# Your favorite version of the USS Enterprise **URL:** \ **Category:** Cafe Society\ **Created:** [May 31, 2019, 9:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/your-favorite-version-of-the-uss-enterprise/834814 "2019-05-31T09:00:48Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 4
**Author:** ![terentii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/terentii/32/212_2.png) [@terentii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/terentii)\ **Post date:** [June 2, 2019, 3:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/your-favorite-version-of-the-uss-enterprise/834814/61 "2019-06-02T15:18:30Z")
> [@Acsenray](#): > > It’s not “the service,” not as we know it. That’s one of, perhaps the most basic, premise of TNG. Starfleet of TNG is not a place solely or primarily for those interested in military service. > > You can’t fight the premise. In my understanding, volunteering to \*\*serve \*\*on board a ship (of \*\*any \*\*kind) puts you **“in the service,”** be it military or civilian. You subject yourself to \*\*their \*\*rules and regulations and surrender whatever personal freedom you might have. Of course, you always have the option of \*\*leaving \*\*if you find this is not to your taste. Which is as it should be. Get the hell out and let someone else who \*\*wants \*\*to have a chance. ---
**Author:** ![Icerigger](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/icerigger/32/432_2.png) [@Icerigger](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Icerigger)\ **Post date:** [June 2, 2019, 3:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/your-favorite-version-of-the-uss-enterprise/834814/62 "2019-06-02T15:19:30Z")
Take us out of orbit Mr. Sulu, ahead warp factor one. This was the last line in many TOS episodes. Scotty was amazed Kirk was going to Troyius from Elas on impulse power. This not using warp drive in a solar system was TNG and later convention. ---
**Author:** ![Alessan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/alessan/32/465_2.png) [@Alessan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Alessan)\ **Post date:** [June 2, 2019, 3:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/your-favorite-version-of-the-uss-enterprise/834814/63 "2019-06-02T15:21:33Z")
> [@terentii](#): > > In my understanding, volunteering to \*\*serve \*\*on board a ship (of \*\*any \*\*kind) puts you **“in the service,”** be it military or civilian. You subject yourself to \*\*their \*\*rules and regulations and surrender whatever personal freedom you might have. Let’s put it this way - could anyone on Enterprise-D ignore a direct order from Picard? ---
**Author:** ![terentii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/terentii/32/212_2.png) [@terentii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/terentii)\ **Post date:** [June 2, 2019, 3:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/your-favorite-version-of-the-uss-enterprise/834814/64 "2019-06-02T15:22:52Z")
> [@Icerigger](#): > > Scotty was amazed Kirk was going to Troyius from Elas on impulse power. The real reason for this was that he wanted to diddle Elaan for as long as possible. 😛😉 ---
**Author:** ![terentii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/terentii/32/212_2.png) [@terentii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/terentii)\ **Post date:** [June 2, 2019, 3:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/your-favorite-version-of-the-uss-enterprise/834814/65 "2019-06-02T15:25:04Z")
> [@Alessan](#): > > Let’s put it this way - could anyone on Enterprise-D ignore a direct order from Picard? _ **I** _ sure as all hell would have, on numerous occasions. And I’d have been happy to do so, even if it meant losing my commission (which they give you **in the sevice** ) or post. ---
**Author:** ![DorkVader](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/73ab20/32.png) [@DorkVader](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DorkVader)\ **Post date:** [June 2, 2019, 3:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/your-favorite-version-of-the-uss-enterprise/834814/66 "2019-06-02T15:44:46Z")
> [@E-DUB](#): > > The Refit. But in the non-canon category, I’ve always liked this ship. > > [Star Trek Blueprints: U.S.S. Churchill NCC-2713 Advanced Tactical Cruiser Technical Specifications](https://www.cygnus-x1.net/links/lcars/uss-churchill-ncc-2713.php) Wow that looks really similar to the Enterprise-C from the Narendra III incident. Regarding the families aboard ship, remember, the Galaxy Class Enterprise-D has (or had) diplomacy as it’s official primary mision. It was supposed to basically just cruise around and “show the flag” while doing things like transporting goods refugees diplomats relief supplies etc if I am remembering correctly. ---
