• Attention All Comstar Customers, Due to unexpected interference by suspected Word of Blake operatives, the HPG systems update was *not* successful. No data was lost due to our careful and extensive backups; however, we will need to try again next weekend. Sincerely, Comstar Precentor Dune

Star Trek The General Star Trek Thread - From TOS to Corporate Schenanigans

bullethead

Part-time fanfic writer
Super Moderator
Staff Member
Joined
Aug 9, 2019
Reaction score
3,506
Location
Florida
You can make excuses, but that's all they are. They specifically made his brother to reflect their father's views, so they were at least internally consistent in TNG about that.
They literally didn't have Picard's dad do anything to contradict his views from TNG. He just showed up in a Starfleet uniform for the head game first part, then he showed up in pretty traditional garb once Picard realized he was talking to a mental projection of his dad.

Also, you don't get more traditional and anti-tech than locking your mentally ill wife in a room when you can't force her to get treatment.

If there's a specific contradiction, please point it out to me, because I'm having a hard time trying to figure out what you're specifically talking about.
 

bullethead

Part-time fanfic writer
Super Moderator
Staff Member
Joined
Aug 9, 2019
Reaction score
3,506
Location
Florida
:rolleyes: Oh, so they made his father even worse than just being a crotchety farmer.
No, they just show he's a crotchety farmer who had a wife with a mental issue and tried his best to deal with it, but it didn't work out alright for a reason that'll almost certainly be revealed as tragic.

If anything, it explains a lot more of why Robert and Jean-Luc didn't get along, because of which parent they aligned more closely with.

And to be honest, it's not like the other male members of the Picard family have been portrayed as anything but assholes, so it's not like they're removing any nuance from the characters. Shit, this is the most we've seen of Picard's dad outside of him being disappointed at Picard dying in Tapestry, and if anything, it humanizes him.
 

commanderkai

Establishing Battlefield Control...Standby
Moderator
Staff Member
Joined
Aug 11, 2019
Reaction score
1,057
Location
Blue Zone 11
The only enjoyable thing about season 2 is that Dutch from The Shield has finally moved from LA homicide detective to FBI agent.
 

The Whispering Monk

Well-known member
Sotnik
Joined
Aug 19, 2019
Reaction score
10,928
Picard stopped 'Baltaring' when he developed that heart issue induced by sharp pointy thing getting shoved into his chest.

"A sucking chest wound is just Nature's way of telling you to slow down."

Side-note: I really wanted someone to end Baltar by shoving an icepick in his head...like around season 1, episode 2. And none of the episodes after that made me feel any different.
 

Captain X

Well-known member
Osaul
Joined
Aug 13, 2019
Reaction score
15,641
Location
The Land of Snow and Cold
No, they just show he's a crotchety farmer who had a wife with a mental issue and tried his best to deal with it, but it didn't work out alright for a reason that'll almost certainly be revealed as tragic.
And totally not a strawman of how leftists see the "anti-science" crowd, I'm sure. :cautious:

If anything, it explains a lot more of why Robert and Jean-Luc didn't get along, because of which parent they aligned more closely with.

And to be honest, it's not like the other male members of the Picard family have been portrayed as anything but assholes, so it's not like they're removing any nuance from the characters. Shit, this is the most we've seen of Picard's dad outside of him being disappointed at Picard dying in Tapestry, and if anything, it humanizes him.
And it still doesn't excuse ignoring "The Inner Light" just so they have an excuse to berate Picard's character.
 

Garak

New member
Joined
Apr 15, 2022
Reaction score
2
I don't know if this has been posted yet but Spacedock did something you might be seeing in Picard down the road.



STO ships are already showing up in Picard. So keep an eye out for these in later seasons.
I personally think most ships in STO are ugly. I dont know who they hired, but they’re just busy. They lack the elegance that most Star Trek ships have. clean and simple. Especially the Romulan ships. Those big, vibrator/dildo ships are ugly as sin.
 

