View Single Post
Old September 10 2013, 01:12 PM   #233
Re: So many Mirandas/So few Constitution-refits?

Crazy Eddie wrote: View Post
blssdwlf wrote: View Post
That's glare - which increased the brightness by a small amount for the entire frame.
At the point of impact, yes. However:

Again, what we'd expect to see from an initial flash from where you're describing it to be should have lit up the front of the impulse deck
IF it was significantly brighter than the torpedo itself, which -- judging by the illumination on the bridge dome -- it was not.
We have an example of what it would look like with a small light source between the impulse drive and bridge module and the initial explosion frame does not fit that look.

Crazy Eddie wrote: View Post
Yep. The first is a thing used in the real world by real navies on training missions. The second is a thing used by nobody -- not even Starfleet -- on training missions.
Really? "Rejoined" and "Sons of Mogh" both have dialogue that talks about "target drones".

Air force training uses/used towed target drones.

Oh and Jedis in training used some kind of training drones that kept zapping them.

Crazy Eddie wrote: View Post
No it did not. Both times it was overwhelmed by their attacks and forced to retreat. Which, again, is not something they could afford to do on an escort mission.
Yes it did survive by your own points. She was attacked by multiple ships and you're unwilling to back up your examples of the 4 incidents where she was heavily damaged from conventional fire.

The other thing is retreat should always be an option for an escort mission as in escorting the protected ship away from danger.

Crazy Eddie wrote: View Post
The fact that he barely managed to defeat ONE bird of prey in "Balance of Terror", and even then against a ship that had nearly exhausted its fuel reserves.
The "Balance of Terror" battle was against a ship with a new weapon and new cloaking device. "The Deadly Years" we see that shielding tech had improved to where she could withstand fire from 10 Romulan BOPs.

Crazy Eddie wrote: View Post
Besides which, it isn't a matter of SURVIVING that attack by being able to flee at an opportune moment. Enterprise is supposed to be protecting Gorkon, for whom fleeing may not necessarily be an option. That would explicitly put Enterprise in the same situation that Saavik faced in the simulator: one ship vs. Three Klingons in an attempt to save a different vessel that you cannot afford to abandon.
If Gorkon's ship becomes too damaged to flee the Enterprise will have a tough situation of trying to rescue Gorkon and then retreating. However what other ship that doesn't have ablative armor would fair any better in that situation?

Crazy Eddie wrote: View Post
That, if you recall, is the hypothetical that Admiral James T. Kirk calls "The no-win scenario."
And it can apply to any ship, not just the Enterprise.

Crazy Eddie wrote: View Post
A different ship wouldn't generate the kind of respect that Enterprise would.
She'd still need to be able to carry out the mission because not everyone respects the Enterprise and she's a magnet for young Klingon captains that want to make a name for themselves.

Crazy Eddie wrote: View Post
Apart from the implication of how Spock describes it -- he set it up on his own initiative and "personally vouched" for KIRK to go along with it -- there's the fact that the script for the movie has the CnC saying: "As it happens, Kirk, the Chancellor specifically requested you and your officers." This is the line immediately before Spock announces his voucher (and is consistent with Spock's "only Nixon could go to China" line later).
That line isn't in the filmed movie so they changed the premise. There isn't evidence in the movie that Gorkon requested Kirk.

Crazy Eddie wrote: View Post
AFAIK, neither registry is actually seen on screen. Repulse is an interesting case, but since we never see the interior we have no idea what her internal technology looks like.
Hmm, will have to look into that.

Crazy Eddie wrote: View Post
OTOH, Lantree had a crew of 26 at the time it was destroyed and is classified as a "supply ship." Not really suggestive of an "upgrade" there.
From a typical TWOK crew of the hundreds to just 26 in TNG would suggest her systems were upgraded to at least reduce her crew size.

Crazy Eddie wrote: View Post
The painfully obvious reason is that they were retired because they had become obsolete by that point. It's likely the Enterprise-A held out for as long as it did because of Jim Kirk's personal awesomeness field.
It's only painfully obvious the bridge crew were getting old. However the ship itself showed no signs of obsolescence.

Crazy Eddie wrote: View Post
Well, that plus the fact that Scotty is pretty much the ascendant god of engineering and has been single handedly holding the entire ship together -- both the nil and the -A -- since at least TOS. In that sense, Enterprise is a bit like the 1993 Dodge Charger my boss still drives around sometimes: it's such a rusty old piece of shit you couldn't sell it for a candy bar, but he somehow manages to keep it running regardless.
Your boss may drive something that physically looks like it might be falling apart but the E-A is lacking any physical signs of wear-and-tear or technical problems.

Crazy Eddie wrote: View Post
There isn't any technological reason to believe that the ship could not be further internally upgraded as her contemporaries, the Reliants and Grissoms, remained viable into the future.
The Reliants and grissoms were still in production at the time, however; new hulls could be built that specifically accommodate new technologies and advances in warp field theory without having to completely redesign them in a fundamental way.
But that's the rub isn't it? The old Reliants and Excelsior(s) in TNG/DS9 don't really change their shapes. They just accommodate the new technologies. The Soyuz class also got retired but she also has about the same or slightly more volume than the Reliant. So pinning it to a technological reasoning is alot harder without more specifics.

Crazy Eddie wrote: View Post
The Navy went through something like this in the 1990s when USS Bainbridge was slated for decommissioning; there was a cottage industry of engineers who swore on a stack of Bibles that the Bainbridge could/should be upgraded with modernized VLS systems and combat software to preserve the nuclear cruiser benefit in a modern battlespace. It turns out that the deck structure couldn't really support the VLS system anyway, and the electrical and computer systems installed in the 1970s had been so ad hoc that upgrading the ship a second time would require totally rebuilding it -- AGAIN -- with no gaurantee of improvement over existing (newer) designs.

Technologically it was doable... to the extent that a rube goldberg machine that fires pingpong balls at the speed of sound is doable. But when they got to the point that even the ship's most basic systems were over 50 years old, it was realized that the cost of replacing and upgrading the ship was greater than the cost of building a new one. The same exact thing happened to the old Albany class ships, which were rebuilt from WW-II cruisers to carry the amazingly complicated Tartar missiles; refitting them to carry the newer Standard missiles would have required completely ripping them apart and rebuilding the superstructure for the third time in as many decades in addition to other systems overdue for replacement. The navy simply didn't bother.
Those are good examples but they're because of financial reasons and not technological. Perhaps the Federation didn't want to pay for continuing upgrades or the E-A was more expensive to maintain?

Crazy Eddie wrote: View Post
That's what "obsolete" basically means in engineering. It's the point where a system/ship/technique is so far behind current technology that it is actually more complicated to upgrade to keep pace with current technology than it is to replace it altogether. It would be like ripping apart an old Apple-IIe and trying to convert it to run Snow Leapord; it's 50 times easier to just buy a new computer.
I just read the definition for obsolete as "no longer in use or no longer useful, no longer current." For the Enterprise-A:

1. Is the E-A no longer in use? - No, she's still in service and in use.
2. Is the E-A no longer useful? - No, she's still going on missions and was even carrying same type of gear that the Excelsior was using.
3. Is the E-A no longer current? - Unlikely as she had same gear as Excelsior and her interior technology appeared to be equivalent to Excelsior's.

Crazy Eddie wrote: View Post
I don't think you give the Klingons enough credit.
These are Klingons we're talking about...
blssdwlf is offline   Reply With Quote