Enterprise and 'continuity'

**KillerWhale** · 09-19-2003, 02:00 PM

The dark age idea is a good one. Maybe the Xindi can explain this?

**Snake_Plissken** · 09-19-2003, 02:40 PM

Maybe the Xindi can explain this?

I really hope not- I'm sick of all that temporal BS. But how about this: the TOS stuff looks the way it looks BECAUSE IT WAS FILMED FOR TV IN THE 60'S ON A LOW BUDGET.

Up until the ep on TNG where Scotty appears and the Tribble DS9 episode, we could have 'pretended' that TOS didn't really look like what we saw on TV. But those episodes 'validated'/'confirmed' the TOS look. As a side note I've always wanted to role-play in the TOS era: the fisfights, the snotty Klingons, the rubber suit aliens, the lovely chicks in short dresses and of course the hapless red shirts. So I don't have a problem with TOS for being what it is.

Phantom, you gotta give a break to the ENT designs. How can you come up with stuff that is supposed to be older (more primitive tech) WITHOUT looking ridiculous BUT NOT looking 'too modern' ... FOR modern television?!? I'm sure you must think that EACH piece of equipment on the show, from the ship, the phasers, the communicators, even the forks & spoons look "too modern". One thing to remember is that looks doesn't always match abilities. In my book TOS technology if far more advanced than ENT-era tech. Obviously, it would make far more sense if the reverse were true, but hey- its television!!!!!!!!

I really liked what they've done with Enterprise design-wise- I like the new ship (I said 'like'- not "love") EVEN if it IS a "rip-off" from the Akira (Braga -I think it was him- admitted it). I like the new uniforms; for once they don't look like space pajamas for kids like the VOY uniforms, and I think the new phase pistol are the coolest SF hand weapons since the 'Shatner' phasers from ST5-6. The Suliban however look like the very tired, cheap, unimaginative alien-of-the-week crap. OTOH I really loved what they did with the Andorians.

I did a design that would have fit in the time line based on the old BP design.

I'd like to see that. I'm not being arsy- I'd really like to see it. I'm a sucker for Romulan ship designs. I really wish I could draw

or use a paint program properly

**KillerWhale** · 09-19-2003, 02:55 PM

I totally agree with the fact that TOS looks like that because it was filmed in the 60's. I don't have a problem with that either - who could have guessed our fashion would be so, a century ago? How come do we say TOS is kitsch? It's set two centuries in the future; maybe we'll all wear pajamas at the time, who knows?

**Phantom** · 09-19-2003, 03:15 PM

Originally posted by Snake_Plissken
I
Phantom, you gotta give a break to the ENT designs. How can you come up with stuff that is supposed to be older (more primitive tech) WITHOUT looking ridiculous BUT NOT looking 'too modern' ... FOR modern television?!? I'm sure you must think that EACH piece of equipment on the show, from the ship, the phasers, the communicators, even the forks & spoons look "too modern". One thing to remember is that looks doesn't always match abilities. In my book TOS technology if far more advanced than ENT-era tech. Obviously, it would make far more sense if the reverse were true, but hey- its television!!!!!!!!

I'd like to see that. I'm not being arsy- I'd really like to see it. I'm a sucker for Romulan ship designs. I really wish I could draw or use a paint program properly

1) It just seems tov me that all the tech in Ent. is so much better then that in the other series. Over the last 3 years of the show (which AFAICT represents 3 years in the Trek universe) they have increased their tech level by leaps-and-bounds...While the other series seem to stagnate tech wise. In Ent they went from lasers to phase pistols, the transporter was perfected in two eps, the engines can now go up to warp 5, and now they are one step away from developing TNG lvl Photons, from starting out with rockets for pete's sake. I wish we could copy this rate of development, we'd be on Mars in 5 years.

2) I wish you could. I no longer know where the sketch is and even I did I don't have a scanner, and I to suck at computer based paint programs. The design wasn't anything too imaginative, a little cosmetic change here and there, a simalar naccelle design from the Enterprise-Class stuff like that. It was originally going to be a design used to fill out losses from the DW. I never used it.

