak has already been claimed by Harry Knowles. Find your own schtick.
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!!”
'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.
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.”
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.
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:
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.
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?
