I've just re-watched Star Trek: Generations out of boredom and had serious WTF-moment when the Enterprise got shot down by that Bird of Prey.
I mean what was Riker thinking! Even though the Klingons had the shield frequency the Enterprise should have been abel to trash that little sucker of a 20 YEARS OLD Bird of Prey! In fact Riker should have been able to destroy the Klingons in one pass. In one properly executed overhead pass the Enterprise would have been able to clobber the Bird of Prey with six phaser emitters, saucer-section ventral(ventral was down, right?) emitter, engineering-section frontal-ventral emitter, the two Warpnacelle pylon emitters and the two aft-ventral emitters, and could have hosed it with torpedoes at the beginning and at the end of the passing.

Funny I've never thought of that before...

----------------
"And what _are_ we dealing with? Little green men!?"
"No. Little green blobs in bonded polycarbite-armor!"

LAST EDITED ON Nov-28-01 AT 03:12 PM (EST)

>should have been able to destroy the Klingons in one pass. In one
>properly executed overhead pass the Enterprise would have been able to
>clobber the Bird of Prey with six phaser emitters,
>saucer-section ventral(ventral was down, right?) emitter,
>engineering-section frontal-ventral emitter, the two Warpnacelle pylon
>emitters and the two aft-ventral emitters, and could have hosed it
>with torpedoes at the beginning and at the end of the passing.

Well, there is the fact that they stuffed a photorp into main engineering.
That'll put a crimp in anybody's style.
On a less facetious vein, that torp probably took out the fore-vent array and the fore torpedo tubes.

Polychrome

>LAST EDITED ON Nov-28-01 AT
>03:12 PM (EST)
>
>>should have been able to destroy the Klingons in one pass. In one
>>properly executed overhead pass the Enterprise would have been able to
>>clobber the Bird of Prey with six phaser emitters,
>>saucer-section ventral(ventral was down, right?) emitter,
>>engineering-section frontal-ventral emitter, the two Warpnacelle pylon
>>emitters and the two aft-ventral emitters, and could have hosed it
>>with torpedoes at the beginning and at the end of the passing.
>
>Well, there is the fact that they stuffed a photorp into main
>engineering.
>That'll put a crimp in anybody's style.
>On a less facetious vein, that torp probably took out the fore-vent
>array and the fore torpedo tubes.

Okay, those wapons may have been disabled or destroyed but there should still be enogh firepower left kick some klingon ass.

And in the movie the Enterprise just turned it's back to the klingons! Even with that hole in the engineering-section's hull that's a pretty dumb move, because this way Riker practically _INVITES_ the klingons to shoot up the Enterprise's engines!

I just saw a ST:TNG episode where the Enterprise hosed a Borg ship with everything it's got nad I just can't believe that that very same Enterprise is perfoming so poorly against an out-of-date Bird of Prey.

At least this gave them an excuse to build a new Enterprise.

----------------
"And what _are_ we dealing with? Little green men!?"
"No. Little green blobs in bonded polycarbite-armor!"

>At least this gave them an excuse to build a new Enterprise.

And for that, I will forgive them any plot, however contrived, that allowed them to get there.

--G.
-><-
Benjamin D. Hutchins, Co-Founder, Editor in Chief, Netadmin
Eyrie Productions, Unlimited http://www.eyrie-productions.com/

LAST EDITED ON Nov-28-01 AT 04:48 PM (EST)

>>At least this gave them an excuse to build a new Enterprise.
>
>And for that, I will forgive them any plot, however contrived, that
>allowed them to get there.
>

I would, except that a) Generations sucked basically from the get-go and b) they (that is, to say, the ST writers) are incapable of keeping their ship performance/crew competency/etc. straight when they write their stories. I hate "Plot-Convenient Playhouse" writing. It shows either a lack of communication or a lack of ability in the writers.

But I will admit that the Enterprise-D is an damned ugly ship.

Ebony the Black Dragon
aka Draco Draconis Ebenium
known to Paramount as Aaron F. Johnson,
Senior Editor, Living Room Games
http://www.lrgames.com

>I would, except that a) Generations sucked basically from the get-go

Of course. It was odd numbered.

Polychrome

>>I would, except that a) Generations sucked basically from the get-go
>
>Of course. It was odd numbered.

The problem with that scheme (odd bad, even good) is that Star Trek IV is a REALLY bad movie. It is marginally better than III, and V makes everything look like a masterpiece, but IV is still a bad bad movie.

-----------------------------------
Chris can't handle whales

>The problem with that scheme (odd bad, even good) is that Star Trek IV
>is a REALLY bad movie.

Uh...... OK.

--G.
-><-
Benjamin D. Hutchins, Co-Founder, Editor in Chief, Netadmin
Eyrie Productions, Unlimited http://www.eyrie-productions.com/

>>>I would, except that a) Generations sucked basically from the get-go
>>
>>Of course. It was odd numbered.
>
>The problem with that scheme (odd bad, even good) is that Star Trek IV
>is a REALLY bad movie. It is marginally better than III, and V
>makes everything look like a masterpiece, but IV is still a bad bad
>movie.

I happen to agree with you, but for some reason that is beyond me, alot of people seemed to like it.
Whatever.

Polychrome

>>>>I would, except that a) Generations sucked basically from the get-go
>>>
>>>Of course. It was odd numbered.
>>
>>The problem with that scheme (odd bad, even good) is that Star Trek IV
>>is a REALLY bad movie. It is marginally better than III, and V
>>makes everything look like a masterpiece, but IV is still a bad bad
>>movie.
>
>I happen to agree with you, but for some reason that is beyond me,
>alot of people seemed to like it.
>Whatever.