**Author:** ![Acsenray](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/acsenray/32/4519_2.png) [@Acsenray](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Acsenray)\ **Post date:** [June 2, 2019, 4:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/your-favorite-version-of-the-uss-enterprise/834814/67 "2019-06-02T16:05:31Z")
It is not the service _as we know it_. Just because it has some elements of things you have experience with, doesn’t require it to have all the elements of what you’re familiar with. “No” service or organization is going to let you bring your family? Well, historically, soldiers, and particularly, officers, in some militaries could bring their families. Again, you can’t deny the premise, part of which is that one of the purposes of Starfleet is to have families and non-military people as part of the long-term mission of exploration. They don’t expect an exploratory and diplomatic vessel to be performing military functions most of the time. This is science fiction. It’s about thinking outside the terms of your personal experience. ---
**Author:** ![DorkVader](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/73ab20/32.png) [@DorkVader](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DorkVader)\ **Post date:** [June 2, 2019, 6:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/your-favorite-version-of-the-uss-enterprise/834814/68 "2019-06-02T18:36:59Z")
To add to what I said earlier and compliment what **Ascenray** said, for the Enterprise-D specifically, as The Flagship of Starfleet and the Federation it would seem abnormal to me, within the context of the Star Trek universe to not have families onboard the ship. The episode I referenced regarding the Enterprise-C did show an alternate -D without dependants ---
**Author:** ![psychonaut](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/psychonaut/32/4655_2.png) [@psychonaut](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/psychonaut)\ **Post date:** [June 2, 2019, 7:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/your-favorite-version-of-the-uss-enterprise/834814/69 "2019-06-02T19:56:58Z")
> [@terentii](#): > > As Zod, Lord and Absolute Dictator of the Zemfir Alliance, I assure you my primary task would be to blast that sucker out of space so fast they wouldn’t have a chance to react. If in the process I can harvest some Terran women and children to supply slave markets throughout the Galaxy, that would be a sweet bonus. (Men would be put to work immediately in the Co60 mines.) Congratulations—the fact that you dreamed up an exception to what was explicitly stated to be a generalization clearly invalidates my argument. :rolleyes: ---
**Author:** ![kanicbird](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/5f8ce5/32.png) [@kanicbird](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kanicbird)\ **Post date:** [June 2, 2019, 11:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/your-favorite-version-of-the-uss-enterprise/834814/70 "2019-06-02T23:02:12Z")
> [@terentii](#): > > No matter how you try to justify it, it’s still a bunch of crap. No organization, military or civilian, is going to let you bring along your family just to keep you happy, especially when (a) the dangers, known and unknown, are so formidable, and (b) there are untold numbers of people who would be more than happy to take your place without bringing along their families and all the unnecessary baggage that would entail. The whole “work and personal happiness are inseparable” thing smacks of dilettantism, not professionalism. I disagree, as space exploration becomes a standard part of human life, families will be part of that. ---
**Author:** ![terentii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/terentii/32/212_2.png) [@terentii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/terentii)\ **Post date:** [June 3, 2019, 8:37am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/your-favorite-version-of-the-uss-enterprise/834814/71 "2019-06-03T08:37:13Z")
> [@psychonaut](#): > > Congratulations—the fact that you dreamed up an exception to what was explicitly stated to be a generalization clearly invalidates my argument. :rolleyes: Huh? 😕 ---