Garak

New member
Joined
Apr 15, 2022
Reaction score
2
I've never heard of that meme. At least in the circles I traveled in, Mirandas were quite well respected for being workhorses that were still competing with ships decades more advanced than they were, and holding together under fire that tended to vaporize lesser vessels. It was Galaxy classes we considered to be fragile soap bubbles for their supposed size and advancement, although the Breen ships got some mockery too for how ludicrously they tended to shatter from a single hit. Excelsiors seemed to generally perform impressively for being antiques too, though the one in the Examples below didn't fare well.



Probably also worth looking at the destruction of the USS Valiant for an important advantage to the outer-hull bridge:
If your bridge is on top of the ship at the outer hull, it's going to be significantly quicker for the bridge escape pods to evacuate when everything goes to pot, compared with a bridge buried deep inside the ship where the pods will have a longer travel time through tubes that may have been warped or jammed by damage already. Sucks for whoever is assigned deep in the bowels of the ship to be sure, but in the cold logic of that situation, saving the highly experienced bridge crew is going to be a priority.
It’s hard to be precise with VFX because it’s not necessarily accurate to what might happen in a real mock up. I don’t know if the Breen are glass cannons. We don’t know how much damage that Breen vessel might have already been dealt. Also, remember that the Dominion upgraded the Cardassian military technology. That forward beam cannon of the Galor class also made a one shot kill out of a bird of prey. Also, can’t tell how much fire that Excelsior took before it laid adrift. It’s kinda quick and loose.
 

Garak

New member
Joined
Apr 15, 2022
Reaction score
2
The bridge window is actually the only JJverse design feature that I like. It has no real downsides, you can still use holographic displays for ship to ship coms and all the stuff they used to use the viewscreen view, and it looks very cool.

Theres no upside to it either. its no mistake that only ships that are capable of routinely undergoing atmospheric re-entry, have large transparencies. Either by purpose or happy accident, Star Trek managed to correct a short-coming of science fiction ships with their view screen and lack of a giant bay window. The notion that a ship with highly sophisticated sensors and computers could ‘scan’ an area and render it into a visible image for the bridge crew was amazing because it handles the scientific and engineering problems that riddle a transparency. It’s an issue I hate in Star Wars and a visual/design choice they also chose for the Orville. It’s equally dumb for the Orville given their sophisticated sensors.

And personally I don’t think something looks cool when it’s literally useless and we know it’s useless because basic public school science education tells us so. In the 21st century our ships have to rely on optics primarily, because we have nothing better to replace it with. But our ships are also close range, low orbit, atmospheric re-entry, and intrasolar. If there’s a crew onboard, they will always be in the solar system and nearly always in the light of the sun or a planetary body which reflects the sunlight.

Being in a solar system and having starlight cast upon you, or reflected upon you will solve your largest technical problems with optics. Those of light to see and to a broader degree, line of sight. Where it gets a bit less tricky is when youre in a ship which is massive by contemporary standards, operates mostly in the black depths of outer space, and operates at great distance. Because of Trek ship’s ability to operate sensors and even weapons at thousands of kilometers from friend or foe; a ship can be at distances too far to see via optics. Mostly ships on screen are much closer than accurate portrayal would prescribe given their interactive distances in the scripts. This is for the entertainment benefit of the audience.

A transparency requires light, line of sight, and range in order to be practically useful. In Trek ships, stellar objects, and phenomena often negate all of these factors. The transparency would be there for the purpose of looking cool and providing a source of natural light, when it’s available. Neither are useful for a bridge crew. It’s pure aesthetic, which brings it into asinine territory.

If you took of your shoes and stood toe to glass with your face pressed to it and a sovereign class starship was in direct line of sight, with all running lights on, you wouldn’t see it as anything but a flicker of light until it were literally within a few thousand feet. And at that range it would be lethal should it’s intentions be hostile.

Most large, moving objects in space are pieces of meteor or other ferrous formations. They have no backlighting and you’d not see it before it smacked you in the hull. Many of the light waves emanating from nebulas are invisible so you’d need help there. And a hostile ship would attack you and in your windshield you’d see nothing but the occasional phaser beam or photon torpedo, striking you from the dark at like 500,000km. And all they’d have to do to stay invisible is stay off access from your windshield by say more than 15-20 degrees.

