Knight Templar wrote:
I've always wondered this:
How long did it take Kirk to convince Commodore Wesley (and the other two ship captains) that he (Kirk) was NOT responsible for the deadly attacks on their vessels?
Obviously at the end, it is clear to all concerned that M-5 was responsible as neither Kirk or any member of his crew is under arrest.
THROUGHOUT, the M-5 controlling the Enterprise attack on the task force, Commodore Wesley seems to ASSUME that Kirk has gone mad.
EVERY reference by Wesley to the attack, mentions Captain Kirk. Not one of them mentions M-5.
"Full Phasers?! What the devil is Kirk doing!?!!"
"Captain! Jim! Have you gone mad? What are you trying to prove? Call off the attack! Jim! We have fifty three dead here! Twelve on the Excalibur".
By the way.
How is it that one phaser hit early on only kills 12 on the Excalibur but the second attack kills the other 400 or so crew aboard? Wouldn't the Excalibur be somewhat more on guard and be trying to raise shields or at least take evasive action when the second one hit?
This is undoubtedly one of many things that happened in-between the time that Wesley radios his task force "do not fire... the Enterprise has dropped her shields" and the time when McCoy is reporting on Daystrom's condition in Sickbay.
I would love to have seen a boarding party of fired-up red-shirts taking command away from Kirk, and then conducting an interrogation process with Wesley stewing in his command throne, demanding reports once every fifteen minutes while he stares at the drifting Enterprise on the Lexington's main viewscreen. That would be epic.
It really is not out of the question for at least several hours to several days to have passed between those two scenes. The establishment shot of the flying Enterprise leaves the door wide open to the fragmentation of time.
People in this forum have criticized "The Galilieo Seven", "The Ultimate Computer" and "By Any Other Name" for having excessively cheery-mooded endings after the Enterprise (or other Federation starships) have lost numerous crewmembers. But I would say in the case of "Galileo" and "Ultimate", there is an indication of the passage of time which would allow for mourning to have occurred as well as for other developments to have happened off-camera. For "By Any Other Name", there is probably a great sense of relief when Rojan turns over control of the Enterprise after highjacking it. In all cases, all Federation personnel have good reason to feel relief and optimism that, despite loss of life, a greater disaster was/will be averted.
In the case of "Ultimate", the story works whether the entire crew of the Excalibur died or only some of the crew died. Either way works for me, even though the notion of the entire crew being killed so quickly and easily seems quite a leap even for TOS.
For me, the interest Kirk and Scotty show in the wrecked Constellation, combined with Kirk's desire to rig-up the Exeter (for what?) suggests that wrecked/abandoned/infected space vessels can be salvaged. I would extrapolate that if Kirk hadn't used the crippled Constellation as a kamikaze bomb, he probably would have arranged for the Enterprise to "take her in tow" out of the asteroid field, have Scott rig/repair the derelict ship enough for it to be either flown under her own power to the nearest port or to have a mobile spacedock brought to the scene so the ship could be fully restored, re-staffed and reactivated.
Given the amazing ability of Scott's repair crew to take an "all powerplants dead" ship and wind up reactiviating her impulse engines, recharging one of her phasers and eventually rigging to ship to become a flying bomb, it really doesn't seem out of the question to me that a seriously damaged ship could be restored out in deep space either where she is found or somewhere nearby. This seems to fit in with TOS without any problem.