It is a bad movie. But it's watchably bad. Bad in a way that is, in spite of itself, fun. Like Super Atragon.

Blessed be.
Nathan Baxter

>>>I would, except that a) Generations sucked basically from the get-go
>>
>>Of course. It was odd numbered.
>
>The problem with that scheme (odd bad, even good) is that Star Trek IV
>is a REALLY bad movie.

Sure, if by "REALLY bad movie" you mean "actually quite a good movie."

The Voyage Home remains the single most successful effort at Trek comedy, and is therefore quite entertaining, and has real tension, solid characterizations (and even some development, on Spock's part), and performances that I quite enjoy. It's not a bad movie because it lacks explosions or other vastly overdone idiocy.

Let's review:

Star Trek: The Motion Picture: Yawn.
Star Trek: The Motion Picture: The Director's Edition: Good, and not just in an "oh my God, it no longer sucks" way. It's real, intelligent, honest science fiction, moreso than Trek ever has been before or since.
Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan: A film that can be described as truly poetic, in every way, and it has the greatest Trek villain of all time.
Star Trek III: The Search for Spock: ...What? Okay, let's accept its existence as a necessary bridge between the ending of The Wrath of Khan and The Voyage Home.
Star Trek IV: The Voyage Home: It's funny, intelligent (though I still have to wonder how long humpbacks are going to stay "regenerated" without more than one mated pair), and is a great Spock movie on top of that.
Star Trek V: The Final Frontier: Utterly forgettable, and verging on character assassination in places. Trek and this kind of "theology" don't mix. (Nor most kinds, for that matter.)
Star Trek VI: The Undiscovered Country: Ahh, yes. A mystery movie, an adventure film, and one of the best handlings of Klingon culture in Trek canon. And a great deal of continuity, too.
Star Trek: Generations: Well, watching Brent Spiner play an emotional Data was quite entertaining ("This is revolting!" "More?" "Please!"), but, other than that, this movie was only useful for getting the Enterprise D out of the way to make way for the much better-looking (especially on the big screen) Sovereign-class Enterprise E.
Star Trek: First Contact: Just plain kicked ass. It had much of the humor of The Voyage Home, and featured a riveting space combat and a downright creepy portrayal of the Borg, their best portrayal since "The Best of Both Worlds." (Let's just forget their emasculation on Voyager... well, let's just forget all of Voyager, while we're at it.)
Star Trek: Insurrection: It tried. It really did. And it had its moments, and excepting Robert Wise's recut of The Motion Picture, it's the best of the odd-numbered films; that is to say, the characterizations are on-target, and it even had a sense of humor, just that the plot wasn't there.
Star Trek: Nemesis: Oh, wait, that one's not out until next year. Still, it sounds better than Insurrection.

-- Sean --

http://www.thebrokenlink.org The Broken Link 4.0 is live!
"All tribal myths are true, for a given value of 'true'." -- Terry Pratchett
Follow my random thoughts
Follow my creative process

>Star Trek: Insurrection: It tried. It really did. And it had
>its moments, and excepting Robert Wise's recut of The Motion
>Picture, it's the best of the odd-numbered films; that is to say,
>the characterizations are on-target, and it even had a sense of humor,
>just that the plot wasn't there.

I like the Director's Edition of TMP too, but the new sound mix always throws me off - I've seen the VHS version so many times that its sound mix is pretty much ingrained in my neural pathways. I'm not used to there being background SFX in the Klingon scenes, and I keep expecting to hear the old "BORTBORTBORTBORT" alert siren and the computer voice ("Incoming fire. Ahead. Zero. Mark. Zero.").

As for Insurrection, it paid for itself in my video collection with just the line, "I have an odd craving for the blood of a live kolaar beast." :)

--G.
-><-
Benjamin D. Hutchins, Co-Founder, Editor in Chief, Netadmin
Eyrie Productions, Unlimited http://www.eyrie-productions.com/

>>Star Trek: Insurrection: It tried. It really did. And it had
>>its moments, and excepting Robert Wise's recut of The Motion
>>Picture, it's the best of the odd-numbered films; that is to say,
>>the characterizations are on-target, and it even had a sense of humor,
>>just that the plot wasn't there.
>
>I like the Director's Edition of TMP too, but the new
>sound mix always throws me off - I've seen the VHS version so many
>times that its sound mix is pretty much ingrained in my neural
>pathways.

I suppose that's an advantage I had; I never enjoyed the original cut of TMP, so the only times I watched it (after my first cognizant viewing of the film in my early teens) were as background on cable. I know enough of the film to know why I don't like it (and to go on about the pacing problems and things of that nature), but I'm not so familiar with it that I experienced any kind of dissonance on watching the Director's Edition; I was able to walk into it (so to speak) fairly close to tabula rasa.

>As for Insurrection, it paid for itself in my video collection
>with just the line, "I have an odd craving for the blood of a live
>kolaar beast." :)

As I've said, Insurrection has its moments, mostly by way of clever dialogue and character bits, but as a story it doesn't fulfill its promise. A shame, really; with those kinds of themes, it promised to be a much more fascinating film than it ended up as. (The Final Frontier also had a tremendous amount of promise, and failed even more spectacularly; at least Insurrection was still entertaining.)

Another tidbit: there's rumors running around of Paramount doing special editions of the other Trek films, and while I see them doing new sound mixes and maybe cleaning the film up, I don't see them recutting the other films. Shame, really; some of them could probably be made significantly better with some tweaking. Ah, well; one can hope.

