# TNG: why didn't starfleet develop cloaking technology? **URL:** \ **Category:** Cafe Society\ **Created:** [June 22, 2010, 3:15am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/tng-why-didnt-starfleet-develop-cloaking-technology/544087 "2010-06-22T03:15:03Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 4
**Author:** ![aceplace57](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/aceplace57/32/3500_2.png) [@aceplace57](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/aceplace57)\ **Post date:** [June 23, 2010, 6:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/tng-why-didnt-starfleet-develop-cloaking-technology/544087/61 "2010-06-23T18:48:05Z")
whoops. 😉 you’re right. She was Cardassian. Thanks. ---
**Author:** ![ChordedZither](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/e9c0ed/32.png) [@ChordedZither](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ChordedZither)\ **Post date:** [June 24, 2010, 6:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/tng-why-didnt-starfleet-develop-cloaking-technology/544087/62 "2010-06-24T18:20:20Z")
> [@Jim\_s\_Son](#): > > To defend Roddenberry, you could argue that in Earth’s past certain once-used military weapons were outlawed and not used again. Poison gas was widely used by both sides in World War I and virtually not at all in the second. Perhaps a closer analogy: from 1972-2002, the U.S. and the Soviets were bound by treaty to forgo deploying more than one strategic anti-ballistic missile system apiece. The Soviets protected Moscow. We protected an Air Force base in North Dakota. So the idea of limiting specific military technology by treaty isn’t quite as MAD as it sounds. ---
**Author:** ![Simplicio](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/c37758/32.png) [@Simplicio](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Simplicio)\ **Post date:** [June 24, 2010, 6:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/tng-why-didnt-starfleet-develop-cloaking-technology/544087/63 "2010-06-24T18:51:25Z")
> [@ChordedZither](#): > > Perhaps a closer analogy: from 1972-2002, the U.S. and the Soviets were bound by treaty to forgo deploying more than one strategic anti-ballistic missile system apiece. The Soviets protected Moscow. We protected an Air Force base in North Dakota. > > So the idea of limiting specific military technology by treaty isn’t quite as MAD as it sounds. And more generally, most of the countries in the world have agreed to forgo nuclear weapons development via the Nuclear non-poliferation pact. This is the closest real world analog I can think of to agreeing to not develop a military technology that other countries you might conceivably go to war with are allowed to keep them. ---
**Author:** ![TBG](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/c89c15/32.png) [@TBG](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TBG)\ **Post date:** [June 25, 2010, 7:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/tng-why-didnt-starfleet-develop-cloaking-technology/544087/64 "2010-06-25T19:24:53Z")
> [@Odesio](#): > > As I recall, initially the Defiant was required to have a Romulan liaison on board but they quickly dropped that after a few subsequent episodes. IIRC, the liaison did something treacherous and got booted off. Also, originally the Defiant was only allowed to use the cloak in the Gamma Quadrant. ---
**Author:** ![Elendil\_s\_Heir](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/7cd45c/32.png) [@Elendil\_s\_Heir](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Elendil_s_Heir)\ **Post date:** [June 25, 2010, 7:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/tng-why-didnt-starfleet-develop-cloaking-technology/544087/65 "2010-06-25T19:48:18Z")
> [@ChordedZither](#): > > 
So the idea of limiting specific military technology by treaty isn’t quite as MAD as it sounds. I see what you did there. ---
**Author:** ![Attack\_from\_the\_3rd\_dimension](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/b38774/32.png) [@Attack\_from\_the\_3rd\_dimension](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Attack_from_the_3rd_dimension)\ **Post date:** [June 25, 2010, 8:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/tng-why-didnt-starfleet-develop-cloaking-technology/544087/66 "2010-06-25T20:36:15Z")
> [@Love\_Rhombus](#): > > So then why didn’t the mirror universe Starfleet have one? Or did they? (I just reread Dark Mirror and I’m having a bad habit of visualizing people with goatees now). Oh no, not at all a good idea. I once had an elegant small mustache, and my man was most disapproving. Jolly well gave me one of those looks, don’t you know, and wouldn’t come to my aid when old Stilton was going to twist my head off. I can’t imagine how a goatee would go over. ---
**Author:** ![N9IWP](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/n9iwp/32/3154_2.png) [@N9IWP](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/N9IWP)\ **Post date:** [June 25, 2010, 11:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/tng-why-didnt-starfleet-develop-cloaking-technology/544087/67 "2010-06-25T23:29:33Z")
Actually a good question is why Klingons use cloaking. Seems to me hiding is dishonorable - you should face your enemy head on. Brian ---
**Author:** ![foolsguinea](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/foolsguinea/32/14751_2.png) [@foolsguinea](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/foolsguinea)\ **Post date:** [June 25, 2010, 11:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/tng-why-didnt-starfleet-develop-cloaking-technology/544087/68 "2010-06-25T23:43:29Z")
> [@dzeiger](#): > > I’ve seen a couple of fanwank-type explanations, at least from the TOS time-frame. 