**Author:** ![terentii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/terentii/32/212_2.png) [@terentii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/terentii)\ **Post date:** [June 3, 2019, 9:07am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/your-favorite-version-of-the-uss-enterprise/834814/72 "2019-06-03T09:07:56Z")
> [@Acsenray](#): > > It is not the service _as we know it_. Just because it has some elements of things you have experience with, doesn’t require it to have all the elements of what you’re familiar with. > > “No” service or organization is going to let you bring your family? Well, historically, soldiers, and particularly, officers, in some militaries could bring their families. > > Again, you can’t deny the premise, part of which is that one of the purposes of Starfleet is to have families and non-military people as part of the long-term mission of exploration. > > They don’t expect an exploratory and diplomatic vessel to be performing military functions most of the time. > > This is science fiction. It’s about thinking outside the terms of your personal experience. To claim Starfleet is not a military organization is like saying the Royal Navy of the 18th and 19th centuries was not one because they engaged in other things (e.g., exploration, scientific research, diplomacy, law enforcement, regulation of commerce, search and rescue) in addition to providing for the national defense in times of war. Starfleet personnel do all of the above too. They also wear uniforms and insignia of rank. They attend an Academy and have a chain of command. They are subject to rules, regulations, disciplinary actions, and courts martial. They can lose or resign their commissions. They are armed with weapons of mass destruction and are authorized to use deadly force when thought necessary. They are awarded decorations and frequently die in the line of duty. Sounds pretty damned military to me. Yes, in the past naval officers were allowed to have their wives travel on board ship with them, and some chose to exercise the option. Officers in the United States Army were also allowed to bring their wives and families with them to frontier posts, and enlisted men were allowed to marry their laundresses and live on base with them. But this was the case for a very small number of personnel, and the women were all performing useful functions. If there were children involved, there might have been maybe a dozen at a post with a garrison of several hundred. No big deal. But more often than not, men enlisted in the Army or Navy to get away from their families, not to bring them along (even if it had been allowed). I realize that Roddenberry in his dotage was dreaming of something like an ideal community of people free from everyday concerns and conflict, all living in perfect harmony on board a spacecraft cruising a friendly Galaxy, but that just ain’t gonna happen, ever. The whole idea is so preposterous it explains why I can now stand to watch only a handful of \*\*\*TNG \*\*\*episodes. Even _ **Mission: Impossible** _ is more realistic than they are. ---
**Author:** ![terentii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/terentii/32/212_2.png) [@terentii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/terentii)\ **Post date:** [June 3, 2019, 9:19am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/your-favorite-version-of-the-uss-enterprise/834814/73 "2019-06-03T09:19:24Z")
> [@Acsenray](#): > > This is science fiction. It’s about thinking outside the terms of your personal experience. To borrow a line from the \*\*\*TOS \*\*\*Writer’s Guide: “If you’re one of the people who say ‘The character acts that way because it’s science fiction,’ don’t call us, we’ll call you.” And yeah, I did like the way the _Enterprise_-D was portrayed in that time-warp episode; it had a Combat Information Center and everything. The best part was Picard’s reaction to the mere suggestion there should be families on board—one of sheer incredulity. ---
**Author:** ![terentii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/terentii/32/212_2.png) [@terentii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/terentii)\ **Post date:** [June 3, 2019, 9:21am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/your-favorite-version-of-the-uss-enterprise/834814/74 "2019-06-03T09:21:33Z")
> [@kanicbird](#): > > I disagree, as space exploration becomes a standard part of human life, families will be part of that. Yeah—just like with the Robinsons. 😉 ---
**Author:** ![Alessan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/alessan/32/465_2.png) [@Alessan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Alessan)\ **Post date:** [June 3, 2019, 9:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/your-favorite-version-of-the-uss-enterprise/834814/75 "2019-06-03T09:47:01Z")
Come on - we all know the only reason they had families abroad is so that the writers could write stupid “family-friendly” stories about stupid kids like Worf’s stupid stupid stupid son. It was a screenwriting crutch, nothing more. ---
