View Single Post
Old August 20 2013, 07:40 PM   #171
Re: So many Mirandas/So few Constitution-refits?

Crazy Eddie wrote: View Post
blssdwlf wrote: View Post
The paragraph clearly states that the leader of the friendly forces is setting the conditions of the defense so his/her friendly forces...
Is not a general, and isn't the supreme commander of a massive coalition of multiple units.
A leader could be as low as a squad leader and going up. It isn't exclusively a general or supreme commander.

Crazy Eddie wrote: View Post
More importantly, this is again in the context of military science and officer's training; that's how those terms are ACTUALLY USED.
Show me where it says in the military that a defensive action would exclude destroying your enemy.

Crazy Eddie wrote: View Post
The GOAL of a defensive action is to destroy or fix an enemy attack and gain the initiative to be able to go on the offense. Preserving the health and well-being of enemy forces isn't a requirement.
It's a question of maximum efficiency is all. Any action that most effectively defeats their attack meets the goals of defense.
That can include killing or destroying their units.

So what do you think about the tail gunners on a WW2 bomber? They're firing guns to destroy enemy planes that are attacking them yet they are in a defensive role since they are unlikely to fly the bomber backwards to chase down an enemy plane.

Crazy Eddie wrote: View Post
Not according to the source you linked to.
Yes it is since it is an action by a defending force. "Attack by part or all of a defending force against an enemy attacking force."

Crazy Eddie wrote: View Post
Again, if you want to split hairs and use terms incorrectly, that's your call. You tend to do that a lot just for argument's sake; whatever makes you happy.
And just when I thought we were having a cordial debate.

Crazy Eddie wrote: View Post
Engineering -- also known as the "engine room" -- is a compartment that contains the intermix chamber and the main reactor below it, and also the power systems and machinery related to them.
And you can also control the ship completely from Engineering as seen in "The Ultimate Computer" when they wired in an automation device that could not be manually overridden.

Crazy Eddie wrote: View Post
During the "eight weeks" conversation, Scotty is not in the engine room, but is in fact in a ladderway that grants access between decks. It's possible he's CLOSE to engineering, but that's definitely not where he is.
Do you have a screenshot to connect that to a ladderway? It just looks like some part of engineering.

Crazy Eddie wrote: View Post
Considering how flimsy that jury rigging turned out to be, how much time would he really need?
Apparently more time than what was available during that standoff with the BOP and less time than 2.1 weeks

Crazy Eddie wrote: View Post
Scotty may be a miracle worker, but I don't see him rebooting the entire automation system and rewriting the software in five seconds flat. Hell, I think that would be a tall order even for Data.
You didn't cover manual override as I had written earlier. So again, if it was just a software problem Scotty could have gone for a manual override.

Crazy Eddie wrote: View Post
If they could have run to deflector control and manually raised the shields, you mean? I DEFINITELY don't see Scotty pulling that off in five seconds.
They had plenty of time to face off against the BOP and listen to Kruge's threats and David's death. That's time for them to get something working on the ship if manual override was an option.

Crazy Eddie wrote: View Post
you can't MANUALLY run ship as sophisticated as the Enterprise with just six people, and with the automation center taken out, they're as helpless as the Yorktown.
Depends on what you're trying to do. Manually running the ship on an extended trip would be a problem with 6 people. But going downstairs to manually activate a device (see Generations) or transfer power to phasers doesn't appear to be an insurmountable task if manual override was an option.

Crazy Eddie wrote: View Post
Unless you think the automation center is physically connected to the helm console next to Scotty's wrist, I don't think this is the case. Kruge's torpedo did hit them a couple meters aft of the bridge, so it probably physically damaged the computer elements that were handling the automation altogether.
It hit to the port side of the deflection crystal housing which is more than a couple of meters aft of the bridge. In anycase, damage to the computer elements doesn't sound like a software issue.

Crazy Eddie wrote: View Post
Which you are guessing -- based on nothing at all -- relates to their explosive yield
It's based on visual evidence with labels. It's a good thing they did lots of those visual inserts

Crazy Eddie wrote: View Post
There is nothing obvious in the movie that the training vessel was not going to do any training exploration.
Other than the fact that they had no pre-set destination in mind and Spock tells Sulu "indulge yourself." As far as we can tell, they hadn't even left the solar system yet when Carol called him to complain.
So where is your evidence that their training flight would have excluded a training exploration at some point in their itinerary? Now you're guessing

Crazy Eddie wrote: View Post
Or the asteroid was the size of a small moon as the navigational deflectors of the TOS Enterprise could nudge a rock the size of the Earth's moon.
No they couldn't. In fact, they nearly burned out their engines trying it.
Nudge. Not enough to deflect it out of the way, just nudge. If they didn't have the power to even nudge it then the deflection would have produced zero effect.
SPOCK: Degree of deflection, Mister Sulu.
SULU: Not enough, Mister Spock. It's only point zero zero one three degrees.
Crazy Eddie wrote: View Post
More importantly, Ilia mentions it as "unidentified small object has been pulled into the wormhole with us directly ahead." What is a "small object" in this context? Smaller than the Enterprise, larger than a shuttlecraft; definitely not "small moon."
Pulverizing a "small" 200-300meter asteroid would require significant energy. Either kinetic or explosive. That same energy used on a city would be catastrophic.
blssdwlf is offline   Reply With Quote