-- Sean --

http://www.thebrokenlink.org The Broken Link 4.0 is live!
"All tribal myths are true, for a given value of 'true'." -- Terry Pratchett
Follow my random thoughts
Follow my creative process

LAST EDITED ON Nov-30-01 AT 00:31 AM (EST)

>Another tidbit: there's rumors running around of Paramount doing
>special editions of the other Trek films, and while I see them
>doing new sound mixes and maybe cleaning the film up, I don't see them
>recutting the other films. Shame, really; some of them could probably
>be made significantly better with some tweaking.

Heh. From an online chat with Bill Shatner hosted at startrek.com earlier this month:

Q: Will there be a director's cut for Star Trek V, like what's happening with the first film?
Mothman

WS: No, I don't think any of the other movies will be touched. But I'm going from house to house trying to get people to buy the DVD of Star Trek V and giving out individual explanations so please call.

I like Shatner a lot since he rediscovered his sense of humor. He has quite a few funny, sardonic moments in that chat. (Transcript, if you care, at http://www.startrek.com/news/transcripts/shatner_110801.html - I'm especially amused by his comments about Galaxy Quest. Very tongue-in-cheek. :)

--G.
-><-
Benjamin D. Hutchins, Co-Founder, Editor in Chief, Netadmin
Eyrie Productions, Unlimited http://www.eyrie-productions.com/

>I like Shatner a lot since he rediscovered his sense of humor.

Have you seen the film Free Enterprise? It's one of my favorite non-mainstream films of recent years, mostly because it's a movie about scifi fanboys that doesn't portray us as dysfunctional losers living in our parents' basements, and it includes William Shatner playing himself (and making fun of himself.) I recommend it strongly to all my geekish friends ^_^.

-- Sean --

http://www.thebrokenlink.org The Broken Link 4.0 is live!
"All tribal myths are true, for a given value of 'true'." -- Terry Pratchett
Follow my random thoughts
Follow my creative process

>Star Trek: Nemesis: Oh, wait, that one's not out until
>next year. Still, it sounds better than Insurrection.

IMHO, if they stick to the script I read a few months ago, it'll stand to be the best TNG movie, and rank up pretty high with the others.

The effects will be much better this go-round too, but then, I'm biased. :)

------------------------
"Mike Wazowski!"
------------------------
Chad Collier
Digital Bitch
J. Random VFX Company

>IMHO, if they stick to the script I read a few months ago, it'll stand
>to be the best TNG movie, and rank up pretty high with the
>others.

See, I've only read synopses and reviews, so I have a hard time evaluating it. It sounds like a solid premise, though, and I'd love to see the script myself so that I could get a better grip on the characterization and plot.

>The effects will be much better this go-round too, but then, I'm
>biased. :)

Yes, I'm sure you are :).

Say, did you have to sign one of those pesky non-disclosure agreements? I'm sure you'll answer in the affirmative, but no harm in asking.

Oh, and while I'm thinking of it, did your company have anything to do with The Fellowship of the Ring? From what I've heard, the SFX in the film make ILM look like college boys making fan films.

-- Sean --

http://www.thebrokenlink.org The Broken Link 4.0 is live!
"All tribal myths are true, for a given value of 'true'." -- Terry Pratchett
Follow my random thoughts
Follow my creative process

>>IMHO, if they stick to the script I read a few months ago, it'll stand
>>to be the best TNG movie, and rank up pretty high with the
>>others.
>
>See, I've only read synopses and reviews, so I have a hard time
>evaluating it. It sounds like a solid premise, though, and I'd love
>to see the script myself so that I could get a better grip on the
>characterization and plot.

From what I know, much of the script was done outside of the group that have done past movies, and the writer is personally a fan of WoK, and it reads about as good as II was. The translation to film can twist that though, just in the nature of the process, so I'm holding off on saying 'It will kick almighty ass!' until I see the final product. :)

There are some aspects of it that I might even call Eyrie-esque, but again, the eventual translation to film is the key.

>Say, did you have to sign one of those pesky non-disclosure
>agreements? I'm sure you'll answer in the affirmative, but no harm in
>asking.

Oh yeah. Hollywood likes the NDA quite a bit. I try to just keep my mouth shut most of the time, but it's been a little tough reading some of the starship-design threads, seeing as I can walk to the next building and see pre-production sketches and the like. I'll be curious to read reaction here to some of the technical bits that will be in it.

>Oh, and while I'm thinking of it, did your company have anything to do
>with The Fellowship of the Ring? From what I've heard, the SFX
>in the film make ILM look like college boys making fan films.

Yes, although it was a small part of it--think water horses if you've read the books (which I haven't yet, figured I'd see it first before getting into them). WETA over in New Zealand did most of the heavy lifting. I think our stuff looks great and I have no real context yet, and friends who do are pretty much speechless. And everything else I've seen in trailers is equally impressive, so we'll see how it comes together.

------------------------
"Mike Wazowski!"
------------------------
Chad Collier--...and I don't know about college boys, but at least there's someone else on the block doing work of that kind of scope. Always a good thing.
Digital Bitch
J. Random VFX Company

>From what I know, much of the script was done outside of the group
>that have done past movies, and the writer is personally a fan of
>WoK, and it reads about as good as II was. The
>translation to film can twist that though, just in the nature of the
>process, so I'm holding off on saying 'It will kick almighty ass!'
>until I see the final product. :)

Indeed. John Logan is a vocal fan of Trek, and Stuart Baird is certainly a capable director, but... one never knows.

At least Brannon Braga doesn't seem to be involved, thank the Goddess.

