Page 3 of 6 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast
Results 31 to 45 of 80

Thread: Warp speed and travel times

  1. #31
    Join Date
    Nov 2014
    Location
    S/E Queensland Australia
    Posts
    861
    No problem Owen, like I said in the OP I am not trying to start a flame war with this tread.

    There is another way to fix the travel times (apart from the one presented above) is to allow perfected Co-axial warp drives to be fitted to Federation ships (especially after Voyagers return, so by 2380 which gives Federation R&D a couple of years to implement the design). The "perfected" part integrates Tom Paris's innovative 'polaric modulator', and have the vessel capable of generating symmetric warp fields (to stabilize the drive) as required.

    http://en.memory-alpha.wikia.com/wik...ial_warp_drive

    A Type V co-axial warp drive is capable of traveling at 6ly/min (faster then even the Quantum Slip Stream drive which allows travel at the same speed as a Type IV Co-axial drive) or 27 odd hours to cross the Federation.
    Last edited by WaveMan; 06-01-2015 at 12:31 AM.

  2. #32
    Quote Originally Posted by WaveMan View Post
    looking at history, take the American frontier in the late 19th century. Before telegraph and the railway crossed the continent, America struggled to form a true "United" states Government.
    What is the epistemology of a true united government?
    Portfolio | Blog Currently Running: Call of Cthulhu, Star Trek GUMSHOE Currently Playing: DramaSystem, Swords & Wizardry

  3. #33
    Join Date
    Nov 2014
    Location
    S/E Queensland Australia
    Posts
    861
    one would assume it is that all the peoples of a given society are united under the one "flag" and are governed by a single entity. With the earlier American example most states early on in American history (before 1865) operated independently and governed themselves rather then, like it is today with all states being Governed by a centralized Government (being classified as a constitutional republic).

    From what I know of the Federation, member worlds do not have independent government, rather a representative (or representatives) on the Federation council, which in turn governs the entire Federation. I would consider individual member worlds equivalent to a "state", each with their own "local" government which is regulated by the central Federation "government". Am I wrong in this assessment?
    Last edited by WaveMan; 06-01-2015 at 12:30 AM.

  4. #34
    These are the links I use whenever I want to get an idea about travel distance and time.

    Warp Speed Calculations:
    http://www.anycalculator.com/warpcalculator.htm

    Star Trek Travel Calculator:
    http://www.aerth.org/Constellation/star_trek.asp

    Anyone else use these?

  5. #35
    Join Date
    Nov 2014
    Location
    S/E Queensland Australia
    Posts
    861
    I have the first link book marked and have used it in the past, the second one is new to me, I will have a look. Thanks for the links.

  6. #36
    Join Date
    Aug 1999
    Location
    Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
    Posts
    3,485
    Well, by the mid-19 the century, specifically 1865, it was established that the individual states were not independent nations and could not depart from the Union, regardless what their voters wanted. Even the Civil War, with the attempted secession of a large part of the country did not result in the collapse of the United States, so in fact your own example actually works against you.

    An example of a would-be Empire which did collapse even though it had modern communications and travel is from about a century later; that being the Third Reich (Realm) of Germany. This was a case of a nation with too rigid a control held by one mentally ill strongman outstripping its resources and trying to take on too many enemies at once.

    The United Federation of Planets, although as a Hollywood production reflects mostly US tradition, is consciously and explicitly based on the United Nations. Federation "culture" as such is merely a veneer over a culturally diverse and flexible melange of planetary powers. More than anything, it is an idea shared by the vast majority of its citizens. The Federation is also extremely resource-rich. Its leaders seem to enjoy popular support, aside from small groups of political dissenters like The New Essentialists. Some critics of Star Trek deride the Federation as an unrealistic Utopia, but nothing could be farther from the truth. It may on the face of it be unrealistic, but a Utopia it is not. There are disagreements and squabbles between factions. While antimatter power and replication technology do give the Federation an overall high standard of living, there are disparities between planets. Some have even sunk to levels of barbarism like Turkana IV with its turf wars and rape gangs. Individual planets appear to maintain some level of sovereignty. Some seem to maintain independent intelligence services, and planetary laws vary greatly. While the Federation overall is administered by an elected President and a Council, it would seem to be mostly concerned with the maintenance of interstellar harmony and order. A further clue that the planetary members retain considerable autonomy is that they send Ambassadors to the Federation. This would seem to indicate that the planets are on equal legal footing with the Federation. Another indication which refutes the "Utopia" idea is that bigotry is alive, although at levels far reduced from our times. Vulcans and Andorians harbour ancient grudges, Tellarites are merely tolerated, and some Humans still resent the Vulcans. There is widespread distrust of artificial life forms a genetically enhanced individuals. There are constant wars with neighbouring stellar nations, like the Romulans, the Klingons, the Dominion, et cetera et cetera et cetera ad infinitum ad nauseum. There are still addiction problems. Yet, with all these problems, there is still a sense of being a part of something larger than oneself, of belonging to a community, with all that it entails.