Not to mention that transparent aluminum, which is a real thing now, doesn’t protect from radiation anywhere as effectively as denser, opaque alloys, you’d be opening your crew up to another vector of danger. Plus a solid allow construction all around has greater hull integrity. Literally nothing about a transparency on the front of an interstellar craft is of benefit. It adds two layers of potential danger and doesn’t even surge a practical purpose. Knowing all of that an intelligence who would build a large transparency on such a craft when a much better alternative exists, would by its sheer stupidity, not look cool. A shuttle, runabout, courier, sure. A view screen doesn’t improve on real time line of sight for aerial maneuvers. But for a non-aerial starship it’s nonsense.
 

Sailor.X

Cold War Veteran
Founder
Joined
Aug 11, 2019
Reaction score
10,701
Location
A Boat Unit in the past.
I personally think most ships in STO are ugly. I dont know who they hired, but they’re just busy. They lack the elegance that most Star Trek ships have. clean and simple. Especially the Romulan ships. Those big, vibrator/dildo ships are ugly as sin.


Inquisitors will be paying you a visit shortly. :devilish::p
 

Val the Moofia Boss

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 6, 2020
Reaction score
2,266
Location
Southern Commiefornia
Personally, when it comes to high fantasy like Star Trek and Star Wars, I'm not really bothered by the specifics. I'm here to have fun, not read a technical manual. I think the lack of viewscreens fits the WW2 look that Star Wars goes for. Viewscreens solved a storytelling problem for TV in that you have two characters on different ships who are talking to each other, but just hearing their voices over the radio wouldn't be as engaging as actually seeing the other character through a camera feed. And if you're getting into the specific properties of fantasy materials like the stuff ST and SW spaceships are made out of, it's just not going to make sense (the hulls of ST ships can survive atmospheric reentry, flying close to a sun, bombardment by capital ship phasers and cannons, and nukes, but are casually melted within a few seconds by a character with his hand phaser?)
 

Bassoe

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 25, 2021
Reaction score
4,913
And if you're getting into the specific properties of fantasy materials like the stuff ST and SW spaceships are made out of, it's just not going to make sense (the hulls of ST ships can survive atmospheric reentry, flying close to a sun, bombardment by capital ship phasers and cannons, and nukes, but are casually melted within a few seconds by a character with his hand phaser?)
I thought it was shields providing the actual durability, hulls are just metal.
 

Sailor.X

Cold War Veteran
Founder
Joined
Aug 11, 2019
Reaction score
10,701
Location
A Boat Unit in the past.
I thought it was shields providing the actual durability, hulls are just metal.
It is the shields that take 95% of the hits in Star Trek. The only armors that can tank direct fire are Neutrionium and Ablative. and the later burns away at each hit.

Personally, when it comes to high fantasy like Star Trek and Star Wars, I'm not really bothered by the specifics. I'm here to have fun, not read a technical manual. I think the lack of viewscreens fits the WW2 look that Star Wars goes for. Viewscreens solved a storytelling problem for TV in that you have two characters on different ships who are talking to each other, but just hearing their voices over the radio wouldn't be as engaging as actually seeing the other character through a camera feed. And if you're getting into the specific properties of fantasy materials like the stuff ST and SW spaceships are made out of, it's just not going to make sense (the hulls of ST ships can survive atmospheric reentry, flying close to a sun, bombardment by capital ship phasers and cannons, and nukes, but are casually melted within a few seconds by a character with his hand phaser?)
I will say this about Star Wars. I love Star Wars but the space battles make zero sense. The WW2 style of space combat can't work when you think about it. Starfighters are not traveling at a few hundred mph. They are traveling at fractions of a percent of the speed of light. Manned turrets should literally hit jack and shit. Which is why I have said in a ship vs ship battle Star Trek ships would murder Star Wars ships. They would never be able to hit a Starfleet ship traveling at .25 impulse speed.
 