>Oh yeah. Hollywood likes the NDA quite a bit. I try to just keep my
>mouth shut most of the time, but it's been a little tough reading some
>of the starship-design threads, seeing as I can walk to the next
>building and see pre-production sketches and the like. I'll be
>curious to read reaction here to some of the technical bits that will
>be in it.

Probably no less curious than we will be to see these technical bits. Personally, I'm waiting to see what Shinzon's Warbird looks like -- the synopses I've read make it sound like something a whole lot more hardcore than the D'Deridex class, but we'll see.

>Yes, although it was a small part of it--think water horses if you've
>read the books (which I haven't yet, figured I'd see it first before
>getting into them).

Yes, I know the scene. And I'm glad it sounds good; everything I've heard about the film sounds breathtaking, though I'm wondering how many people are going to see the film, then rush out to buy the books and discover that J.R.R. Tolkien didn't write much like, say, Stephen King or J.K. Rowling.

-- Sean --

http://www.thebrokenlink.org The Broken Link 4.0 is live!
"All tribal myths are true, for a given value of 'true'." -- Terry Pratchett
Follow my random thoughts
Follow my creative process

>Personally, I'm waiting to see what Shinzon's Warbird looks like --
>the synopses I've read make it sound like something a whole lot more
>hardcore than the D'Deridex class

Yes.

:)

------------------------
"Mike Wazowski!"
------------------------
Chad Collier--"Big man, Pig-Man, ha ha, charade you are..."
Digital Bitch
J. Random VFX Company

>>Personally, I'm waiting to see what Shinzon's Warbird looks like --
>>the synopses I've read make it sound like something a whole lot more
>>hardcore than the D'Deridex class
>
>Yes.

tease!

that was evil...as if I'm not having enough trouble biding my time...

>>Personally, I'm waiting to see what Shinzon's Warbird looks like --
>>the synopses I've read make it sound like something a whole lot more
>>hardcore than the D'Deridex class
>
>Yes.

... not, of course, that it could be much less...

--G.
ugh
-><-
Benjamin D. Hutchins, Co-Founder, Editor in Chief, Netadmin
Eyrie Productions, Unlimited http://www.eyrie-productions.com/

>Probably no less curious than we will be to see these technical bits.
>Personally, I'm waiting to see what Shinzon's Warbird looks like --
>the synopses I've read make it sound like something a whole lot more
>hardcore than the D'Deridex class, but we'll see.

Imporant note to starship designers, even those designing ships for alien races whose culture appears to be Roman-inspired:

SHIPS DO NOT HAVE ATRIUMS. Thank you.

(What the HELL were they thinking? "Hey, let's have a distributed superstructure in the hopes that they'll shoot THROUGH THE MIDDLE?" I got four words for them in that one: "Mr. Data, target engines." Picard and/or Riker used to say that in fights. and in a D'Dereidex, hell, they got twice as much possible room to smite. Besides, cloaking that thing must be a bitch and three-quarters, way more surface area to make nonvisible.)

--
Geoff Depew - Mephron
Haberdasher to Androids, Malakite of Lightning and Angel of Tech Support Professionals
(They won't give me LARTs, they say that's restricted to Michael.)

LAST EDITED ON Nov-30-01 AT 07:11 PM (EST)

>SHIPS DO NOT HAVE ATRIUMS. Thank you.
>
>(What the HELL were they thinking? "Hey, let's have a distributed
>superstructure in the hopes that they'll shoot THROUGH THE MIDDLE?" I
>got four words for them in that one: "Mr. Data, target engines."
>Picard and/or Riker used to say that in fights. and in a
>D'Dereidex, hell, they got twice as much possible room to
>smite. Besides, cloaking that thing must be a bitch and
>three-quarters, way more surface area to make nonvisible.)

There you go being rational again! Of course all ships carry lots of non-essential space that is difficult to defend! What do you think future war is like? You don't think they'll be professional do you? Of course all the backup systems will be so strong, and so indestructible and easy to repair that you can add lots of stupid stuff (say like a Holodec) and still be a mean-lean-fighting machine.

And targeting engines? Well, that's just not sporting!

t.
Sherman: War is hell
Starfleet: War is hell if you don't have a jacuzzi filled with Betazoids!

Trigger Argee
trigger_argee@hotmail.com
Manon, Orado, etc.
Denton, never leave home without it.

>There you go being rational again! Of course all ships carry lots of
>non-essential space that is difficult to defend! What do you think
>future war is like? You don't think they'll be professional do you?
>Of course all the backup systems will be so strong, and so
>indestructible and easy to repair that you can add lots of stupid
>stuff (say like a Holodec) and still be a mean-lean-fighting machine.

Just for the sake of fairness, Federation starships (with the exception of the Defiant class) are not, primarily, warships.

--G.
-><-
Benjamin D. Hutchins, Co-Founder, Editor in Chief, Netadmin
Eyrie Productions, Unlimited http://www.eyrie-productions.com/

>Just for the sake of fairness, Federation starships (with the
>exception of the Defiant class) are not, primarily, warships.

I recognize that Starfleet doesn't believe it's purpose is to fight wars. However, you build a craft that has shields, miliary grade weapons, teach all your captains how to fight, have a security staff, and in general treat your crews with military discipline, you have a military force.

That Starfleet delibritely handicaps itself in this regard is amazingly frustrating to me. As if you can't have warships that do both science, exploraration and conquest. Please.

Now if you were to say that warships aren't the best tool for such ventures, I couldn't agree more. We see that a little in the movies - where we have space stations, or pure science missions. However, the US miltiary, the british navy, etc. have demonstrated that warships can carry out basic exporation and some science experiements in the course of their cruise.

