Star Trek The Birth of a Federation Military

[AndrewJTalon]

Honestly, many of the admirals going rogue (Like Admiral Pressman trying to develop a Federation cloaking device in "The Pegasus", and Admiral Leyton trying to pull a coup in "Homefront/Paradise Lost") are probably a symptom of how bad things had gotten in the Federation government.

As we've seen in our own world, political ideologies can be incredibly dangerous when they reach a critical mass in the areas of power. What we've seen with the Federation in the 100 years after the Khitomer Accords perfectly matches the pattern of complacency and self-sabotage when a self-interested, self righteous political faction expands its reach and power.

Basically, with the Khitomer Accords signed, the Peacenik Faction of the Federation and Starfleet began to take more and more influence across all levels of their society. And like any political faction based on how righteous they were, they couldn't be satisfied with just a little power. They just kept pushing and pushing for more influence. And while there's nothing wrong with having balanced political factions of hawks and doves, having too many doves is just as bad as too many hawks in charge. And the doves had been denied power for a long time.

Even with threats like the Cardassians, the Tholians, the Talarians, and the Tzenkethi causing small border wars, this faction maintained its influence and expanded it. After all, none of these empires had the same reach or industrial power as the Klingons or the Romulans. None of them had even half of the territory of the Romulans or Klingons. So these could be excused as minor border conflicts, police actions and the like. Nothing that would deter the trajectory of the Peacenik Faction's ambitions.

Then Wolf 359 happened. The Federation's weakness was exposed. The Peacenik faction lost power, but unfortunately they'd been entrenched for decades. So even such a catastrophic event couldn't remove or convince them to change their minds. Not at once.

So what we're seeing with the canon Star Trek is actually very fitting for a civilization that's been suffering from an entrenched pacifistic political faction at the highest levels of power unable to adjust to changing conditions fast enough, and their complacency is literally endangering the Federation. The Dominion War however taught the Federation that sometimes peace is just another word for surrender, and if they want to go out into the unknown, they need to be prepared to fight as well as talk.

It is telling that in Star Trek Online, it is revealed that MACO, Military Assault Command Operations/Organization (the Federation's ground based army) was brought back into being around the time after the Dominion War.

 

[Val the Moofia Boss]

It is telling that in Star Trek Online, it is revealed that MACO, Military Assault Command Operations/Organization (the Federation's ground based army) was brought back into being around the time after the Dominion War.

While I do agree that the Feddies should've been more wary and beefed up their military, I think STO takes it too far. Or maybe that's just the framing of the game, since it is an MMO where the primary gameplay is combat, which means you need a lot of enemies to fight (so suddenly everyone in the Star Trek setting is at war with each other), which therefore makes your faction seem militaristic because most of the missions in the game are about you fighting someone else. STO does have good missions where you don't blow stuff up, like investigating phenomena or exploring planets and trying to resolve negotiations, but the bulk of STO's content is warfare. When you warp into your two dozenth mission where you're being told to blow up Orion Pirates/Klingons/Romulans/Cardassians/Borg/whatever, and the other Starfleet ships you are seeing are either jumping in to help you fight or you're jumping in to help reinforce Starfleet ships already in combat, you get the feeling that the Federation has just turned into a militaristic empire.

 

[S'task]

While I do agree that the Feddies should've been more wary and beefed up their military, I think STO takes it too far. Or maybe that's just the framing of the game, since it is an MMO where the primary gameplay is combat, which means you need a lot of enemies to fight (so suddenly everyone in the Star Trek setting is at war with each other), which therefore makes your faction seem militaristic because most of the missions in the game are about you fighting someone else. STO does have good missions where you don't blow stuff up, like investigating phenomena or exploring planets and trying to resolve negotiations, but the bulk of STO's content is warfare. When you warp into your two dozenth mission where you're being told to blow up Orion Pirates/Klingons/Romulans/Cardassians/Borg/whatever, and the other Starfleet ships you are seeing are either jumping in to help you fight or you're jumping in to help reinforce Starfleet ships already in combat, you get the feeling that the Federation has just turned into a militaristic empire.

That's a fair criticism of the game, and one I think even the designers I think realized as time went on. In their biggest war arc, the Iconian War, they actually did a lot with missions that while combat oriented involved more than combat, like recovery operations post battle, and the climax of the Iconian War actually involved a solution that, well, it was a very Trek/Federation solution and didn't involve just showing up with the biggest guns and fighting it out. So they have tried to take that into account and adjust, even though you're right, the core gameplay loot IS combat.