Captain X

Well-known member
Osaul
Joined
Aug 13, 2019
Reaction score
15,641
Location
The Land of Snow and Cold
I actually really hate the JJ-verse windshields. To me, it's just part of how Star Trek got turned into what the pop culture stereotypes of it were, which includes the normie perception of the viewscreen being a windshield even though it wasn't intended to be. It also totally ripped off what I was planning to do with my Foundations series with the older ships of that setting to help illustrate that they were older ships. :cautious:
 

The Whispering Monk

Well-known member
Sotnik
Joined
Aug 19, 2019
Reaction score
10,928
...It also totally ripped off what I was planning to do with my Foundations series with the older ships of that setting to help illustrate that they were older ships. :cautious:
Then just pretend they did it the way you want and ignore the rest!
 

bullethead

Part-time fanfic writer
Super Moderator
Staff Member
Joined
Aug 9, 2019
Reaction score
3,506
Location
Florida
Theres no upside to it either. its no mistake that only ships that are capable of routinely undergoing atmospheric re-entry, have large transparencies. Either by purpose or happy accident, Star Trek managed to correct a short-coming of science fiction ships with their view screen and lack of a giant bay window. The notion that a ship with highly sophisticated sensors and computers could ‘scan’ an area and render it into a visible image for the bridge crew was amazing because it handles the scientific and engineering problems that riddle a transparency.
There is an upside to it: whenever you're stuck in a nebula that fucks with your sensors or you have a power failure, you can see what's going on outside.
 

Battlegrinder

Someday we will win, no matter what it takes.
Moderator
Staff Member
Founder
Obozny
Joined
Aug 11, 2019
Reaction score
10,982
I personally think most ships in STO are ugly. I dont know who they hired, but they’re just busy. They lack the elegance that most Star Trek ships have. clean and simple. Especially the Romulan ships. Those big, vibrator/dildo ships are ugly as sin.
Eh, not really, most STO designs are detailed on par with something like the Sovereign class or NX, designs from later in the ship's run when it was easier to have highly detailed ships. Certainly there are some design that are a tad busy, but the big iconic designs like the Odyssey and Andromeda aren't much different than what the Galaxy would have looked like if they'd drawn it up in 1996 and not 1987.

its no mistake that only ships that are capable of routinely undergoing atmospheric re-entry, have large transparencies.
I don't think that's true. Voyager doesn't have a transparent window, nor do BOPs or Jem Hadar fighters (the latter don't even have a viewscreen at all). The actual rule is that only ships that were designed after the 2009 movie have them.

The bridge window is actually the only JJverse design feature that I like. It has no real downsides, you can still use holographic displays for ship to ship coms and all the stuff they used to use the viewscreen view, and it looks very cool
.....
Literally nothing about a transparency on the front of an interstellar craft is of benefit. It adds two layers of potential danger and doesn’t even surge a practical purpose. Knowing all of that an intelligence who would build a large transparency on such a craft when a much better alternative exists, would by its sheer stupidity, not look cool.
It's bizzare that these two points are from the same post, referencing the same topic.

I actually really hate the JJ-verse windshields. To me, it's just part of how Star Trek got turned into what the pop culture stereotypes of it were, which includes the normie perception of the viewscreen being a windshield even though it wasn't intended to be.
Is ST 2009 the pop culture stereotype of Star Trek? It never came off like that to me, it was too fast paced and too busy for me to buy people going "yeah, this is what I think star trek is usually like".


As for the bridge window, I like it, in part because it helps tie the bridge to the rest of the ship. On the the pre-2009 shops, you could never see the rest of the ship through the viewscreen, so the bridge always felt a little bit too much like a TV set and not part of a real ship (the fact that I'm a big TNG fan and the TNG bridge is the least military of any of the bridges doesn't help). Having a window where you can look out and see the hull does a lot to address that.
 

Laskar

Would you kindly?
Founder
Joined
Aug 12, 2019
Reaction score
3,839
Location
Near the lighthouse, under the sea.
So can anyone else confirm that "Duet" is missing on Paramount+?
Yup, it's missing:


Anybody know if there's something going on with Maritiza's actor?
Article:
Why isn't the show or episode I want to stream available on demand?



If a show or episode is not available, it's likely due to restrictions in streaming rights. But remember, with Paramount+, you have more than 30,000 episodes and movies to choose from, along with live sports like the UEFA Champions League and UEFA Europa League! In addition, we've added programming from BET, Comedy Central, Nickelodeon, MTV/VH1 and Smithsonian Channel, with even more on the way.
Can confirm, it's back on. I'm watching it right now.
 
Top Bottom