Thus my rant above - if Starfleet believes that putting delibrite weaknesses in their weapons creates some sort of benefit to peace, then they're smoking something. All that happens is that your personnel are more likely to be killed than your enemies.

sorry, with the exception of the ST:TOS more realistic than it's descendents.

t.

Trigger Argee
trigger_argee@hotmail.com
Manon, Orado, etc.
Denton, never leave home without it.

LAST EDITED ON Dec-01-01 AT 03:53 PM (EST)

>I recognize that Starfleet doesn't believe it's purpose is to fight
>wars. However, you build a craft that has shields, miliary grade
>weapons, teach all your captains how to fight, have a security staff,
>and in general treat your crews with military discipline, you have a
>military force.

Starfleet is a military organization. In terms of structure, it's military. In terms of firepower, it's military. In terms of focus, it isn't, but only barely. The fact that most of the ships are designed to hold civilians doesn't convince me that the Federation is unaware of what Starfleet really is, and always has been. (For that matter, any organization where a good portion of the ship carries sidearms as a matter of course...) The reason why nobody comes out and says that Starfleet is the military wing of the UFP is because the UFP is supposed to be a non-military organization - its whole purpose is a union of planets who have security without pointing guns at one another. (Also, I'd be willing to bet that's a selling point for the Federation. Romulans have a military, the UFP has Starfleet.)

Considering how utopian Trek is supposed to be, though, it's sort of unnecessary to read too much into Starfleet's purpose and design. Starfleet consists almost completely of The Good Guys, and part of being The Good Guys, I suppose, is having an exploration ship that can take on lethal opposing craft and come out on top with regularity.
-Eliot "Not getting into the Galaxy-class bashing for my own reasons" Lefebvre
-=()=-
We're only given a little time in our lives to waste. Make the most of it.
Electronic Transcendence Productions
Producer of, um, stuff for an unspecified time-period.
Thoughts of the moment, and such

>I recognize that Starfleet doesn't believe it's purpose is to fight
>wars. However, you build a craft that has shields, miliary grade
>weapons, teach all your captains how to fight, have a security staff,
>and in general treat your crews with military discipline, you have a
>military force.

Starfleet is a military force in all ways except for focus and name. Its officers all have some degree of scientific knowledge; that's demonstrated time and again. (The qualifications just to get into the Academy, as demonstrated in the episode where Wesley took his exam, are downright brutal by modern standards, and probably still high by the 24th century.) The captains and other senior officers of its vessels are typically trained in things like diplomacy and xenomedicine to make forming relationships with new political entities easier, and more benificial.

The UFP is well aware that, in times of war, Starfleet is its military force. And even dedicated science/exploration vessels (such as the Nova-class, which is based on the Defiant project's pathfinder ship -- just pick up the DS9 tech reference and you'll see the resemblance) carry weapons and shields for the purposes of self-defense; after all, one never knows when one might meet a hostile force.

And, I might add, it would appear that Starfleet does field fighters, of a sort: the Peregrine-class appears to be a heavily-armed (for its size) single-pilot craft. (Of course, it's still somewhere around 60' long, give or take, so it's probably got a transporter, head, and sleeping cabin, just like most TNG-era designs.)

-- Sean --

http://www.thebrokenlink.org The Broken Link 4.0 is live!
"All tribal myths are true, for a given value of 'true'." -- Terry Pratchett
Follow my random thoughts
Follow my creative process

>And, I might add, it would appear that Starfleet does field fighters,
>of a sort: the Peregrine-class appears to be a heavily-armed
>(for its size) single-pilot craft. (Of course, it's still somewhere
>around 60' long, give or take, so it's probably got a transporter,
>head, and sleeping cabin, just like most TNG-era designs.)

Heh. Funny, I should have remembered the Peregrine myself; I have fond memories of "those cool Maquis ships they're fielding." The main reason, I think, that Starfleet fields no fighters isn't because of focus, it's because of the opposition. After all, it's rare that something as big as the Enterprise has been so huge that it's gotten outmaneuvered, so why not make a bigger ship that's better defended?
-Eliot "The Steamrunner has my vote" Lefebvre
-=()=-
We're only given a little time in our lives to waste. Make the most of it.
Electronic Transcendence Productions
Producer of, um, stuff for an unspecified time-period.
Thoughts of the moment, and such

>And, I might add, it would appear that Starfleet does field fighters,
>of a sort: the Peregrine-class appears to be a heavily-armed
>(for its size) single-pilot craft. (Of course, it's still somewhere
>around 60' long, give or take, so it's probably got a transporter,
>head, and sleeping cabin, just like most TNG-era designs.)

Hey! I said that last night on IRC, except I was more sarcastic. :)

--G.
-><-
Benjamin D. Hutchins, Co-Founder, Editor in Chief, Netadmin
Eyrie Productions, Unlimited http://www.eyrie-productions.com/

>>And, I might add, it would appear that Starfleet does field fighters,
>>of a sort: the Peregrine-class appears to be a heavily-armed
>>(for its size) single-pilot craft. (Of course, it's still somewhere
>>around 60' long, give or take, so it's probably got a transporter,
>>head, and sleeping cabin, just like most TNG-era designs.)
>
>Hey! I said that last night on IRC, except I was more sarcastic. :)

And talking about a different class of ship... but it does seem to be a truism of TNG-era Starfleet design. Unless it's a box strapped to an impulse engine (like the... Type 15 shuttlecraft, I believe), it's got to have a substantial number of amenities or, presumably, Starfleet officers and crew would whine about its inadequacies, or something. Well, okay, the Delta Flyer doesn't seem to have much in the way of amenities, but it's an ugly, shapeless blob that I'd just as soon forget about. The only thing I ever liked about that ship was its control yoke, though it hardly seems appropriate.