 

[AndrewJTalon]

I don't disagree that the game is geared more towards combat, but I do think that overall, it is a positive direction for Star Trek. I do want more non-combat missions but again, that's game mechanics. It's not a rap on the story, which can be quite good.

And certainly leagues above Picard...

 

[The Original Sixth]

ah here's where it came to my memory.

Your boy is retarded.

Of his ten criticisms, only one has any real merit. And that was one example, not one criticism.

To be more specific...

1) The Bridge is Exposed

It is not as bad as people make it out to be. In most combat situations, both ships will approach each other and hence be facing each other. In this case, the GCS's bridge's profile is very slim. Any uncontrolled weapon has an easy chance of missing the bridge. That's not to say that this can't get ugly, but approaching the GCS at an angle favorable to hitting the bridge is also an angle favorable to getting a 1 TW phaser cannon shoved up your ass. In addition, the bridge is shielded. And shields are generally far better protection than actual armor.


2) The Bridge is Dangerous

The bridge is not dangerous. Most of the jerks you see on the show will not throw someone out of their chair, though it will admittedly bang them up. In most cases though, the inertial dampeners are relied upon to keep any unpredictable momentum shifts from harming the crew.


3) Security Sucks

The first two instances that are cited are not a flaw with the GCS's security. In the first instance, where a race of computer-enhanced people abduct the ship during maintenance, the problem is NOT with the ship's security. The aliens in question were trusted users and had complete or near complete access to the ship's systems. This is an error on the people who approved them as trusted users.

The second incident is similar to the first. The GCS is going through maintenance and thieves sneak aboard as part of the people working on the ship, preparing it for the green magic scan. This is a security issue with whoever runs the base, as obviously word leaked out where the Enterprise D was going to be and when. Said thieves were also able to get what must have been jobs that required some level of security clearance.

The third example is the only legit one--a handful of Ferengi taking the ship, but it was a poorly written episode and many franchises have this sort of problem and it really shouldn't be held together as a whole of poor GCS security.


4) Saucer Landing

The saucer had been damaged by the exploding stardrive, whose shockwave clearly hit the aft of the ship--where the impulse engines are. The saucer section then loses control and the ship crashes on the planet. This is clearly an issue with the exploding stardrive and NOT the saucer section. Troi did the best she could with fucked up engines and a nearby gravity well.

5) Shield Frequency

A result of poor writing in Generations led to this issue. In DS9, for example, the Odyssey had remodulated its shields to try and ward off the phased poleron beams of the Dominion. This was also something that was commonly employed against the Borg. There is really no reason why they shouldn't have immediately remodulated the shields. One might have assumed this happened off-screen and that the Duras sisters might have adjusted it by spying on Geordie.

The real question is how they managed to get a signal from Geordie's visor through the ship's shield and to their own ship. Especially during a battle that basically exchanged a small nuclear arsenal against each other. Very possibly, given their connections, it had communicated with part of the GCS, via a known exploit to the Klingons, but that's all conjecture.


6) Rear Torpedo Launcher

While there is a degree of tactical limitation for keeping the launcher where it is, the fact is that this doesn't matter. If Starfleet wanted more launchers...they could have just attached more launchers. It's not like they didn't have space for refits. As far as putting the ship in danger--any antimatter warhead that hit the Enterprise would have much better areas to hit than that particular torpedo launcher. Nor does said launcher present anymore of a threat than the other two launchers. I also don't understand how a spy sneaking onboard is better served going to that launcher than the other launchers or just planting a bomb on the warpcore. I also don't see any reason why the launcher would simply fire, just because the spy would want them to fire. There would be multiple safety locks to prevent the torpedo launcher from firing.

Also, since antimatter is NOT injected into the torpedo until battle begins, there really isn't any reason to be concerned with empty shells.


7) Warp Nacelles

This is not a flaw, so much as it is a trade-off. Warp nacelles of that style allow for more efficient and faster warp geometries. In exchange for that efficiency, it reduces the defensive quality of the ship. Seeing as it is an explorer, not a battleship, this is an acceptable tradeoff. More so, there is again the issue of targeting. Non-guided weapons will have a very high chance of missing a warp nacelle. And anything guided has much better targets (like the center stardrive, where the torpedoes and antimatter are stored). In most battles, the initial profile is not at all problematic.

