View Single Post
Old May 30 2013, 11:10 PM   #76
Pauln6
Rear Admiral
 
Pauln6's Avatar
 
Location: Bristol, United Kingdom
Re: New Treknology Into Darkness

Timo wrote: View Post
But that doesn't make sense. Communications signals come in on subspace carrier waves and if they couldn't detect them they'd never receive any messages.
So it does make sense after all? I mean, I just argued that subspace carrier waves are consistently detectable and this is because they are a long-duration phenomenon.

How does Nero get the drop on 47 Klingon ships?
He can kill a planet with, indeed, a drop. Catching a Klingon frontline garrison world by surprise would be a nice way to accomplish such a trick... There'd be no opposition afterwards, but OTOH a space detonation of red matter would leave planetside witnesses to spread the message of terror to Starfleet, thereby leaving Vulcan defenseless.

But if Nero really uses this as a ruse to get Starfleet away from Vulcan, then surely the battle site must be distant from Vulcan - while Nero himself has a slow ship... Which is why I still prefer the idea that there was no battle, merely a false message that indicated a horrible threat approaching from the direction of Laurentius which is nowhere near Vulcan or Nero's previous location.

That's probably the weakest approach, as starships have energy and power to burn. Escaping a planet is an established feat - starships even escape black holes in TOS and VOY! Towing a planet is a feat not yet established, but it should not be all that far beyond the capabilities of a single ship; Spock and Picard come close to achieving it in "Paradise Syndrome" and "Deja Q", respectively.

Whether starships move by using thrust is far from established. We have never heard of a "rocket blast" associated with impulse power, and indeed starships themselves appear immune to such things, as impulse engines often are facing starship structures without frying them. Perhaps impulse drive is purely gravity manipulation (that is, subspace trickery, as subspace fields remove inertia)? Even if it's not, Starfleet has gravity tech, and could direct the ship's power to gravitic landing and takeoff engines if need be.

...But nowhere the size of a Borg ship yet. And bigger things have lifted off planets in Star Trek...

The energy requirement to escape and in fact manoeuvre rather effectively and speedily within an atmosphere have nothing to do with real world physics any more.
Why is this a problem? Real world physics could not explain how the Enterprise got from Elas to Troyius in such a short time, let alone how she got to the Tellun system in the first place. Propulsion in Trek is fundamentally and consistently immune to currently known laws of physics.

That doesn't make it ill-conceived or contradictory, though. Not unless for some reason starships were unable to land on planets and lift off from them!

Now they can zip around in a planet's gravity like a TIE fighter.
If by "now" you mean "Tomorrow is Yesterday"...

Timo Saloniemi
Now you've lost me. In what way do you feel that detecting and intercepting a communications signal sent via subspace different from detecting and intercepting a a transporter signal sent via subspace? If you can detect the incoming carrier wave it should tip your automated systems off one way or another.

Yeah there are a few patches that you can apply to try and justify the Narada and why it takes so long to get to Earth, doesn't seem to have its shields up, or Why Spock and Kirk don't seem to bother to take steps to notify Starfleet Command what's going on etc etc. But monitoring stations along the Neutral Zone should have detected the creation of an artificial black hole so it's not a foolproof theory.

TOS science was based on real world physics even if the writers weren't required to write using a Trek tech bible back in those days. I don't think citing Voyager is a point in your favour and citing multiple occasions where writers clearly got it wrong just highlights why nerds are justified in continuing to moan! Do you want another Star Trek V on your conscience?

And I know you are exaggerating in Tomorrow is Yesterday. Firstly, they didn't have the special effects to make the Enterprise perform a u-turn and secondly the ship was performing more like a Vogon Constructor fleet - hanging in the air in exactly the same way that bricks don't. Skimming the upper atmosphere isn't the same as dive-bombing a planet's surface.

Yes you can magic up an excuse but generally speaking starships were designed to be freaky and un-aerodynamic because they were built in space and stayed in space. Dumping those clunking great things into an atmosphere and making them zip around is silly. You may like it, but it's still silly.
__________________
Star Trek/Babylon 5/Alien crossover www.youtube.com/user/pauln6

Other Worlds Role Playing Game
http://rpg.drivethrustuff.com/produc...ducts_id=97631
Pauln6 is offline   Reply With Quote