-- Sean --

http://www.thebrokenlink.org The Broken Link 4.0 is live!
"All tribal myths are true, for a given value of 'true'." -- Terry Pratchett
Follow my random thoughts
Follow my creative process

>>Just for the sake of fairness, Federation starships (with the
>>exception of the Defiant class) are not, primarily, warships.
>
>I recognize that Starfleet doesn't believe it's purpose is to fight
>wars. However, you build a craft that has shields, miliary grade
>weapons, teach all your captains how to fight, have a security staff,
>and in general treat your crews with military discipline, you have a
>military force.
>
>That Starfleet delibritely handicaps itself in this regard is
>amazingly frustrating to me. As if you can't have warships that do
>both science, exploraration and conquest. Please.

They do, yes. Even back in TOS, the Enterprise wasn't as powerful a weapon as she could have been, because of all the space and power spent on laboratories and sensors, but she was still a capable fighting platform. My point is that Federation starships are not built solely to fight, like, say, Klingon ships. They're intended to be multirole. Of course one of those roles is combat - no one ever tried to deny that except Roddenberry in his dotage, when he got very, very weird. Starfleet aren't deliberately handicapping themselves - they're trying to expand their capabilities and be more than just a war fleet, and in that regard, I think they succeed quite well.

(Part of this is also tied into the Federation's own purpose, which is not conquest, except perhaps of a cultural nature, but communication and understanding. They'll fight if attacked, and since the galaxy is a dangerous place and battle scenes are necessary to sustain ratings, they're attacked quite often - but their mission is not to start fights, so you don't see them developing first-strike weapons, for instance.)

In later years, when the Federation finds itself involved in a number of wars through no fault of its own, Starfleet does shift its focus more toward the defense end of the spectrum, leading to things like the Defiant class. (Although they were still trying to hang onto that 'peaceful exploration' angle at some level, or they wouldn't have kept building hopelessly weenie ships like the Intrepid class... )

In the UF universe, of course, things are quite different nowadays, and getting more different all the time...

--G.
-><-
Benjamin D. Hutchins, Co-Founder, Editor in Chief, Netadmin
Eyrie Productions, Unlimited http://www.eyrie-productions.com/

>They do, yes. Even back in TOS, the Enterprise wasn't
>as powerful a weapon as she could have been, because of all the space
>and power spent on laboratories and sensors, but she was still a
>capable fighting platform. My point is that Federation starships are
>not built solely to fight, like, say, Klingon ships. They're
>intended to be multirole. Of course one of those roles is combat - no
>one ever tried to deny that except Roddenberry in his dotage, when he
>got very, very weird. Starfleet aren't deliberately handicapping
>themselves - they're trying to expand their capabilities and be
>more than just a war fleet, and in that regard, I think they succeed
>quite well.
>
>(Part of this is also tied into the Federation's own purpose, which is
>not conquest, except perhaps of a cultural nature, but communication
>and understanding. They'll fight if attacked, and since the galaxy is
>a dangerous place and battle scenes are necessary to sustain ratings,
>they're attacked quite often - but their mission is not to start
>fights, so you don't see them developing first-strike weapons, for
>instance.)
>
>In later years, when the Federation finds itself involved in a number
>of wars through no fault of its own, Starfleet does shift its
>focus more toward the defense end of the spectrum, leading to things
>like the Defiant class. (Although they were still trying to
>hang onto that 'peaceful exploration' angle at some level, or they
>wouldn't have kept building hopelessly weenie ships like the
>Intrepid class... )
>
>In the UF universe, of course, things are quite different
>nowadays, and getting more different all the time...

In the UF universe, how much of a military focus do ships like the Galaxy-class have? Do they have the extras of the orignal class in Star Trek, or are they pure military vessels?

Matrix Dragon
"Do not meddle in the affairs of wizards, for they are subtle and quick to anger." --J.R.R. Tolkien
"Do not meddle in the affairs of dragons, for obvious reasons." -Matrix Dragon

>In the UF universe, how much of a military focus do ships like
>the Galaxy-class have? Do they have the extras of the orignal
>class in Star Trek, or are they pure military vessels?

Well, they're classified as battleships...

--G.
-><-
Benjamin D. Hutchins, Co-Founder, Editor in Chief, Netadmin
Eyrie Productions, Unlimited http://www.eyrie-productions.com/

>>Oh, and while I'm thinking of it, did your company have anything to do
>>with The Fellowship of the Ring? From what I've heard, the SFX
>>in the film make ILM look like college boys making fan films.
>
>Yes, although it was a small part of it--think water horses if you've
>read the books (which I haven't yet, figured I'd see it first before
>getting into them). WETA over in New Zealand did most of the heavy
>lifting. I think our stuff looks great and I have no real context
>yet, and friends who do are pretty much speechless. And everything
>else I've seen in trailers is equally impressive, so we'll see how it
>comes together.

I've just seen the movie and I _was_ speechless when I saw the water horses!

----------------
"And what _are_ we dealing with? Little green men!?"
"No. Little green blobs in bonded polycarbite-armor!"

LAST EDITED ON Dec-19-01 AT 06:36 PM (EST)

>I've just seen the movie and I _was_ speechless when I saw the water
>horses!

Yay us. :)

Those shots are the only ones I've seen beyond the trailers, and I won't get a chance to see the movie until I'm in Florida after Friday, so I'm dodging any kind of review or anything until I can get my butt in a seat. We're finishing work on The Time Machine and I'm going to be working right up until about 6 hours before my flight...