And again, the ship is shielded. So in reality, the nacelles are actually heavily armored. Relative to the rest of the ship, it is a weakness, but it is not a flaw.


8) Wasted Space

The GCS is an Explorer ship. It is not a battleship, even if it's heavily armed and sometimes serves that role. In regards to unused space for later upgrades, that's actually something that is being done with the new US Supercarriers; where extra space and extra power capabilities are planned for possible future upgrades to energy weapons. This allows the designers to come back later and make changes without having to re-work other critical parts of the ship. This is a trade-off; minor inconvenience in everyday use for major convenience in future upgrades.


9) Multirole

Again, this is a tradeoff, NOT a flaw.

10) No joystick.

Most of the work in regards to maneuver is done by the computer, not by hand. Worf and the helmsmen are selecting tactical patterns and options, NOT directly adjusting the course of the ship in the middle of battle. The logic being that the ship can perform these roles much faster and much more accurately than the biological user can--therefore the users simply pick tactical options presented to them (based on their style and education). They rarely do manual controls or inputs.

A joystick would in fact, not really do them much good.

 

[Battlegrinder]

And shields are generally far better protection than actual armor.

That's a generally good response to a lot of "criticism" of ST designs, their main defense is shields, not armor. Once those shields are down, the ship's hull is not strong enough to provide a meaningful defense, so locating the bridge deeper inside the hull or something wouldn't actually do anything.

3) Security Sucks

I actually agree with GT that starfleet security is fairly poor, however that's starfleet security, there's nothing about the GCS in particular that makes it worse or better.

4) Saucer Landing

It's bizzare to cite that as a flaw, since most sci-fi ships in a similar scenario would have had no chance of pulling off such a maneuver, they'd just crash and kill everyone. Or everyone would have to bail out in escape pods, where star trek is no better or no worse that the average.

10) No joystick.

I'd also not that we don't know if the ship does or doesn't have a joystick. The E-E had one, it's entirely possible the E-D did and it was just never used.

That said, I'd disagree that the push button controls are actually better than a joystick for normal operations, or that the "well, the computer's really flying the ship" is a valid excuse. We have the technology to build planes that mostly run on computer control with the pilot only providing the occasion bit of manual input, and touch screens are a entirely mature technology....that everyone involved with aviation, or sailing, or just driving absolutely refuses to use as a primary control interface. I don't see why that would chance in the future.

 

[The Original Sixth]

That's a generally good response to a lot of "criticism" of ST designs, their main defense is shields, not armor. Once those shields are down, the ship's hull is not strong enough to provide a meaningful defense, so locating the bridge deeper inside the hull or something wouldn't actually do anything.

Well, there are plenty of flaws that you can point out in the GCS. For example, the fact that the ship rarely separates, but the civilian section of the ship is front and center. Without armor, it's pretty bad. With shields, it's actually worse, because it means the area most likely to suffer radiation damage first is the forward section.

I actually agree with GT that starfleet security is fairly poor, however that's starfleet security, there's nothing about the GCS in particular that makes it worse or better.

I actually disagree to some extent.

Disregarding the absurd episode with the computer virus that eats everything (which was written so early in the days of computer, that the idea of "let's just reset it" was more of a novelty, instead of what now constitutes as "basic procedure"), so that it can be safely discarded. There are simply some things that do not age well--but overall, I find that Star Trek security is average in some areas and very good in others.

The biggest flaw for ST cybersecurity is actually their entire approach to computer networking. Everything is connected to the main computer. Everything. So if you're accessing a panel that replicates food, rather have that be on its own network with other civilian or low-level access stuff--it is actually on the same network as the things that fire the torpedoes. No amount of firewalls or security awareness will alleviate the fact that you while picking what kind of degenerative sex fantasy you're about to indulge in on the holodeck, you can also fire off the main forward launcher--armed with the equivalent of the US arsenal of nuclear warheads.

If Starfleet would separate its computer network into...separate networks, you'd see a massive jump in security. It doesn't matter if Joe Blow is super good at hacking the replicator if the replicator can't actually physically access the military programs that run the ship. And just looking at how hacking works with US agencies (see SolarWind), most government or military groups are going to be behind the curve when fighting against hackers, state or otherwise.

