View Single Post
Old September 28 2012, 04:09 AM   #50
Crazy Eddie
Rear Admiral
 
Crazy Eddie's Avatar
 
Location: I'm in your ___, ___ing your ___
Re: Federation Law of restricting cloaking device

MacLeod wrote: View Post
newtype_alpha wrote: View Post
Timo wrote: View Post
That would be like forgetting to mention the V-weapons in a WWII epic...
I watched the movies Saving Private Ryan, Flattop, Run Silent Run Deep and PT-109. None of those movies make any reference to the V weapons; for that matter, only Saving Private Ryan makes any mention of the Battle of Brittain at all, and also doesn't mention V-weapons.

But these cloaked missile strikes are more comparable to such a movie forgetting to mention that air forces existed...
No mention of the air force in Run Silent Run Deep. Perhaps because it's a movie about a submarine?
The first V-1 bomb did fall on Britian until 1944, "Run Silent, Run Deep", "PT-109" were set in the pacific theatre, I've not seen Flattop but I'm guessing that's also the Pacific theater.
That's kinda what I meant. Timo's suggesting that in any good war movie, anything of any relevance whatsoever to the outcome of the war would be worthy of mention somewhere in dialog. I'm pointing out that this is, almost NEVER the case, that most movies will focus on a very specific theatre of operations and the relatively narrow perspective of the soldiers involved. More modern examples might be found in the movie "Jarhead," which -- ironically -- zeroes in on the life of a Marine sniper who gets through the entire Gulf War without actually shooting anyone.


throwback wrote: View Post
Combat in later Star Trek was increasingly unrealistic. In the original series, starships were battling each other at tens of thousands of kilometers. In the episode "The Ultimate Computer", the Enterprise engaged her sister ships at 200,000 kilometers. In the later episodes, ships were engaging each other at point blank range. As shown in the TOS episode, ships had better maneuverability at this distance. And this is closer to reality where fighter jets can engage in tens of kilometers.
I used to think so too, but this might end up being a truth in television. We've been told for many years by many people that air to air combat primarily involves missiles fired from beyond visual range, but often enough it devolves into the same old turning dogfight action that's always defined air combat, down to ranges between 2 and 10km.

It might be a bit different for starships, but I think part of the problem is that science fiction writers have no sense of scale. I'll grant that trading phaser fire at 700 meters is borderline silly, but 200,000km is too far to the opposite extreme; that would be like two supersonic fighter planes exchanging missiles from opposite sides of the Atlantic Ocean.

I think a realistic combat distance for a starship would be between 100 and 400km for phasers, and 1000 to 5000km for photon torpedoes (assuming the torpedoes move pretty damn fast and can cover that distance in five to ten seconds).

As for cloaking devices aboard Federation starships, Captain Kirk, a war veteran, told Kang that Starfleet doesn't specialize in sneak attacks. ("The Day of the Dove")
Which is idiotic, considering Kirk spent most of his time doing EXACTLY that on Organia.
__________________
The Complete Illustrated Guide to Starfleet - Online Now!
Crazy Eddie is offline   Reply With Quote