------------------------
Chad Collier--...where I will then blissfully not think about any of it for two and a half weeks...
Digital Bitch
J. Random VFX Company

>Sure, if by "REALLY bad movie" you mean "actually quite a good
>movie."
>
>The Voyage Home remains the single most successful effort at
>Trek comedy, and is therefore quite entertaining, and has real
>tension, solid characterizations (and even some development, on
>Spock's part), and performances that I quite enjoy. It's not a bad
>movie because it lacks explosions or other vastly overdone idiocy.

I actually don't mind that it lacks big explosions or other vastly overdone idiocy. I really dislike how it takes the wonderful Trek world (which I would view the movie to escape to) and brings it to the 80s.

-----------------------------------
Chris can't handle chemicals

>>At least this gave them an excuse to build a new Enterprise.
>
>And for that, I will forgive them any plot, however contrived, that
>allowed them to get there.

Despite getting rid of the Enterprise-D and getting a Sovereign-class ship, my mind still refuses to accept that Will Riker, who has served under Picard for years, would have his ass handed to him by a ragtag group of Klingons in a rusty old starship. He had a better ship, better training, better mind and more experience. He should have had his butt whipped by someone with a bit more class.

Matrix Dragon
"Do not meddle in the affairs of wizards, for they are subtle and quick to anger." --J.R.R. Tolkien
"Do not meddle in the affairs of dragons, for obvious reasons." -Matrix Dragon

I can't quote it directly, since I no longer have the book, but the Enterprise D technical manual, which I bought just after seeing Generations, and was published around season 5 or so, specifically states that no Federation starship uses static shield frequencies anymore, meaning what the Bird of Prey did should have been technically impossible at the time, on top of everything else. Still, it did get us the Sovereign class Enterprise, so...

TRB

(who thought the triple-nacelled, giant phaser cannon equipped Enterprise-D from the final episode had some potential, at least)

"You are... what you do... when it counts." -The Masao

>I can't quote it directly, since I no longer have the book, but the
>Enterprise D technical manual, which I bought just after seeing
>Generations, and was published around season 5 or so, specifically
>states that no Federation starship uses static shield frequencies
>anymore, meaning what the Bird of Prey did should have been
>technically impossible at the time, on top of everything else. Still,
>it did get us the Sovereign class Enterprise, so...
>
>TRB
>
>(who thought the triple-nacelled, giant phaser cannon equipped
>Enterprise-D from the final episode had some potential, at least)
>
>"You are... what you do... when it counts." -The Masao

This is all so very true... I wonder what UF-Gryph would put in that spinal mount. Only think we can rule out is a reflex cannon, because it isn't a proper shape or size to set up the reflex harmonic...
___________________

Jer told Vaughn about me. I am once again a victim of Murphy's law...

>This is all so very true... I wonder what UF-Gryph would put in that
>spinal mount. Only think we can rule out is a reflex cannon, because
>it isn't a proper shape or size to set up the reflex harmonic...

I would not be particularly inclined to spend money, time and effort embellishing a Galaxy-class spaceframe. As my grandfather says, you can't polish a turd.

--G.
-><-
Benjamin D. Hutchins, Co-Founder, Editor in Chief, Netadmin
Eyrie Productions, Unlimited http://www.eyrie-productions.com/

>I would not be particularly inclined to spend money, time and effort
>embellishing a Galaxy-class spaceframe. As my grandfather
>says, you can't polish a turd.

The Galaxy frame is an ugly duckling that failed to grow into a graceful swan. It remained an ugly duck for the rest of it's days.

Berk Watkins
Student of Quantum Bogodynamics...

>>This is all so very true... I wonder what UF-Gryph would put in that
>>spinal mount. Only think we can rule out is a reflex cannon, because
>>it isn't a proper shape or size to set up the reflex harmonic...
>
>I would not be particularly inclined to spend money, time and effort
>embellishing a Galaxy-class spaceframe. As my grandfather
>says, you can't polish a turd.
>

No, no... I wasn't reffering to the Galaxy class... The upgraded Soverign you see Future Riker commanding in 'All Good things'. Came swooping down into frame and saved Bev's hosptial ship from I forget who... Basic Soverign design except for an extra engine, plus a gosh arful spinal mount phaser at the point of the upper hull. NCC-1701-E, not D, maybe even F or G.

___________________

Jer told Vaughn about me. I am once again a victim of Murphy's law...

>No, no... I wasn't reffering to the Galaxy class... The upgraded
>Soverign you see Future Riker commanding in 'All Good things'.

Uh... you're either from a parallel universe or on crack. The Sovereign class hadn't even been thought of, let alone designed, when the TNG TV series wrapped. It was developed for the second TNG movie, First Contact, several years later.

The alternate-future ship is a modified NCC-1701-D. I've got a toy around here somewhere that transforms from the regular version to that one (somebody bought it for me).

Mind you, if you are from a parallel universe, I wish you'd fix me up with a tape of your universe's version of All Good Things... - it sounds much better than the one I saw. :)

--G.
-><-
Benjamin D. Hutchins, Co-Founder, Editor in Chief, Netadmin
Eyrie Productions, Unlimited http://www.eyrie-productions.com/

>>No, no... I wasn't reffering to the Galaxy class... The upgraded
>>Soverign you see Future Riker commanding in 'All Good things'.
>
>Uh... you're either from a parallel universe or on crack. The
>Sovereign class hadn't even been thought of, let alone
>designed, when the TNG TV series wrapped. It was developed for
>the second TNG movie, First Contact, several years
>later.
>
>The alternate-future ship is a modified NCC-1701-D. I've got a toy
>around here somewhere that transforms from the regular version to that
>one (somebody bought it for me).