Now, setting that aside, there are individual cases of poor security and good security. Deep Space Nine actually had some of the best security in the franchise. The downside was that its profile was more vulnerable, being a military armed space port. So DS9 had plenty of issues with people hacking security or security problems, but when you consider the exposure--and the fact that they use one network, it's actually pretty good.

TNG had so-so security. On the one hand, it's rare that anyone without highly privileged access or know-how was actually able to do much damage to the ship. For the most part, the really clever people were able to give them a good run-around for half an hour. We see good security practices, such as revoking password privileges' for compromised officers, security clearance requirements, security alerts for very privileged information, and different levels of security clearance for rank AND department.

Voyager...had piss-poor security. Compromised officers did not have their passwords revoked--even months after they had knowingly defected from the crew. Security access was often limited by rank, but not by department. So anyone with high enough security clearance and know-how could basically take over the ship if they felt like it. Minimal to no security was provided for non-essential or non-critical or non-restricted terminals, allowing people to lock out key stations from minor ones.

It's bizzare to cite that as a flaw, since most sci-fi ships in a similar scenario would have had no chance of pulling off such a maneuver, they'd just crash and kill everyone. Or everyone would have to bail out in escape pods, where star trek is no better or no worse that the average.

Actually, the TM has a really cool scenario of small, emergency transporter rooms to be used in the case of emergency. It's not super-fast, but with all transporters running--including the cargo transporters, you could clear the ship in about 45 minutes. Which is actually really good. Assuming you had a place to beam to.

I'd also not that we don't know if the ship does or doesn't have a joystick. The E-E had one, it's entirely possible the E-D did and it was just never used.

Granted.

That said, I'd disagree that the push button controls are actually better than a joystick for normal operations, or that the "well, the computer's really flying the ship" is a valid excuse. We have the technology to build planes that mostly run on computer control with the pilot only providing the occasion bit of manual input, and touch screens are a entirely mature technology....that everyone involved with aviation, or sailing, or just driving absolutely refuses to use as a primary control interface. I don't see why that would chance in the future.

The TM is actually pretty clear. Combat inputs or tactical inputs are basically a set of options that you choose. That may seem insane, but consider that most of this is in deep space, where you don't have to worry about most navigational hazards. For a human to try and control a ship flying at those speeds is actually really hard. It's better to let the computer handle it, while the actual helmsman mostly acts as manager, keeping the ship in line with the captain's order and strategy.

Now, there is a drawback to that, mainly if the computer is providing bad recommendations or options or is having its own issues, the helmsman has to work with tactile flatscreen and that's not easy. Of course, maybe all ships have emergency joysticks. We do know that Paris had switches and buttons on his first Delta Flyer.

 

[Val the Moofia Boss]

Deep Space Nine actually had some of the best security in the franchise. The downside was that its profile was more vulnerable, being a military armed space port. So DS9 had plenty of issues with people hacking security or security problems, but when you consider the exposure--and the fact that they use one network, it's actually pretty good.

From Starfleet's perspective, DS9 might have the weakness of being built by Cardassians. You typically don't see Klingons or Romulans hacking into Starfleet ships, because the Klingons and Romulans don't know really know the hardware or software architecture of those ships. But the Cardassians know where most of the hardware of DS9 is going to be. IIRC the only thing Starfleet really replaced with their own tech was the main computer. DS9 was still using Cardassian consoles and interfaces and perhaps other computers around the station, which I think would make the process of an attack easier. This becomes a really severe weakness when Cardassian joins a superpower that is becoming increasingly hostile to the Federation, and DS9 is the Federation's most important defense against said superpower. In the event of an attack, the Dominion would already have a lot more knowledge on how to breach DS9's defenses, be it either with a remote attack from outside the station, or if they get troops to board the station and they already know which hallway has a panel with wires behind they need to clip to disable forcefields, etc.

 

[The Original Sixth]

From Starfleet's perspective, DS9 might have the weakness of being built by Cardassians.

That's not really much of an excuse, to be honest. While there were compatibility issues between Starfleet and Cardassian programs and hardware--as well as Cardassian security issues they didn't fully appreciate, such as using security computer rods for computer access, as we typically saw with Quark's stolen set, the Cardassians were actually better at security practice. Because they simply did not let most people access their computers and those that did were not trusted, even within the military. You also had a top-down spy agency spying on its own people, so anyone trying to access anything can be sure that a security-state agency is going to pay you a visit if you get caught.