**Rayaru** · 09-19-2003, 05:43 PM

I think they just framed the series during a time of rapid change. I mean we went from the brink of annihalation at the end of WWIII to being a spacefareing power within a century, it wouldn't surprise me so much to see things follow suit.

I don't think the torps are like TNG's, they just look like them. If Gene had a chance to do TOS with today's graphics, I think the torps would look like TNG's too. And as for the transporter- it may be "perfected," but it's still seen as a last-resort option due to the taboo people hold over it.

**Sho-sa Kurita** · 09-20-2003, 03:57 AM

Originally posted by Phantom
1) Over the last 3 years of the show (which AFAICT represents 3 years in the Trek universe) they have increased their tech level by leaps-and-bounds...While the other series seem to stagnate tech wise. In Ent they went from lasers to phase pistols, the transporter was perfected in two eps, the engines can now go up to warp 5, and now they are one step away from developing TNG lvl Photons, from starting out with rockets for pete's sake.

I have to agree with Rayaru that the series is intentionally framed at a time of massive tehnological advancement. That said, three of your four points here are simply unfounded.

Phase pistols -- introduced in the pilot -- no change since.
Warp 5 capability -- The ship was designed to go Warp 5 from the get go. They didn't do it right away, and it took some pushing and tweaking to get there, which was actually one of the points of the ship being out there in the first place -- shakedown.
Transporter "perfection" -- introduced in the pilot. No tweaks or anything since, and they try not to use it.
Photon torpedoes -- okay, I think it was a stretch to introduce these this soon.

I don't mind folks having issues with the show, but at least find valid points. How about the scanners that are much more compact that TOS ones? Or the quantum scanner used in "The Expanse." Never saw anything "quantum" in TOS days. "Oh, no! I'm melting...."

As far as other series "stagnating," TNG - maybe. But in DS9 and VOY we saw advancements -- pulse phasers, quantum torpedoes, holography and AI, new propulsion and scanning techniques. Enough venting for now.

**Sho-sa Kurita** · 09-20-2003, 04:06 AM

Back to address one of the points in the original post -- Vulcans and Romulans. After 2000 years I would expect there to little similarity in the language. Ever try to read Olde English? And that's only like 1000 years. What bothers me a lot more than language similarity (or lack thereof) is that in 2000 years, the Romulans apparently evolved those foreheads! I don't think so! Unless someone wants to put forward a theory of species-wide genetic engineering.

**WarriorKnight** · 09-20-2003, 01:25 PM

Originally posted by Sho-sa Kurita

Photon torpedoes -- okay, I think it was a stretch to introduce these this soon.

Actually I've Heard them refered to so far as Photonic Torpedoes,not Photon.I know symantics probably,but it might also just be a frist step in the development of the photon torps.Yes it bugged me too when they intro'd them.

**Phantom** · 09-20-2003, 06:21 PM

Originally posted by Sho-sa Kurita

Warp 5 capability -- The ship was designed to go Warp 5 from the get go. They didn't do it right away, and it took some pushing and tweaking to get there, which was actually one of the points of the ship being out there in the first place -- shakedown.
Transporter "perfection" -- introduced in the pilot. No tweaks or anything since, and they try not to use it.
Photon torpedoes -- okay, I think it was a stretch to introduce these this soon.

Uhm, excuse me but all the points I made on the above are valid.

1) the engine was stated as the first Warp 4.5 engine...Not Warp 5! A bit of a difference in performance in that .5c.

2) Transporters were rated as "unsafe" (direct quote) for use on living matter in the pilot. In the very next ep they beamed Archer aboard while on the run. The Techs in Ent. time must be way better then Scotty and O'Brian combined.

3) Photon(ic) only difference is the "ic." Heck they could even dial up the damage on them for crying out load!

**WarriorKnight** · 09-20-2003, 06:55 PM

Originally posted by Phantom
Uhm, excuse me but all the points I made on the above are valid.