And since Gryphon beat me to it, here's some pics I found for what I was going to post...

http://www.stinsv.com/TNg/640ship/agtent1.jpgx
http://www.stinsv.com/TNg/640ship/entdagt2.jpgx

(remove the x at the end after getting the 404)

I'd hurt something if they broke up a Sovereign's lines like that. As far as the Galaxy goes, I'll paraphrase Caddyshack, "Do you get a free bowl of soup with that refit? Oh, looks good on you, though." :)

Interestingly, for Generations, they actually made the 1701-D a little wider than the tv model (if you can believe that) so it'd look a little more interesting on the wider screen in the movie. It was probably one of the reasons they crashed it, so as to facilitate the design of a new ship that would be better suited to CinemaScope, hence the 1701-E being long and sleek like it is. Your fun fact for the day...errr, night.

------------------------
"Mike Wazowski!"
------------------------
Chad Collier
Digital Bitch
J. Random VFX Company

>>The alternate-future ship is a modified NCC-1701-D. I've got a toy
>>around here somewhere that transforms from the regular version to that
>>one (somebody bought it for me).
>
>And since Gryphon beat me to it, here's some pics I found for what I
>was going to post...
>
>http://www.stinsv.com/TNg/640ship/agtent1.jpgx
>http://www.stinsv.com/TNg/640ship/entdagt2.jpgx
>
>I'd hurt something if they broke up a Sovereign's lines like that. As
>far as the Galaxy goes, I'll paraphrase Caddyshack, "Do you get
>a free bowl of soup with that refit? Oh, looks good on you, though."
>:)

Personally, I don't think a third engine fits in with Starfleet designs, even crappy ones. It makes the Galaxy look even worse, like it has a deformed growth in its back. If anyone does that to a Sovereign, they'll die painfully.

Matrix Dragon
"Do not meddle in the affairs of wizards, for they are subtle and quick to anger." --J.R.R. Tolkien
"Do not meddle in the affairs of dragons, for obvious reasons." -Matrix Dragon

>>>No, no... I wasn't reffering to the Galaxy class... The upgraded
>>>Soverign you see Future Riker commanding in 'All Good things'.
>>
>>Uh... you're either from a parallel universe or on crack. The
>>Sovereign class hadn't even been thought of, let alone
>>designed, when the TNG TV series wrapped. It was developed for
>>the second TNG movie, First Contact, several years
>>later.
>>
>>The alternate-future ship is a modified NCC-1701-D. I've got a toy
>>around here somewhere that transforms from the regular version to that
>>one (somebody bought it for me).
>
>And since Gryphon beat me to it, here's some pics I found for what I
>was going to post...
>
>http://www.stinsv.com/TNg/640ship/agtent1.jpgx
>http://www.stinsv.com/TNg/640ship/entdagt2.jpgx
>
>------------------------
>"Mike Wazowski!"
>------------------------
>Chad Collier
>Digital Bitch
>J. Random VFX Company

Hmm. Uglier than I remember it. My visual memory didn't recall the third nacelle being up on that deformed hump like that. Still, I recall seeing it mostly from the front, not the rear. And yes, that treatment to a Sovereign would be lynch mob worthy. But you can't do much actual -harm- to a Galaxy. P-)

TRB

"You are... what you do... when it counts." -The Masao

>But you can't do
>much actual -harm- to a Galaxy. P-)

Unless you're a 20 years old Bird of Prey. ^_^

----------------
"And what _are_ we dealing with? Little green men!?"
"No. Little green blobs in bonded polycarbite-armor!"

>>But you can't do
>>much actual -harm- to a Galaxy. P-)
>
>Unless you're a 20 years old Bird of Prey. ^_^
>

Err... You also need to be piloted by the main Antagonist or similar main charecter. (Recall that the Dumas sisters have quite a history prior to their appearance in the movie)

___________________

Jer told Vaughn about me. I am once again a victim of Murphy's law...

>>>But you can't do
>>>much actual -harm- to a Galaxy. P-)
>>
>>Unless you're a 20 years old Bird of Prey. ^_^
>>
>
>Err... You also need to be piloted by the main Antagonist or similar
>main charecter. (Recall that the Dumas sisters have quite a history
>prior to their appearance in the movie)

You also need the help of a Mad Scientist(tm)!

----------------
"And what _are_ we dealing with? Little green men!?"
"No. Little green blobs in bonded polycarbite-armor!"

>And since Gryphon beat me to it, here's some pics I found for what I
>was going to post...
>
>I'd hurt something if they broke up a Sovereign's lines like that. As
>far as the Galaxy goes, I'll paraphrase Caddyshack, "Do you get
>a free bowl of soup with that refit? Oh, looks good on you, though."
>:)
>

Ye Flippin' Gods... THAT is one truly ugly ship... it makes the venerable ol' Millenium Falcon seem sleek and polished by comparison...

-={(Astynax)}=-
"Darkness beyond Twilight"

>>And since Gryphon beat me to it, here's some pics I found for what I
>>was going to post...
>>
>>I'd hurt something if they broke up a Sovereign's lines like that. As
>>far as the Galaxy goes, I'll paraphrase Caddyshack, "Do you get
>>a free bowl of soup with that refit? Oh, looks good on you, though."
>>:)
>>
>
>Ye Flippin' Gods... THAT is one truly ugly ship... it makes the
>venerable ol' Millenium Falcon seem sleek and polished by
>comparison...
>
That thing's ugly even by my standards.

And usually I'd say, "Who cares as long as it works?"