 > > The other, and I don’t remember where this came from, was a finding that cloaking technology has an overall harmful effect on the mental health of those aboard the ship. That would work with TOS-era Klingons and Romulans, perhaps not the TNG-era Klingons, though. Well, TNG Klingon military careerists are canonically usually what we would call insane. Whereas TOS Klingons seem reasonably normal. So I can believe that the Klingon cloak has psychological effects that they fail to shield from (or don’t shield from as well as the Romulans do). ---
**Author:** ![Pushkin](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/ee59a6/32.png) [@Pushkin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Pushkin)\ **Post date:** [June 25, 2010, 11:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/tng-why-didnt-starfleet-develop-cloaking-technology/544087/69 "2010-06-25T23:55:40Z")
> [@Don\_t\_Call\_Me\_Shirley](#): > > What about Star Trek 6? That had traitorous Starfleet officers. Gene was alive for the filming of that, although not for the release, IIRC. By that stage though, hadn’t he been quietly sidelined? Given credit as a producer but not allowed to influence things too much. ---
**Author:** ![Elendil\_s\_Heir](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/7cd45c/32.png) [@Elendil\_s\_Heir](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Elendil_s_Heir)\ **Post date:** [June 26, 2010, 2:58am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/tng-why-didnt-starfleet-develop-cloaking-technology/544087/70 "2010-06-26T02:58:23Z")
> [@Pushkin](#): > > By that stage though, hadn’t he been quietly sidelined? Given credit as a producer but not allowed to influence things too much. That was my understanding. After 1989-90 or so I don’t think they let him play in his old sandbox all that much. ---
**Author:** ![RickJay](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/bb73d2/32.png) [@RickJay](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RickJay)\ **Post date:** [June 26, 2010, 3:23am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/tng-why-didnt-starfleet-develop-cloaking-technology/544087/71 "2010-06-26T03:23:07Z")
The extent of Roddenberry’s weirdness is, if anything, being understated here. Roddenberry objected - strenuously - to the scene in “Wrath of Khan” where Kirk vaporizes the slug that had just crawled out of Chekov’s ear. He argued that Kirk would never have destroyed the creature, but would have wanted to study it. Aside from the fact that this is (a) stupid, (b) completely irrelevant to the plot, © totally inconsistent with Kirk’s established willingness to shoot things, and (d) totally ludicrous to think ANYONE would, upon watching a goddamn brain-lobster crawl out of a dear’s friend fucking head, would think they should preserve the cute little big for study, it’s freaking stupid. Wait, that was point (a). Well, it bore mentioning again. So really, it’s 'cause Roddenberry wanted Starfleet to be the good guys. ---
**Author:** ![The\_Other\_Waldo\_Pepper](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/the_other_waldo_pepper/32/12370_2.png) [@The\_Other\_Waldo\_Pepper](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Other_Waldo_Pepper)\ **Post date:** [June 26, 2010, 11:56am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/tng-why-didnt-starfleet-develop-cloaking-technology/544087/72 "2010-06-26T11:56:19Z")
> [@N9IWP](#): > > Actually a good question is why Klingons use cloaking. Seems to me hiding is dishonorable - you should face your enemy head on. FWIW, don’t they drop the cloak to fire? ---
**Author:** ![TBG](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/c89c15/32.png) [@TBG](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TBG)\ **Post date:** [June 26, 2010, 8:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/tng-why-didnt-starfleet-develop-cloaking-technology/544087/73 "2010-06-26T20:07:22Z")
> [@The\_Other\_Waldo\_Pepper](#): > > FWIW, don’t they drop the cloak to fire? The cloak uses too much power to fire while cloaked, usually. ---
