RSS iconTwitter iconFacebook icon

The Trek BBS title image

The Trek BBS statistics

Threads: 139,573
Posts: 5,423,433
Members: 24,810
Currently online: 409
Newest member: toaster

TrekToday headlines

Star Trek: Alien Domain Game Announced
By: T'Bonz on Sep 15

Red Shirt Diaries Episode Three
By: T'Bonz on Sep 15

Made Out Of Mudd Photonovel
By: T'Bonz on Sep 15

Takei Has Growth Removed
By: T'Bonz on Sep 15

Retro Review: Tears of the Prophets
By: Michelle on Sep 12

New Wizkids Attack Wing Ships
By: T'Bonz on Sep 12

Coto Drama Sold To Fox
By: T'Bonz on Sep 12

Braga Inks Deal
By: T'Bonz on Sep 12

Remastered Original Series Re-release
By: T'Bonz on Sep 11

UK Trek Ships Calendar Debuts
By: T'Bonz on Sep 10


Welcome! The Trek BBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans. Please login to see our full range of forums as well as the ability to send and receive private messages, track your favourite topics and of course join in the discussions.

If you are a new visitor, join us for free. If you are an existing member please login below. Note: for members who joined under our old messageboard system, please login with your display name not your login name.


Go Back   The Trek BBS > Star Trek TV Series > Star Trek - Original Series

Star Trek - Original Series The one that started it all...

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old September 21 2012, 08:07 PM   #31
MacLeod
Admiral
 
Location: Great Britain
Re: Are there too many "convenient" planets or scenarios to beam down

^Don't think so, but thats irrelevant. Even in places with a high rain fall, it doesn't always rain every single day.

Well as pointed out we did see snow.
__________________
On the continent of wild endeavour in the mountains of solace and solitude there stood the citadel of the time lords, the oldest and most mighty race in the universe looking down on the galaxies below sworn never to interfere only to watch.
MacLeod is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 21 2012, 08:11 PM   #32
Grant
Fleet Captain
 
Grant's Avatar
 
Re: Are there too many "convenient" planets or scenarios to beam down

Mr_Homn wrote: View Post
Grant wrote: View Post
MacLeod wrote: View Post
Remember ST is a TV show and it has to be produced to a budget, as for it always being sunny, isn't that more a case of were the show was filmed.
Was there even one episode of TOS where it rained--on Earth or an alien world?
Not that I can think of, off hand. Los Angeles is generally a dry region.
I just thought of one---sort of--the street is clearly wet in the final exterior scene of All Our Yesterdays as Kirk goes back to the portal access.
It was filmed on backlot and in real world it could have been a case of studio people just hosing the location off.
But in the context of the episode it had to be evidence of it having rained.

McCoy mentions 'rainy day' in 'Devil in..'and sandoval mentions, 'moderate rainfall' in This side..'


that's as close as we get I suppose.
Grant is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 21 2012, 11:04 PM   #33
plynch
Commodore
 
plynch's Avatar
 
Location: Outer Graceland
View plynch's Twitter Profile
Re: Are there too many "convenient" planets or scenarios to beam down

Even of the air were breathable, think of all the different germs you'd be breathing in and/or letting in through cracks in your skin. Even travelling to a different part of this planet people have to adjust to different pollen and can be sick from that.

It was 1966 tv, a vehicle with which to tell stories about people. It's ok.
__________________
Author of Live Like Louis! Inspirational Stories from the Life of Louis Armstrong, http://livelikelouis.com
plynch is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 22 2012, 05:03 AM   #34
The Grim Ghost
Fleet Captain
 
The Grim Ghost's Avatar
 
Location: Thee Olde Spook Shack
Re: Are there too many "convenient" planets or scenarios to beam down

Jimi_James wrote: View Post
For that image? What's up with the moon and why is it so close? Is it inhabited and indeed, does its proximity effect the planet in some way beyond simple tidal forces? What's with the low cloud cover? Is the atmosphere unusually thin? Are those lakes of water, or so sort other liquid? If it's not water, is it dangerous to go swimming? Is it even liquid, it could be frozen from the looks of it. Why do things looks sort of hazy? What's up with those blue/purple bushes? If that is the local star to the left of the moon, is it flashing or pulsing for some reason and if so why? Why is the sky that color? Why is there no vegetation, other than those blue bushes and what appears to be grass? There are no trees or any other kind of plants anywhere. Are there any animals in the vicinity? Spock, have we been here before? This matte painting looks like the planet we visited a few weeks ago.