1) the engine was stated as the first Warp 4.5 engine...Not Warp 5! A bit of a difference in performance in that .5c.

2) Transporters were rated as "unsafe" (direct quote) for use on living matter in the pilot. In the very next ep they beamed Archer aboard while on the run. The Techs in Ent. time must be way better then Scotty and O'Brian combined.

3) Photon(ic) only difference is the "ic." Heck they could even dial up the damage on them for crying out load!

1) It's been listed as the 1st warp 5 Earth vessel.Hence the warp 5 program
2) Reed stated in Broken Bow that the transporter had been rated as safe for human transport,but that he didn't feel safe having himself being compressed into a data stream.

**Rayaru** · 09-20-2003, 07:04 PM

Originally posted by Phantom
Uhm, excuse me but all the points I made on the above are valid.

1) the engine was stated as the first Warp 4.5 engine...Not Warp 5! A bit of a difference in performance in that .5c.

2) Transporters were rated as "unsafe" (direct quote) for use on living matter in the pilot. In the very next ep they beamed Archer aboard while on the run. The Techs in Ent. time must be way better then Scotty and O'Brian combined.

3) Photon(ic) only difference is the "ic." Heck they could even dial up the damage on them for crying out load!

I think you're incorrect on point #1... I distinctly remember it as the first Warp 5 engine.

How much damage the torpedoes do is a story device, really... and I do think the "ic" is significant... otherwise it would have made sense to just call them Photon Torpedoes and copy them over from TNG totally to have another link to Trek. Also don't be too surprised they have these so early... remember the Klingon vessel they boarded a while back had this technology, which probably means they copied some of the database over and sent it into Starfleet.

**Sea Tyger** · 09-20-2003, 10:04 PM

Originally posted by Phantom
3) Photon(ic) only difference is the "ic." Heck they could even dial up the damage on them for crying out load!

A student at the Naval Postgraduate School built an electromagnetic railgun in 1995. While he didn't include the ability to select the voltage send to the rails (thus, adjusting velocity and damage), he could prove it was easily possible to do just that. I wrote an article on his thesis and creation, and saw the weapon fire once.

While the U.S. Military is still looking into the feasibility of EM propelled weapons in field artillery, tank armaments and naval guns, the technology is already available. (And, believe it or not, it's probably been available for about 30 years now, given that the capacitors the student used were old-Soviet built units made in the early-70s.)

I also know, through various non-classified conferences I've attended, that the Army is working on mines that will make themselves inert after a period of time. I don't know how long it will be before we see that, but I do know it's coming.

Given that knowledge, I see no problem with the Enterprise being able to adjust the yield of a space-borne missile weapon in 2152-3.

**Phantom** · 09-20-2003, 11:00 PM

Funny I don't remember later versions of the weapon having that capability in RPG, sereis, movie or novels.]

Just B&B trying to prove their "greatness." Oh, wait! I forgot. Continuity is a four letter word to B&B.

**Sea Tyger** · 09-21-2003, 01:43 AM

Originally posted by Phantom
Funny I don't remember later versions of the weapon having that capability in RPG, sereis, movie or novels.]

Warning!: This is by no means canon! This is just a whimsical explanation to counter Phantom's argument!

Easy. A combination of advanced effectiveness and efficiency of 23rd and 24th century phasers, and the geometric increase in the power of photon torpedos, make it unwieldy and unnecessary to "dial up" torpedo yields.

**Phantom** · 09-21-2003, 01:56 AM

Originally posted by Sea Tyger
Warning!: This is by no means canon! This is just a whimsical explanation to counter Phantom's argument!

Easy. A combination of advanced effectiveness and efficiency of 23rd and 24th century phasers, and the geometric increase in the power of photon torpedos, make it unwieldy and unnecessary to "dial up" torpedo yields.

LOL.

Good one. Whimsical-yes. A counter to my points-no. If the tech continues to advance as it is, by the time TOS era rolls around the Fed will be using Galaxy-class ships.

However, amusing none the less.

Thread: Enterprise and 'continuity'

Thread Tools

Posting Permissions