Starfleet was opposite. It not only also put every computer on the same system, they also had more trust than the Cardassians did. So more people were allowed to access terminals that would otherwise be restricted. This was mitigated by Odo though, whose very presence and somewhat draconian policy blunted that impact.

You typically don't see Klingons or Romulans hacking into Starfleet ships, because the Klingons and Romulans don't know really know the hardware or software architecture of those ships. But the Cardassians know where most of the hardware of DS9 is going to be. IIRC the only thing Starfleet really replaced with their own tech was the main computer. DS9 was still using Cardassian consoles and interfaces and perhaps other computers around the station, which I think would make the process of an attack easier. This becomes a really severe weakness when Cardassian joins a superpower that is becoming increasingly hostile to the Federation, and DS9 is the Federation's most important defense against said superpower. In the event of an attack, the Dominion would already have a lot more knowledge on how to breach DS9's defenses, be it either with a remote attack from outside the station, or if they get troops to board the station and they already know which hallway has a panel with wires behind they need to clip to disable forcefields, etc.

You don't see a lot of remote hacking because most of the time, in combat, ships don't just accept random computer inputs from unknown sources. ST is actually pretty good at ship to ship communication; rarely do you see any sort of hack come from outside the ship or station. It often has to be placed within the ship or station. Part of that is probably more a case of the writers treating subspace radio as super radio.

 

[S'task]

7) Warp Nacelles

This is not a flaw, so much as it is a trade-off. Warp nacelles of that style allow for more efficient and faster warp geometries. In exchange for that efficiency, it reduces the defensive quality of the ship. Seeing as it is an explorer, not a battleship, this is an acceptable tradeoff. More so, there is again the issue of targeting. Non-guided weapons will have a very high chance of missing a warp nacelle. And anything guided has much better targets (like the center stardrive, where the torpedoes and antimatter are stored). In most battles, the initial profile is not at all problematic.

And again, the ship is shielded. So in reality, the nacelles are actually heavily armored. Relative to the rest of the ship, it is a weakness, but it is not a flaw.

I always hated the entire "Star Trek ships are dumb because exposed warp nacelles!" line of argument.

The entire thing is spurious, as it basically is saying "I don't like how Star Trek Warp works because it makes it so that my flying box designs aren't boxes!". Consider how many peer factions to the Federation in Trek use exposed nacelles who are much more military minded... that would, quite literally, be ALL OF THEM. Klingon ships have exposed nacelles on pylons. Romulans have exposed nacelles on pylons. The FREAKING DOMINION had exposed nacelles on pylons.

Integrated Warp Nacelles only appear on smaller ships and appear to create serious limitations. Every starship with integrated nacelles seems to have lower speeds than ships of similar size but exposed nacelles, or have other issues.

The biggest flaw for ST cybersecurity is actually their entire approach to computer networking. Everything is connected to the main computer. Everything. So if you're accessing a panel that replicates food, rather have that be on its own network with other civilian or low-level access stuff--it is actually on the same network as the things that fire the torpedoes. No amount of firewalls or security awareness will alleviate the fact that you while picking what kind of degenerative sex fantasy you're about to indulge in on the holodeck, you can also fire off the main forward launcher--armed with the equivalent of the US arsenal of nuclear warheads.

In fairness to the writers, networking was in the very earliest stages development so they likely didn't even think of things in a term of multiple networks. Heck, the most common network they would have been familiar with wouldn't have been the modern peer to peer network model we use, but rather a Mainframe set up. Trek computers, back to TOS, were always written as if they were mainframe computer systems, not peer to peer, which makes sense as that was the dominate computer set up when TOS was written and the more well developed network technology when TNG was written. Peer to peer networking only really started to dominate in the 90s.

 

[The Original Sixth]

I always hated the entire "Star Trek ships are dumb because exposed warp nacelles!" line of argument.

The entire thing is spurious, as it basically is saying "I don't like how Star Trek Warp works because it makes it so that my flying box designs aren't boxes!". Consider how many peer factions to the Federation in Trek use exposed nacelles who are much more military minded... that would, quite literally, be ALL OF THEM. Klingon ships have exposed nacelles on pylons. Romulans have exposed nacelles on pylons. The FREAKING DOMINION had exposed nacelles on pylons.