**Author:** ![Simplicio](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/c37758/32.png) [@Simplicio](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Simplicio)\ **Post date:** [June 26, 2010, 8:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/tng-why-didnt-starfleet-develop-cloaking-technology/544087/74 "2010-06-26T20:15:21Z")
> [@RickJay](#): > > Aside from the fact that this is (a) stupid, (b) completely irrelevant to the plot, (c) totally inconsistent with Kirk’s established willingness to shoot things, and (d) totally ludicrous to think ANYONE would, upon watching a goddamn brain-lobster crawl out of a dear’s friend fucking head, would think they should preserve the cute little big for study, it’s freaking stupid. Wait, that was point (a). Well, it bore mentioning again. I dunno, if I suddenly discovered the existence of a crazy mind-control bug, I think I’d want to study it to. It seems like the kind of thing Starfleet should keep tabs on, to prevent more mind-controlled helmsman, if for no other reason. ---
**Author:** ![Attack\_from\_the\_3rd\_dimension](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/b38774/32.png) [@Attack\_from\_the\_3rd\_dimension](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Attack_from_the_3rd_dimension)\ **Post date:** [June 26, 2010, 8:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/tng-why-didnt-starfleet-develop-cloaking-technology/544087/75 "2010-06-26T20:18:22Z")
> [@Simplicio](#): > > I dunno, if I suddenly discovered the existence of a crazy mind-control bug, I think I’d want to study it to. It seems like the kind of thing Starfleet should keep tabs on, to prevent more mind-controlled helmsman, if for no other reason. Especially since they wound up with an alien mind control coup attempt in TNG - that study thing might have been a good idea. By the way, every time I see the thread title, I read it as _TNG: why didn’t starfleet develop **choking** technology_, and think it’s about Worf. ---
**Author:** ![friedo](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/8edcca/32.png) [@friedo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/friedo)\ **Post date:** [June 26, 2010, 8:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/tng-why-didnt-starfleet-develop-cloaking-technology/544087/76 "2010-06-26T20:22:43Z")
> [@Lute Skywatcher](#): > > Not entirely true. Traditional “money” had been rendered worthless by the invention of the replicator but the Federation had been using “credits” in TOS. In TOS, sure. But not in TNG. And not in any of the latter Star Trek movies. This coincides with when Gene began losing his marbles. > [@](#): > > Who were introduced during Roddenbury’s reign as executive producer and just happened to have discovered a substance that cannot be replicated. There’s all _sorts_ of shit that can’t be replicated. Latinum was never mentioned until the first season of DS9. ---
**Author:** ![Pushkin](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/ee59a6/32.png) [@Pushkin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Pushkin)\ **Post date:** [June 26, 2010, 9:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/tng-why-didnt-starfleet-develop-cloaking-technology/544087/77 "2010-06-26T21:46:17Z")
> [@The\_Other\_Waldo\_Pepper](#): > > FWIW, don’t they drop the cloak to fire? IIRC DS9 mentions their tactic of hanging around ship wrecks while cloaked, waiting for a rescue party to turn up and then blast them rapidly. > [@Simplicio](#): > > It seems like the kind of thing Starfleet should keep tabs on, to prevent more mind-controlled helmsman, if for no other reason. Or, alternatively, to create _more_ mind-controlled helmsmen. When that “xxx was inwented by a little old lady in Moscow” routine gets a bit stale, just reach for the larvae. ---