**Author:** ![terentii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/terentii/32/212_2.png) [@terentii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/terentii)\ **Post date:** [June 3, 2019, 10:17am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/your-favorite-version-of-the-uss-enterprise/834814/76 "2019-06-03T10:17:28Z")
> [@Alessan](#): > > Come on - we all know the only reason they had families abroad is so that the writers could write stupid “family-friendly” stories about stupid kids like Worf’s stupid stupid stupid son. It was a screenwriting crutch, nothing more. And Wesley! Can’t forget Wesley! **Gag!** :mad: I suppose we all should have known Roddenberry was losing it when he said in one interview “Wesley is me at 14.” :rolleyes: ---
**Author:** ![Acsenray](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/acsenray/32/4519_2.png) [@Acsenray](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Acsenray)\ **Post date:** [June 3, 2019, 11:59am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/your-favorite-version-of-the-uss-enterprise/834814/77 "2019-06-03T11:59:11Z")
> [@terentii](#): > > To claim Starfleet is not a military organization Who said that. Me? I said Starfleet is not _primarily_ or _solely_ a military organization and it’s not a service _as we know it_. > [@](#): > > Yes, in the past naval officers were allowed to have their wives travel on board ship with them, and some chose to exercise the option. Officers in the United States Army were also allowed to bring their wives and families with them to frontier posts, and enlisted men were allowed to marry their laundresses and live on base with them. But this was the case for a very small number of personnel, and the women were all performing useful functions. If there were children involved, there might have been maybe a dozen at a post with a garrison of several hundred. No big deal. But more often than not, men enlisted in the Army or Navy to get away from their families, not to bring them along (even if it had been allowed). You’ve just set forth the case for why this is a perfectly plausible premise. In history, we have had armies with trains of civilians, including families and service providers; we have had fortresses with attached villages; we have had ships with family members on board; we have had outposts with attached towns, in which the outpost’s personnel could have their families practically next door; we have foreign embassies in which staffers have their families on post; we have mixed military-scientific outposts, like in the Antarctic. Star Trek has space stations in which the civilian population outnumbers the military staff. It’s all there. On the Enterprise, you’re just putting it all together and making them mobile. And that’s the premise. You’re making the mistake to taking your personal experience and assigning it to the category of “human nature” instead of just what societal organization happens to be at the time, which is changing constantly. > [@terentii](#): > > To borrow a line from the \*\*\*TOS \*\*\*Writer’s Guide: > > “If you’re one of the people who say ‘The character acts that way because it’s science fiction,’ don’t call us, we’ll call you.”\ That’s a reference to individual character decisions. It’s not a strike against the premises of speculative fiction, which is actually how science fiction works—let’s take something that doesn’t exist and put people in it. In an above post, I listed a bunch of things that so far as we know are impossible, but science fiction works with it. This is merely a societal organization matter, which we know isn’t impossible, because we have examples of variations of it, many of them you listed yourself. ---
**Author:** ![bump](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/7c8e57/32.png) [@bump](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bump)\ **Post date:** [June 3, 2019, 1:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/your-favorite-version-of-the-uss-enterprise/834814/78 "2019-06-03T13:26:49Z")
> [@terentii](#): > > If the standard configuration of a starship is so ineffectual in battle, why have they been building them that way for more than a century? Kirk never had any problems fighting hostiles—except, of course, circuits would blow and the shields would go down after three or four phaser/disruptor hits. (I suspect all of Starfleet’s vessels were built by the lowest bidder.) Star Trek hasn’t ever been able to really decide whether they’re going to portray space combat as basically WWII-style fighter combat, a-la the Defiant vs. Borg, Enterprise non-saucer section, Birds of Prey, etc… or whether it’ll be more of a Napoleonic-style slug-fest with relatively slow moving ships, a-la Wrath of Khan, Yesterday’s Enterprise, Star Trek VI, etc… That’s the real problem here (as with much of Trek)- they never really codified any of that, and it was always open for directorial and writer interpretation for any given episode/movie/scene. ---