Integrated Warp Nacelles only appear on smaller ships and appear to create serious limitations. Every starship with integrated nacelles seems to have lower speeds than ships of similar size but exposed nacelles, or have other issues.

It'd be nice to see some variations personally (the BoP Warp Plates are cool, as are the Vulcan warp rings), but by the setting's own standards, the exposed warp nacelles are sort of a requirement for fast moving ships. It's a trade-off.

In fairness to the writers, networking was in the very earliest stages development so they likely didn't even think of things in a term of multiple networks. Heck, the most common network they would have been familiar with wouldn't have been the modern peer to peer network model we use, but rather a Mainframe set up. Trek computers, back to TOS, were always written as if they were mainframe computer systems, not peer to peer, which makes sense as that was the dominate computer set up when TOS was written and the more well developed network technology when TNG was written. Peer to peer networking only really started to dominate in the 90s.

I grant them that, nor do I expect them to have decided on peer to peer networks as a solution seeing as that's not their field. And one might make an argument for a change in technology that makes large super computers more efficient than separate computer networks...but regardless of how we cut it, there are weaknesses associated with putting everything on the same network.

Although I don't doubt nowadays, were the show intelligently written, we'd probably see a shift toward more modern network schemes.

 

[Battlegrinder]

I actually disagree to some extent.

Oh, GT meant cyber security, I misunderstood what you were responding to (I didn't watch the video, I'm not giving those idiots ad revenue).

The TM is actually pretty clear. Combat inputs or tactical inputs are basically a set of options that you choose. That may seem insane, but consider that most of this is in deep space, where you don't have to worry about most navigational hazards. For a human to try and control a ship flying at those speeds is actually really hard. It's better to let the computer handle it, while the actual helmsman mostly acts as manager, keeping the ship in line with the captain's order and strategy.

I have to point out that the sky is not exactly crowded with navigational hazards either, and pilots still demand physical controls rather than touchscreens. And I don't think the fact that ST ships move faster in absolute terms doesn't seem like it would change that, since they don't move all that fast relative to one another.

 

[The Original Sixth]

Oh, GT meant cyber security, I misunderstood what you were responding to (I didn't watch the video, I'm not giving those idiots ad revenue).

Well, most security breaches in ST are actually cybersecurity breaches of one sort or another. Actual physical security breaches are either aided by cybersecurity breaches (because force fields mean you lose) or random plot fuckery. As far as actual mismanagement in a security breach goes, he chose rather tame ones. The only really bad one was the Ferengi episode.

EDIT -- Actually, another issue with ST security breaches is that most people assume that those performing the breach should just be beamed into a cell or space. And while there have been use of the transporter in response to security breaches in the show, what we see is more or less not great results for that.

And Nemesis is actually an example of a really poor security showing. At no point are force fields activated to keep the invading party contained, but rather they just get in a shootout with Riker's team. Even if the Reman team had means of blasting through security fields or disabling them, there was no indication of their use to even slow them down. Which leads to the typical Trek "plot convenience" problem the franchise has an issue with.

I have to point out that the sky is not exactly crowded with navigational hazards either, and pilots still demand physical controls rather than touchscreens. And I don't think the fact that ST ships move faster in absolute terms doesn't seem like it would change that, since they don't move all that fast relative to one another.

ST fighters should probably have physical controls, but this is actually rather different. The reason why you don't want to use a touch screen on a fighter is because the pilot is faster and more accurate using physical controls. Physical controls also have the benefit of not needing to see them in order to use them. In the space and speed that modern fighters move at, physical controls are critical to survival. Touch screen will mostly just get you killed.

In space combat though, you are moving so fast, in ships that are so big, that physical controls really don't present any additional features. Even while you are moving at relative velocity to the opponent and it's mostly empty space, you can still get massive problems from moving too fast for a human to really manage.

You really are better off doing most of the labor by computer and having humans act as managers of that system. Because moving at .17c means that even drifting too far left can put you in a really bad spot, even if your opponent is also moving at around the same speed. That may not be the case for say, fighter craft, where things are more simplified, but for capital ships that is very much going to be the standard.

Not that you can't have physical controls. And ST touchscreens are actually tactile, in that they raise and lower, allowing for users to 'feel' the difference.

 

[Thors_Alumni]

One of the main criticisms I have about TNG Era Starfleet was that they had gotten so pacifistic and borderline obsolete that there were children on Starships. Children like Jake who was on the Saratoga at Wolf 359. There were probably also children on the other starships in that little task force. And some have to have died during that battle.