    I know I probably won't be able to convince you of my views, but the fact that we can disagree and still maintain a conversation is what community is all about, so I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree. Yes, I know I get wordy when I wax philosophical after midnight, but that's me...

  7. #37
    Join Date
    Nov 2014
    Location
    S/E Queensland Australia
    Posts
    861
    agreed Owen..LoL (I see how you are right in my American example, so I edited it so as to makes more sense)

    after midnight, but that's me...
    LoL it's the middle of the day for me.

    I agree member worlds would have autonomy at a local level, but it is when the stage is changed to "federal" level that individual worlds would not speak on behalf of the entire Federation. Also as far as I know all member worlds have to adhere to the Federation constitution, so even if, for example, a member worlds local ordinance allowed it's citizens to contact pre warp civilizations (violate the prime directive), under Federation law they would not be allowed to do so and still maintain membership.
    Last edited by WaveMan; 06-01-2015 at 12:20 AM.

  8. #38
    Quote Originally Posted by WaveMan View Post
    From what I know of the Federation, member worlds do not have independent government, rather a representative (or representatives) on the Federation council, which in turn governs the entire Federation. I would consider individual member worlds equivalent to a "state", each with their own "local" government which is regulated by the central Federation "government". Am I wrong in this assessment?
    We haven't seen anything about the Federation president setting internal policy for individual member worlds. Also, it's called a Federation. I don't think it would could as a unified political entity under your definition.
    Portfolio | Blog Currently Running: Call of Cthulhu, Star Trek GUMSHOE Currently Playing: DramaSystem, Swords & Wizardry

  9. #39
    Join Date
    Nov 2014
    Location
    S/E Queensland Australia
    Posts
    861
    post your thinking TTK, I am interested in your take on it.

    BTW I didn't say nor imply that the Federation council has jurisdiction over the internal politic's of individual member worlds, but as far as I know they do have set guide lines that member worlds have to achieve/maintain to retain membership (episodes mentioned that almost every member world had a "unified" world government, were warp capable etc) and once a world is accepted they have to adhere to the Federation constitution.

  10. #40
    1. The only time we see the Federation council getting together is to discuss admissions and foreign policy matters. The Federation president in 'Homefront' authorizes sweeping security powers for Starfleet, but in the context of an apparently active threat to the safety of the planet, and they have to invoke disaster-response language to do it.

    2. The existence of an entire species within the Trill population was unknown to the ex-head of Starfleet Medical. Pon farr was unknown to McCoy until Spock went through it, nor were they apparently in the position to look up koon-ut-kal-if-fee in the Enterprise's legal database.
    Portfolio | Blog Currently Running: Call of Cthulhu, Star Trek GUMSHOE Currently Playing: DramaSystem, Swords & Wizardry

  11. #41
    Join Date
    Nov 2014
    Location
    S/E Queensland Australia
    Posts
    861
    I was silly, I have the book Price Of Freedom and it clearly lays out the entire structure of the Federation and it's government.It is too extensive even to paraphrase the entire article but the first paragraphs on page 19 go like this

    The UFP, known universally simply as "the Federation"- is an institution formed in the year 2161 by five diverse species for the purposes of mutual defense, trade, diplomacy and scientific and cultural exchanges. Based on the principles of set forth in the Federation Constitution, it embodies a government dedicated to freedom, fairness, civil rights, mutual respect among it member species and the rule of law. Although it's own laws prevent it from interfering in local political situations or with the normal development of any society, when ever possible the Federation and it's member states stand as bastions for the protection of individual rights and responsibilities that are sadly deigned to many citizens of other governments.

    From what I can make out it is as I said earlier, member worlds can be considered "states", each with their own "local level" government (which oversee's the day to day running of that planet) with all those "local governments" answering to the centralized Federation government (which oversee's the day to day running of the entire Federation).

  12. #42
    Quote Originally Posted by WaveMan View Post
    I was silly, I have the book Price Of Freedom and it clearly lays out the entire structure of the Federation and it's government.It is too extensive even to paraphrase the entire article but the first paragraphs on page 19 go like this

    The UFP, known universally simply as "the Federation"- is an institution formed in the year 2161 by five diverse species for the purposes of mutual defense, trade, diplomacy and scientific and cultural exchanges. Based on the principles of set forth in the Federation Constitution, it embodies a government dedicated to freedom, fairness, civil rights, mutual respect among it member species and the rule of law. Although it's own laws prevent it from interfering in local political situations or with the normal development of any society, when ever possible the Federation and it's member states stand as bastions for the protection of individual rights and responsibilities that are sadly deigned to many citizens of other governments.