I'm kidding, sort of. More specifically though, I was referring to the previously comment about stumbling upon a planet that appeared to have no moons and orbit no star. Sure, they can get away with not explaining why the planet appears to exist on it's own, but some comment about other planetary bodies in the system and the star they're orbiting isn't too much to ask for.

It only takes a moment to include a throwaway line about the rest of the star system. And my point was that if you're going to go to the trouble of doing something, than why not go just a bit further and get the details right. Or at the very least include some details that sound right, even if you make them up. The existence of the Tech Manual suggest there are plenty of people who care about such details, even if they never make it into the show or add any great depth to the story.
I'm not really sure why you assume these planets are "just there".

Many times we join the ship when it is already orbiting a planet. Other times we might see a planet gradually growing larger on the viewscreen. The ship's sensors are centered around showing their destination, the planet itself.

You can easily imagine Spock's science station picking up all of the other relevant astronomical details and forwarding them to anybody else who needs to know if you like.

Honestly I think you are in the minority in wanting more of those types of details...which is fine! We all like different aspects of the show, but for most viewers I really don't think it would add much, and might even be dull or annoying to others. It simply wasn't the focus of the show to delve into such minutiae.
__________________
Life looks better in black and white.
The Grim Ghost is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 22 2012, 05:32 AM   #35
Jimi_James
Lieutenant Commander
 
Jimi_James's Avatar
 
Location: Gettin' Lucky in Kentucky
View Jimi_James's Twitter Profile
Re: Are there too many "convenient" planets or scenarios to beam down

BillJ wrote: View Post
Jimi_James wrote: View Post
For that image? What's up with the moon and why is it so close? Is it inhabited and indeed, does its proximity effect the planet in some way beyond simple tidal forces? What's with the low cloud cover? Is the atmosphere unusually thin? Are those lakes of water, or so sort other liquid? If it's not water, is it dangerous to go swimming? Is it even liquid, it could be frozen from the looks of it. Why do things looks sort of hazy? What's up with those blue/purple bushes? If that is the local star to the left of the moon, is it flashing or pulsing for some reason and if so why? Why is the sky that color? Why is there no vegetation, other than those blue bushes and what appears to be grass? There are no trees or any other kind of plants anywhere. Are there any animals in the vicinity? Spock, have we been here before? This matte painting looks like the planet we visited a few weeks ago.

But none of that is really important to the scene at hand and would feel unnatural.
You forgot to quote the part right after that paragraph where I said I was kidding. Of course I don't expect them to get into all of that, unless the story specifically called for it. I was pointing any question I could think of, into response to Timo's post about what more the the matte painting could possibly cover.

Sure, it does a great job setting the scene, but to say the landscape doesn't raise any questions, is off the mark. So to simply point out that questions could be asked, I rattled off a list of things that came to mind...and to be honest I wasn't even sure what episode that was from, and how it might have fit into the narrative of a specific story didn't even come to mind. I was just pointing out questions for the sake of pointing them out.
__________________
“I was here,” says Man. “Prove it,” says the Universe.” Method of Life, a post apocalyptic sci-fi ebook available on Amazon.

My YouTube Gaming Channel
Jimi_James is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 22 2012, 06:03 AM   #36
Jimi_James
Lieutenant Commander
 
Jimi_James's Avatar
 
Location: Gettin' Lucky in Kentucky
View Jimi_James's Twitter Profile
Re: Are there too many "convenient" planets or scenarios to beam down

The Grim Ghost wrote: View Post
Jimi_James wrote: View Post
For that image? What's up with the moon and why is it so close? Is it inhabited and indeed, does its proximity effect the planet in some way beyond simple tidal forces? What's with the low cloud cover? Is the atmosphere unusually thin? Are those lakes of water, or so sort other liquid? If it's not water, is it dangerous to go swimming? Is it even liquid, it could be frozen from the looks of it. Why do things looks sort of hazy? What's up with those blue/purple bushes? If that is the local star to the left of the moon, is it flashing or pulsing for some reason and if so why? Why is the sky that color? Why is there no vegetation, other than those blue bushes and what appears to be grass? There are no trees or any other kind of plants anywhere. Are there any animals in the vicinity? Spock, have we been here before? This matte painting looks like the planet we visited a few weeks ago.


I'm kidding, sort of. More specifically though, I was referring to the previously comment about stumbling upon a planet that appeared to have no moons and orbit no star. Sure, they can get away with not explaining why the planet appears to exist on it's own, but some comment about other planetary bodies in the system and the star they're orbiting isn't too much to ask for.

It only takes a moment to include a throwaway line about the rest of the star system. And my point was that if you're going to go to the trouble of doing something, than why not go just a bit further and get the details right. Or at the very least include some details that sound right, even if you make them up. The existence of the Tech Manual suggest there are plenty of people who care about such details, even if they never make it into the show or add any great depth to the story.
I'm not really sure why you assume these planets are "just there".