If Starfleet had not been so pacifistic they would have offloaded their dependents at a starbase and returned for them later. Which of course didn't happen. And then there was the Enterprise-D. How many times did the kids on that starship get endangered by the disaster of the week? On the top of my head I can count at least 7 times where it did happen not counting Generations.

Now WOG from the writers or someone high up mentioned that for the Federation, The experiment of children and families on starships was an experiment that failed. and Honestly I am glad for it since again how many times were children endangered on TNG. Voyager has an excuse that there was no where safe to send Naomi while they were stuck in the Delta quadrant. The Borg Children were offloaded as soon as their people were found and could take care of them.

By the time of DS9 that was starting to change but not fast enough. The Captain of the USS Odyssey had the presence of mind to offload his dependents onto the station before the task force went through the wormhole. Which shows that Starfleet was starting to shake off the pacifism for the most part.

The Dominion war was brutal in that it both cost the Alpha Quadrant powers hundreds if not thousands of Starships, and quite possibly Millions of personnel not including Civilians. Civilians who we know probably also suffered at the hands of the Dominion and its allies.

When I say obsolete classes. The most advanced Starship the Fleet had up to 359 was probably the Galaxy and to me personally she was a flawed design. You had Miranda's Excelsior's and who knows what other kind of TOS era Starfleet ships still flying around.

Wolf 359 taught Starfleet and the Federation government a harsh lesson in that some things can't be solved with diplomacy but with force. The Dominion war taught both the price of not having an up to date military arm. By the end of the war, The Pacifism ideal had to have been almost gone with dozens of new classes flying around with new weapons and technology to defend the Federation from it's enemies including the Borg and the Dominion.

I doubt that the Federation will ever give up its nature as explorers and peacemakers, but They will have learned their lessons and kept their starships up to date in class and technology.

 

[The Original Sixth]

One of the main criticisms I have about TNG Era Starfleet was that they had gotten so pacifistic and borderline obsolete that there were children on Starships. Children like Jake who was on the Saratoga at Wolf 359. There were probably also children on the other starships in that little task force. And some have to have died during that battle.

If Starfleet had not been so pacifistic they would have offloaded their dependents at a starbase and returned for them later. Which of course didn't happen. And then there was the Enterprise-D. How many times did the kids on that starship get endangered by the disaster of the week? On the top of my head I can count at least 7 times where it did happen not counting Generations.

Now WOG from the writers or someone high up mentioned that for the Federation, The experiment of children and families on starships was an experiment that failed. and Honestly I am glad for it since again how many times were children endangered on TNG. Voyager has an excuse that there was no where safe to send Naomi while they were stuck in the Delta quadrant. The Borg Children were offloaded as soon as their people were found and could take care of them.

By the time of DS9 that was starting to change but not fast enough. The Captain of the USS Odyssey had the presence of mind to offload his dependents onto the station before the task force went through the wormhole. Which shows that Starfleet was starting to shake off the pacifism for the most part.

The Dominion war was brutal in that it both cost the Alpha Quadrant powers hundreds if not thousands of Starships, and quite possibly Millions of personnel not including Civilians. Civilians who we know probably also suffered at the hands of the Dominion and its allies.

When I say obsolete classes. The most advanced Starship the Fleet had up to 359 was probably the Galaxy and to me personally she was a flawed design. You had Miranda's Excelsior's and who knows what other kind of TOS era Starfleet ships still flying around.

Wolf 359 taught Starfleet and the Federation government a harsh lesson in that some things can't be solved with diplomacy but with force. The Dominion war taught both the price of not having an up to date military arm. By the end of the war, The Pacifism ideal had to have been almost gone with dozens of new classes flying around with new weapons and technology to defend the Federation from it's enemies including the Borg and the Dominion.

I doubt that the Federation will ever give up its nature as explorers and peacemakers, but They will have learned their lessons and kept their starships up to date in class and technology.

Well, it was Roddenberry who wanted to include all of that crap. I think it was mostly dropped from the franchise because instead of offering them opportunity for new stories and threads, it was mostly forgotten. They only separated the ship a handful of times, they rarely used the civilians for stories, and it made less and less sense when the ship was knowingly going into danger that these people would also be put in danger.