**Author:** ![DSYoungEsq](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/c6cbf5/32.png) [@DSYoungEsq](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DSYoungEsq)\ **Post date:** [June 3, 2019, 4:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/your-favorite-version-of-the-uss-enterprise/834814/79 "2019-06-03T16:52:08Z")
As a child, I grew up on a military base, out in the middle of nowhere in California’s Mojave desert. My dad was a civilian, yet we lived on the base, used base facilities, etc. When the base was established in 1943, there was no significant civilian town/city to act as a support to the base. The base itself was a “temporary” facility, so banks wouldn’t offer mortgages except on very unfriendly terms to the civilians who were hired by the Dept. of Defense to work at the base (it was a weapons design/test facility). So for the first roughly 25 years of its existence, civilians lived on the base in housing built by the Navy for them, using the base facilities (even, for the first decade or so, the post exchange and the comissary!). Civilians on the base were not subject to military authority. A member of the Navy _might_ be somehow involved in the table of organization for the civilian workforce (there was a relatively unique inter-relationship of military and civilian workforces that to this day remains the backbone of how things get done there), but you didn’t take “orders” from the Navy personnel. To me, this is an example of what the _Enterprise-D_ is. She’s just China Lake in a mobile, space-faring form. She’s got personnel from Starfleet on board, but she also has just plain civvies. And I’m okay with that, because the UFP isn’t engaged in a war, and the _Enterprise-D_ isn’t a warship. The fact that the _Enterprise-D_ in _Yesterday’s Enterprise_ doesn’t have families on board because it’s a **military** vessel simply emphasizes the point. That ship would be more analogous to a forward military base built in the Pacific during WWII, where you would hardly expect families to end up living with whomever got posted there. It’s a complete paradigm shift. What I think got lost during the show was what effect this has on use of the _Enterprise-D_. Whenever that ship is headed into what will clearly be a battle, it should leave all non-“military” personnel on the saucer, dump the saucer off out of harms way, and proceed to the battle with just the engine/weapons section. Yeah, there are potential problems with this, but it’s still doable, and was clearly what they were thinking when they put the whole thing together at the start of _The Next Generation_. But all of that takes precious screen time to accomplish, and I think they just kinda gave up on the concept right away for that reason, if no other. But to assert, as **terentii** does, that there is **no possible way that this could happen** is ludicrous. Maybe YOU wouldn’t do it, but that doesn’t mean it’s inconceivable. Clearly. ---
**Author:** ![Just\_Asking\_Questions](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/ba9def/32.png) [@Just\_Asking\_Questions](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Just_Asking_Questions)\ **Post date:** [June 3, 2019, 5:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/your-favorite-version-of-the-uss-enterprise/834814/80 "2019-06-03T17:08:00Z")
> [@DSYoungEsq](#): > > But to assert, as **terentii** does, that there is **no possible way that this could happen** is ludicrous. Maybe YOU wouldn’t do it, but that doesn’t mean it’s inconceivable. Clearly. And to add one point - if the Cold War suddenly got hot, and the Russkies decided to nuke China Lake, or Beale, Luke, Eglin, or Offut, would the decision to have families on bases be retroactively judged to have been wrong? Because one could say they were in danger the whole time they were living there. Heck, being anywhere in Omaha was probably dangerous in the same way. Early ICBMs weren’t all that accurate. Yet, somehow, families lived on base all these years. > [@terentii](#): > > Huh? 😕 If things were different, they wouldn’t be the same. Hostile action by someone like the Borg or Klingons or Romulans who take no prisoners isn’t the only reason the saucer section could separate and be a life boat. If Decker had sent his saucer away, and fought the planet killer with just the warp drive section, more would have lived. Because the PK doesn’t chase spaceships that aren’t a threat. Or if there was, say, a computer virus that had the risk of blowing the warp core. If the saucer section had separated, most of the people on the Yamato would be alive. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/your-favorite-version-of-the-uss-enterprise/834814.md?page=3) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/your-favorite-version-of-the-uss-enterprise/834814.md?page=5)