Many times we join the ship when it is already orbiting a planet. Other times we might see a planet gradually growing larger on the viewscreen. The ship's sensors are centered around showing their destination, the planet itself.

You can easily imagine Spock's science station picking up all of the other relevant astronomical details and forwarding them to anybody else who needs to know if you like.

Honestly I think you are in the minority in wanting more of those types of details...which is fine! We all like different aspects of the show, but for most viewers I really don't think it would add much, and might even be dull or annoying to others. It simply wasn't the focus of the show to delve into such minutiae.
I'm not assuming they're just there. That was someone else, as I mentioned in my post. I was commenting on the general need to at the very least give the appearance that you care about including some level of detail beyond simply warping up to a planet and beaming down to see what the locals are up to.
It doesn't matter what the details ever are, if they're towards a planet, a type of weapon being used, or the type of power flowing through your engines...which Star Trek is known for getting into. We even had to invent a word to define the level of technical detail Trek gets into, even though most of it is made up...technobable is all about details. Think of it as the difference between saying, "they're shooting at us," and "we're taking enemy disruptor fire."

The same mentality should be applied across the board, so rather than saying hey, there's a planet let's check it out....you instead get, we're approaching an M-class world, with a pre-warp civilization approaching one billion inhabitants." The latter is usually the standard of what we get and that's fine...And before that's again construed as an plea for vastly more detail to be included, let me say clearly that I feel Trek gets into plenty of detail as it is, and could stand with a little less detail, particularly in the case of technobabble. Too much detail can be dull an annoying and it has to be done carefully.

Anyway, to get back to the original topic, I think it's really amazing now that we're finding so many actual planets beyond our solar system and that some of them may very well be possible of supporting some sort of life.

In the past, it did seem strange that Trek came across so many habitable planets, but it seems sort of fitting in a way to find out now that Trek may have actually had it right after all. There are tons of planets out there and many of them will likely support life, not only life as we might expect to find it, but possibly life beyond anything we might image. It's a great time to be a science fiction fan...seeing what we thought was fiction, actually becoming science fact.
__________________
“I was here,” says Man. “Prove it,” says the Universe.” Method of Life, a post apocalyptic sci-fi ebook available on Amazon.

My YouTube Gaming Channel
Jimi_James is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 22 2012, 06:42 AM   #37
The Grim Ghost
Fleet Captain
 
The Grim Ghost's Avatar
 
Location: Thee Olde Spook Shack
Re: Are there too many "convenient" planets or scenarios to beam down

Jimi_James wrote: View Post
The Grim Ghost wrote: View Post
Jimi_James wrote: View Post
For that image? What's up with the moon and why is it so close? Is it inhabited and indeed, does its proximity effect the planet in some way beyond simple tidal forces? What's with the low cloud cover? Is the atmosphere unusually thin? Are those lakes of water, or so sort other liquid? If it's not water, is it dangerous to go swimming? Is it even liquid, it could be frozen from the looks of it. Why do things looks sort of hazy? What's up with those blue/purple bushes? If that is the local star to the left of the moon, is it flashing or pulsing for some reason and if so why? Why is the sky that color? Why is there no vegetation, other than those blue bushes and what appears to be grass? There are no trees or any other kind of plants anywhere. Are there any animals in the vicinity? Spock, have we been here before? This matte painting looks like the planet we visited a few weeks ago.


I'm kidding, sort of. More specifically though, I was referring to the previously comment about stumbling upon a planet that appeared to have no moons and orbit no star. Sure, they can get away with not explaining why the planet appears to exist on it's own, but some comment about other planetary bodies in the system and the star they're orbiting isn't too much to ask for.

It only takes a moment to include a throwaway line about the rest of the star system. And my point was that if you're going to go to the trouble of doing something, than why not go just a bit further and get the details right. Or at the very least include some details that sound right, even if you make them up. The existence of the Tech Manual suggest there are plenty of people who care about such details, even if they never make it into the show or add any great depth to the story.
I'm not really sure why you assume these planets are "just there".

Many times we join the ship when it is already orbiting a planet. Other times we might see a planet gradually growing larger on the viewscreen. The ship's sensors are centered around showing their destination, the planet itself.

You can easily imagine Spock's science station picking up all of the other relevant astronomical details and forwarding them to anybody else who needs to know if you like.