If TNG had been about deep space exploration, where you rarely saw a UFP starbase, it would have been fine. Essentially a mobile military-diplomatic-exploration base with families. It was just another hairbrained idea from Roddenberry though, including his idea of using dolphins to try and simulate space navigation for UFP use. It was such a bad idea that it was never mentioned, save in a one-off joke by Geordie.

Same with the de-militarization of Starfleet. But this was also at the same time that people in the world had assumed that the world was moving towards a true global government and we had entered the "End of History". Sort of how people once called WWI, "The War to End All Wars". Roddenberry had been ahead of the curve on that mode of thought, thinking that the world would unit into some globalist system.

 

[Val the Moofia Boss]

Now WOG from the writers or someone high up mentioned that for the Federation, The experiment of children and families on starships was an experiment that failed.

I don't think that the experiment "failed". More like the Enterprise is the work horse of Starfleet, being sent on all sorts of dangerous missions like chasing pirates or getting involved in border skirmishes. A Starfleet ship that just transports supplies around the interior of Federation space, far away from any hostile powers, will be fine having children on board, as that ship isn't getting caught up in shenagains like the Enterprise does.

The Captain of the USS Odyssey had the presence of mind to offload his dependents onto the station before the task force went through the wormhole. Which shows that Starfleet was starting to shake off the pacifism for the most part.

The real answer as to why the Enterprise rarely offloaded the kids is because of the sheer number of episodes in TNG where the Enterprise gets into a dangerous situation. It would become expensive if they kept doing saucer section separation model shots, and having the star drive section of the Enterprise fight the threat of the week wouldn't be anywhere near as cool as having the whole ship. The alternative would be to spend a couple minutes showing them offloading civilians before getting on with the plot, but this would bog down the pacing, take up screentime that could be devoted to other things, and would become formulaic. It only really happened in DS9 because it was a one off episode.

 

[Battlegrinder]

It would become expensive if they kept doing saucer section separation model shots, and having the star drive section of the Enterprise fight the threat of the week wouldn't be anywhere near as cool as having the whole ship.

I'd not that thr cost of doing separation shots is a non-factor or nearly a non-factor, because that's not how stock footage works. You shoot the separation once, and then it's done, you have the footage to use as much as you want and don't have to refilm.

In fact, getting that footage is almost certainly why they had a saucer separation in the pilot. Some of the footnotes in the TNG tech manual from the writers mentioned thst once a show has all its sets and stock shots built in the first season, it can be really hard to get more built, particularly sets, and so the writers made scripts for the specific purpose of getting all the sets they wanted made, to the point of contriving events so that a particular set woyld be built, IIRC it was either engineering or the shuttle bay (I suspect the DS9 writing team not doing this is why we never saw what the station's engineering area looked like).

Of course, this tactic has its downsides. Paramount certainly didn't get thier money's worth out of that battle bridge set.

 

[Captain X]

They did in the sense that the battle bridge set was often redressed and used as the bridge set of many different guest ships, and even the courtroom used in "The Measure of a Man."

 

[Battlegrinder]

They did in the sense that the battle bridge set was often redressed and used as the bridge set of many different guest ships, and even the courtroom used in "The Measure of a Man."

Darn, I knew I should have checked ex astra sciencia first.

Though after checking,it turns out we're both right/wrong, as the battle bridge was actually the bridge from the TOS films redressed for TNG, rather then a set built for TNG. But as they only used it 3 times in the series as the battle bridge, they probably didn't get much value out of whatever battle bridge specifical props and bits they purchased.

 

[The Original Sixth]

I'd not that thr cost of doing separation shots is a non-factor or nearly a non-factor, because that's not how stock footage works. You shoot the separation once, and then it's done, you have the footage to use as much as you want and don't have to refilm.

In fact, getting that footage is almost certainly why they had a saucer separation in the pilot. Some of the footnotes in the TNG tech manual from the writers mentioned thst once a show has all its sets and stock shots built in the first season, it can be really hard to get more built, particularly sets, and so the writers made scripts for the specific purpose of getting all the sets they wanted made, to the point of contriving events so that a particular set woyld be built, IIRC it was either engineering or the shuttle bay (I suspect the DS9 writing team not doing this is why we never saw what the station's engineering area looked like).

Of course, this tactic has its downsides. Paramount certainly didn't get thier money's worth out of that battle bridge set.

It was actually reused multiple times as the skeleton for alien spaceship bridges.