**Author:** ![carnivorousplant](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/carnivorousplant/32/3563_2.png) [@carnivorousplant](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/carnivorousplant)\ **Post date:** [June 26, 2010, 9:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/tng-why-didnt-starfleet-develop-cloaking-technology/544087/78 "2010-06-26T21:53:43Z")
> [@friedo](#): > > There’s all _sorts_ of shit that can’t be replicated. Latinum was never mentioned until the first season of DS9. I remember the Maquis guy who does a Jake Holman act while the rest of the guys escape complaining about the taste of replicated food, but what else can’t be replicated? Can latinum be beamed from one place to another? ---
**Author:** ![friedo](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/8edcca/32.png) [@friedo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/friedo)\ **Post date:** [June 26, 2010, 10:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/tng-why-didnt-starfleet-develop-cloaking-technology/544087/79 "2010-06-26T22:10:25Z")
> [@carnivorousplant](#): > > I remember the Maquis guy who does a Jake Holman act while the rest of the guys escape complaining about the taste of replicated food, but what else can’t be replicated? Any MacGuffin that needs to be difficult to acquire. In TNG: _Starship Mine_, the villains hijack the _Enterprise_ so they can get warp engine byproducts that are useful for making weapons. In several episodes of DS9, Quark has to get some contraband item that he can’t just pull out of his replicator. In DS9: _In the Pale Moonlight_, Bashir has to prepare some dangerous substance that can be used for making biological weapons to trade for a genuine Cardassian data rod. (Oh, I guess genuine Cardassian data rods can’t be replicated by the Cardassian replicators aboard DS9. 😛 ) There’s another DS9 episode where they travel to an abandoned Cardassian station of the same design in order to get spare parts. Because they couldn’t be replicated, presumably. In Voyager, Seven’s Borg nannites prove useful for various purposes but can’t be replicated. Yadda yadda yadda. The point is, while replicators can provide all the food and medicine and whatnot that you need, and could conceivably make a market economy obsolete, humans still need all kinds of unreplicatable stuff, and how they acquire it (it can’t all be barter) is never really explained. It’s also never explained how the finite resources of Earth are assigned to people, given that they have no money. How does Sisko’s father “own” his restaurant in New Orleans? Did he inherit it or win it in a lottery or what? Because you sure can’t replicate an infinite amount of restaurants in a finite-sized city. In _The Visitor_, Jake lives in the Sisko family’s house in Louisiana, seeming to indicate that children can still inherit property, or at least the right to occupy some property. Yet they have no money to pay for this property, or sell it, or whatever. My point is, even with replicators to provide consumables and antimatter reactors to provide unlimited energy, there’s no plausible way that you can eliminate money entirely. Even if your replicators can make anything, there are still finite resources like land, original works of art, and intangible services. Gene was stupid to declare that there was no money on Earth, and that humans (at least Federation ones) had magically transcended the need for trade. It was one of the many things he did that needlessly hampered the writing on the latter shows, and another thing that always necessitated inventing another alien that wasn’t quite as enlightened in order to tell a story. ---
**Author:** ![EllisDee](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ellisdee/32/4531_2.png) [@EllisDee](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/EllisDee)\ **Post date:** [June 26, 2010, 10:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/tng-why-didnt-starfleet-develop-cloaking-technology/544087/80 "2010-06-26T22:24:57Z")
More than that, currency is one of the great innovations in human history, single-handedly driving progress forward by leaps and bounds. Elimintaing currency entirely is as moronic as eliminating writing. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/tng-why-didnt-starfleet-develop-cloaking-technology/544087.md?page=3) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/tng-why-didnt-starfleet-develop-cloaking-technology/544087.md?page=5)