Honestly I think you are in the minority in wanting more of those types of details...which is fine! We all like different aspects of the show, but for most viewers I really don't think it would add much, and might even be dull or annoying to others. It simply wasn't the focus of the show to delve into such minutiae.
I'm not assuming they're just there. That was someone else, as I mentioned in my post. I was commenting on the general need to at the very least give the appearance that you care about including some level of detail beyond simply warping up to a planet and beaming down to see what the locals are up to.
It doesn't matter what the details ever are, if they're towards a planet, a type of weapon being used, or the type of power flowing through your engines...which Star Trek is known for getting into. We even had to invent a word to define the level of technical detail Trek gets into, even though most of it is made up...technobable is all about details. Think of it as the difference between saying, "they're shooting at us," and "we're taking enemy disruptor fire."

The same mentality should be applied across the board, so rather than saying hey, there's a planet let's check it out....you instead get, we're approaching an M-class world, with a pre-warp civilization approaching one billion inhabitants." The latter is usually the standard of what we get and that's fine...And before that's again construed as an plea for vastly more detail to be included, let me say clearly that I feel Trek gets into plenty of detail as it is, and could stand with a little less detail, particularly in the case of technobabble. Too much detail can be dull an annoying and it has to be done carefully.

Anyway, to get back to the original topic, I think it's really amazing now that we're finding so many actual planets beyond our solar system and that some of them may very well be possible of supporting some sort of life.

In the past, it did seem strange that Trek came across so many habitable planets, but it seems sort of fitting in a way to find out now that Trek may have actually had it right after all. There are tons of planets out there and many of them will likely support life, not only life as we might expect to find it, but possibly life beyond anything we might image. It's a great time to be a science fiction fan...seeing what we thought was fiction, actually becoming science fact.
Sorry, didn't mean to put somebody else's words in your mouth, it's late here.. I get what you're saying and mostly agree.

I think we can assume that the Enterprise probably investigated many other sorts of worlds off camera and that we are only shown the most interesting ones. Also I imagine that more emphasis is put on checking out the more earthlike planets, or inhabited planets in general for obvious reasons.

To your last point...yes I agree that is quite as awesome thing isn't it?! Very exciting.
__________________
Life looks better in black and white.
The Grim Ghost is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 22 2012, 07:56 AM   #38
scotpens
Vice Admiral
 
scotpens's Avatar
 
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Re: Are there too many "convenient" planets or scenarios to beam down

Timewalker wrote: View Post
The thing that always irritated me about the planets that the crew stumbled across mostly seem to just be there. They're rarely mentioned as having their own Sun, or being part of a solar system, or even having any moons.
Well, it goes without saying that any planet is going to be orbiting some star or other. And the nomenclature was often quite specific. For example, the planet in "This Side of Paradise" is Omicron Ceti Three, meaning it's the third planet orbiting the fifteenth brightest star (omicron being the 15th letter of the Greek alphabet) in the constellation Cetus (the whale).
__________________
“All the universe or nothingness. Which shall it be, Passworthy? Which shall it be?”
scotpens is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 22 2012, 08:13 AM   #39
kythe
Commander
 
Location: US
Re: Are there too many "convenient" planets or scenarios to beam down

scotpens wrote: View Post
Well, it goes without saying that any planet is going to be orbiting some star or other. And the nomenclature was often quite specific. For example, the planet in "This Side of Paradise" is Omicron Ceti Three, meaning it's the third planet orbiting the fifteenth brightest star (omicron being the 15th letter of the Greek alphabet) in the constellation Cetus (the whale).
Not always. In "Enterprise" episode "Rogue Planet" they found a planet with no sun that somehow managed to support a complete ecosystem. There was no explanation for what the planet's source of heat was, and I don't think there is anything redeeming that episode scientifically.
kythe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 22 2012, 08:16 AM   #40
scotpens
Vice Admiral
 
scotpens's Avatar
 
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Re: Are there too many "convenient" planets or scenarios to beam down

SchwEnt wrote: View Post
I don't think it was ever confirmed onscreen, but in-universe Kirk had orders to explore and investigate Class M Earth-approximate planets.

So maybe not just convenient that we always saw the Enterprise stumbling across Class M planets. It seems those were the ones the ship was sent to explore. Or something.
From Gene Roddenberry's original series outline, as quoted in TMOST:
(Excerpted from orders to Captain Robert T. April)

. . . VI. Consistent with the limitations of your vessel and equipment, you will confine your landings and contacts to class "M" planets approximating Earth-Mars conditions.
So . . . yeah. It was part of the concept from the beginning that the Enterprise would be mostly limited to exploring Earthlike planets, obviously for budgetary reasons.
__________________
“All the universe or nothingness. Which shall it be, Passworthy? Which shall it be?”
scotpens is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 22 2012, 09:02 AM   #41
Jimi_James
Lieutenant Commander
 
Jimi_James's Avatar
 
Location: Gettin' Lucky in Kentucky
View Jimi_James's Twitter Profile
Re: Are there too many "convenient" planets or scenarios to beam down

The Grim Ghost wrote: View Post
Sorry, didn't mean to put somebody else's words in your mouth, it's late here.. I get what you're saying and mostly agree.

I think we can assume that the Enterprise probably investigated many other sorts of worlds off camera and that we are only shown the most interesting ones. Also I imagine that more emphasis is put on checking out the more earthlike planets, or inhabited planets in general for obvious reasons.

To your last point...yes I agree that is quite as awesome thing isn't it?! Very exciting.
No worries. And it's very exciting indeed.
__________________
“I was here,” says Man. “Prove it,” says the Universe.” Method of Life, a post apocalyptic sci-fi ebook available on Amazon.

My YouTube Gaming Channel
Jimi_James is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 23 2012, 01:09 AM   #42
Nerys Myk
Fleet Admiral
 
Nerys Myk's Avatar
 
Location: House of Kang, now with ridges
Re: Are there too many "convenient" planets or scenarios to beam down

kythe wrote: View Post
scotpens wrote: View Post
Well, it goes without saying that any planet is going to be orbiting some star or other. And the nomenclature was often quite specific. For example, the planet in "This Side of Paradise" is Omicron Ceti Three, meaning it's the third planet orbiting the fifteenth brightest star (omicron being the 15th letter of the Greek alphabet) in the constellation Cetus (the whale).
Not always. In "Enterprise" episode "Rogue Planet" they found a planet with no sun that somehow managed to support a complete ecosystem. There was no explanation for what the planet's source of heat was, and I don't think there is anything redeeming that episode scientifically.
From Memory Alpha

Rogue Planet Summery wrote:
When the Enterprise discovers a "rogue": a planet that has broken out of its orbit. They decide to lay in a course to take a closer look. Scanning it, T'Pol points out that this planet supports a diverse animal population despite being a rogue, because of hot gases venting from its interior, forming oases where most lifeforms are concentrated.
__________________
The boring one, the one with Khan, the one where Spock returns, the one with whales, the dumb one, the last one, the one with Kirk, the one with the Borg, the stupid one, the bad one, the new one, the other one with Khan.
Nerys Myk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 23 2012, 01:36 AM   #43
T'Girl
Vice Admiral
 
T'Girl's Avatar
 
Re: Are there too many "convenient" planets or scenarios to beam down

" ... to seek out new life, and new civilizations ..."

Kind of hard to do on a lifeless moon, or a poisonous planet the temperature of Venus, or a gas giant.

T'Girl is online now   Reply With Quote
Old September 23 2012, 02:41 AM   #44
Xhiandra
Lieutenant Commander
 
Xhiandra's Avatar
 
Re: Are there too many "convenient" planets or scenarios to beam down

Jimi_James wrote: View Post
For that image? What's up with the moon and why is it so close? Is it inhabited and indeed, does its proximity effect the planet in some way beyond simple tidal forces? What's with the low cloud cover? Is the atmosphere unusually thin? Are those lakes of water, or so sort other liquid? If it's not water, is it dangerous to go swimming? Is it even liquid, it could be frozen from the looks of it. Why do things looks sort of hazy? What's up with those blue/purple bushes? If that is the local star to the left of the moon, is it flashing or pulsing for some reason and if so why? Why is the sky that color?
Wouldn't it break your suspension of disbelief if they wondered about such things all the time? With the possible exception of Enterprise (where they did have some such scenes early on), it would break mine: remember that spacial exploration has been a cultural reality for centuries by the time of the TNG/DS9/VOY era, so it's only natural that they wouldn't question why a particular planet has bigger/smaller satellites or a purple sky: they're used to visiting vastly different worlds by then.

It would also be poor writing, to be honest. Such expository details belong squarely in the "show, don't tell" category.
Xhiandra is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 23 2012, 03:07 AM   #45
plynch
Commodore
 
plynch's Avatar
 
Location: Outer Graceland
View plynch's Twitter Profile
Re: Are there too many "convenient" planets or scenarios to beam down

TMOST line from GR: Earth-Mars conditions?? That's a pretty wide range of temps and atmospheres (or lack thereof)!
__________________
Author of Live Like Louis! Inspirational Stories from the Life of Louis Armstrong, http://livelikelouis.com
plynch is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump



All times are GMT +1. The time now is 09:13 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
FireFox 2+ or Internet Explorer 7+ highly recommended.