    From what I can make out it is as I said earlier, member worlds can be considered "states", each with their own "local level" government (which oversee's the day to day running of that planet) with all those "local governments" answering to the centralized Federation government (which oversee's the day to day running of the entire Federation).
    This is Star Trek chat, not Narrator's Ready Room, or even the Icon System forum. C'mon.

    Anyway, page 23:

    "One of the key aspects to the Federation government is that it remains just what it says it is—a federation. That means the members have agreed to join together, and to cede certain rights and powers to the "group government," but not to relinquish their sovereignty entirely. The Federation Constitution is very specific in describing which powers are granted to the Federation government and which remain the province of the member planets. In general, while member planets can ask for the Federation's help in certain matters, the Federation may not dictate to its members, or of its own accord interfere in their local affairs. However, this rule does have some exceptions. The primary one is this: If a member violates the agreement that it makes when it enters the Federation (by, for example, instituting a war of aggression, establishing a class or caste system, or otherwise grossly interfering in individual rights), the Federation may intervene. In effect, each member agrees to abide by certain standards of conduct when it joins the Federation, and if it does not, the Federation is empowered to make it "behave." Fortunately, this istuation arises so rarely as to be almost academic; the Federation has only had to "discipline" members on a few occasions. Most scholars attribute this to the fact that the benefits of Federation membership far outweigh the burden of the rules that members have to obey. After all, any civilization mature enough to join the Federation will usually follow those rules anyway."

    That said, I'd have difficulty imagining the Federation using military force to resolve the Ardana situation; economic sanctions would probably suffice, since Stratos doesn't look like it has much in the way of agricultural space, heh.
    Last edited by The Tatterdemalion King; 06-02-2015 at 10:21 AM.
    Portfolio | Blog Currently Running: Call of Cthulhu, Star Trek GUMSHOE Currently Playing: DramaSystem, Swords & Wizardry

  13. #43
    Join Date
    Aug 1999
    Location
    Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
    Posts
    3,485
    In many ways, these included, the UFP is a form of the United Nations that actually works as designed. Effectiveness issues aside, the biggest difference between the UN and the UFP is that the UFP maintains a standing body of armed forces rather than assembling an ad hoc force every time something comes up. Well, that, and the fact that the UN doesn't have to deal with other planets.

  14. #44
    Join Date
    Dec 2000
    Location
    Stockholm, Sweden
    Posts
    1,131
    Star Trek don't have any "EU canon", so from a writer perspective, it is only what has been in a show that actually counts. But someone writing licensed material might had access to someone with inside information at Paramount and then probably got the finished product approved by someone; as long that someone isn't just a bean counter or a lawyer, it can be well informed speculation. Different people have different levels of how pure their canon has to be, and personally, I see the RPG material as good speculations and suggestions.

    When it comes to Natasha Yar's home planet, I never took it as a member planet. More like a failed or illegal colony, or otherwise independent system, that just happened to be within or close to UFP Space. So I think she had to apply for a citizenship at a UFP member. If the planet she came from had been a UFP member, I think the charter had not only allowed, but required, diplomatic and policiary interventions to protect people on the planet. But if the planet isn't a member, their hands are tied until invited.

    I think the "constitution" of the Federation is primary on a Foreign policy, "free trade" between members, freedom of movements, and on "human rights." The rest is up to each planet. Then there is a lot of "affiliated planets" that might be part of the trade zone and have treaties putting them under Starfleet protection, but they are not a member planet.

    When it comes to the Prime Directive, what it really means seems to be a matter of "depending on plot" as well. Sometime they are not allowed to contact a planet at all, while at other times they are just not allowed to "share their technology." Then, as I recall, in one TNG episode some traders claimed the PD didn't applied to them as they weren't Starfleet. So from that writers mind, apparently only Starfleet personnel are limited to the Prime Directive. But it's not the first time Trek has conflicting canon

  15. #45
    Join Date
    Nov 2014
    Location
    S/E Queensland Australia
    Posts
    861
    I think that is the big difference of full member species and one's that have merely affiliated or have a non aggression pacts in place. Member worlds would be required to uphold the ideals of the Federation, reaping the benefits of Federation membership, where the rest would only enjoy varying degree's of interaction with the Federation.

    as per wiki Turkana IV is a non-aligned world with a Earth (it doesn't say "Federation" which I find interesting, so I assume it was a human only endeavor) colony (I would classify it as "a failed colony".)

    http://en.memory-alpha.wikia.com/wiki/Turkana_IV

    The Prime Directive is contentious, on paper I think it is a worthy goal to aspire to, but as you note writer's seemed to ignore it at will, and cite it on other occasions. If RPG sources are taken into account, Raiders, Renegade's and Rogues covers when non star fleet characters operating as mercenaries in the UFP (legally), and several of the "codes of conduct" mention that Federation sanctioned mercenary companies must "make reasonable efforts to adhere to the prime directive"

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •