RSS iconTwitter iconFacebook icon

The Trek BBS title image

The Trek BBS statistics

Threads: 135,739
Posts: 5,215,433
Members: 24,211
Currently online: 1020
Newest member: DeimosAnimus

TrekToday headlines

Q Meets NuTrek Crew
By: T'Bonz on Apr 18

Pine In Talks For Drama
By: T'Bonz on Apr 18

New X-Men: Days of Future Past Trailer
By: T'Bonz on Apr 17

Nimoy to Receive Award
By: T'Bonz on Apr 17

Star Trek Special: Flesh and Stone Comic
By: T'Bonz on Apr 16

These Are The Voyages TOS Season Two Book Review
By: T'Bonz on Apr 16

Kirk’s Well Wishes To Kirk
By: T'Bonz on Apr 15

Quinto In New Starz Series
By: T'Bonz on Apr 15

Star Trek: Horizon Film
By: T'Bonz on Apr 14

Star Trek: Fleet Captains Game Expansion
By: T'Bonz on Apr 14


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 Movies > Star Trek Movies I-X

Star Trek Movies I-X Discuss the first ten big screen outings in this forum!

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old December 17 2012, 01:35 PM   #16
Kronos
Admiral
 
Kronos's Avatar
 
Location: Running with the Badgers
Re: Did the Auto-destruct partially malfunction in TSFS?

It has always seemed to me that the charges blew up the bridge, auxiliary control, enviromental controls and the computer system, basically creating a load of scrap but not making a bang that might damage the only other ship to escape on.
__________________
Now I can breathe and I feel grace rush over me.
Kronos is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 17 2012, 01:46 PM   #17
Timo
Admiral
 
Re: Did the Auto-destruct partially malfunction in TSFS?

It's just that it very much looks like all the really important parts of the ship, mainly the warp engines and the location where the warp core and the torpedo launchers reside, were left completely intact by the explosions we could see, for an extended period of time at least - which does make one think that something went wrong with the scuttling charges. Perhaps they did not completely fail to detonate, but some of them were apparently badly delayed, possibly badly enough to allow a swiftly acting enemy to stop further detonations. There are many stories of warship scuttlings here on Earth being stopped by a brave and determined boarding party...

If a malfunction is ruled out, then it looks like the scuttling charges were optimized to go gently on the warp drive, for whatever reason.

Or perhaps the charges malfunctioned the other way? Perhaps Kirk only wanted to blow up the areas with Klingon boarders, so that he could later return to the wreck and fly it back to Earth, but something went wrong, the entire saucer blew and the fell from orbit. Kirk's "What have I done?" takes a new meaning here...

Timo Saloniemi
Timo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 17 2012, 03:20 PM   #18
Mytran
Fleet Captain
 
Mytran's Avatar
 
Location: North Wales
Re: Did the Auto-destruct partially malfunction in TSFS?

That would certainly provide a clearer answer to the old question of "why didn't Kirk just beam over to the nearly empty BOP?"

On the other hand, if Kirk only meant to kill (or incapacitate) the Klingon borders, wouldn't making use of the intruder alert systems be a sensible route to pursue? Knockout gas, phasers on wide beam, even just some locked doors all seem less drastic than resorting to dynamite!!!
Mytran is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 18 2012, 02:02 AM   #19
jayrath
Fleet Captain
 
Location: West Hollywood, Calif., USA
Re: Did the Auto-destruct partially malfunction in TSFS?

Or even just drop the bulkheads and turn off the turbolifts? It'd take a week for the boarding party to zap their way to the bridge. (Accommodating of them to beam into a transporter room, and not right onto the bridge, incidentally.)

None of it makes too much sense, but perhaps auto-destruct and intruder containment were some of the systems damaged in the BoP attack. Lots of other things already went gaflooey, and Kirk & Co. no longer had any hope of running the ship themselves.

So the only hope was destroying the bridge and (more far more importantly) computer core, and letting the atmosphere do the rest of the work.
jayrath is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 18 2012, 03:08 AM   #20
C.E. Evans
Vice Admiral
 
C.E. Evans's Avatar
 
Location: Saint Louis (aka Defiance)
Re: Did the Auto-destruct partially malfunction in TSFS?

Shane Johnson's idea of there being a "destruct one" and a "destruct zero" could still work if the latter is used to ensure enough clearance for last-second lifeboats and transporters, IMO. The former could be used when any evacuation of the ship isn't possible or feasible.
__________________
"Everybody wants to rule the world..."
C.E. Evans is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 18 2012, 04:41 AM   #21
SchwEnt
Fleet Captain
 
Re: Did the Auto-destruct partially malfunction in TSFS?

Also, maybe the destruct method was corrupted by the damaged nature of the Enterprise.

Between the limited repairs left from TWOK and the hit from the Bird of Prey, the damage may have affected the destruct system. What we saw in TSFS may be a self-destruct mishap, where certain scuttling charges didn't go off as designed or detonated prematurely out of sequence or whatever else you can think of. A self-destruct that didn't go as designed.

Maybe what we saw in TSFS was an unplanned destruct scenario, something between "maximum annihilation" self-destruct and "scuttle the vessel safely" self-destruct.

I'm guessing.
SchwEnt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 18 2012, 07:53 AM   #22
Takeru
Fleet Captain
 
Takeru's Avatar
 
Re: Did the Auto-destruct partially malfunction in TSFS?

Timo wrote: View Post
There is some merit to the famous backstage rationalization (printed e.g. in Shane Johnson's Mr Scott's Guide to the Enterprise) that scuttling near planets is normally done gently ...
Ugh, I really don't like explanations like that, there's way to much overthinking going on. They wanted to blow up the Enterprise in a visually intersting way, it was one of the biggest fx scenes of the movie, they didn't just want a big boom and the Enterprise disappearing in a ball of fire right away.
Takeru is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 18 2012, 08:39 AM   #23
Xaios
Lieutenant Commander
 
Xaios's Avatar
 
Re: Did the Auto-destruct partially malfunction in TSFS?

It crashed the way it did by design, except that they missed their target. Nimoy was hoping to make it crash directly into Kirk. It was his pioneering attempt to "drop a Bridge on him."
Xaios is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 18 2012, 09:42 AM   #24
Timo
Admiral
 
Re: Did the Auto-destruct partially malfunction in TSFS?

Just killing (or capturing) the boarding party would not suffice for Kirk. He had a helpless starship while the Klingon commander had a threateningly armed one. Kirk needed to negate that threat somehow: either the Klingon ship had to be destroyed, or then captured, or then deprived of targets.

Destroying the Klingon ship by conventional means was obviously not possible. Boarding would have presented quite a risk, too: Kirk had no real idea of what sort of opposition he would face, but he did know he'd have to drag the less than combat-capable McCoy (and Scotty) along for the fight. Trying to blow up both ships would have been a pretty clever move, and would imply that the scuttling did not go quite as planned since Kruge managed to escape. Just blowing up the boarding party helped already, though - but escaping from the doomed Enterprise was a necessary move no matter what, so stun gas or containment fields would not have been viable options, as they would not have diminished the Klingon fighting strength and ability to hunt down Kirk's party in any way.

Timo Saloniemi
Timo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 18 2012, 02:21 PM   #25
USS KG5
Vice Admiral
 
USS KG5's Avatar
 
Location: England's green and pleasant land.
Re: Did the Auto-destruct partially malfunction in TSFS?

Chemahkuu wrote: View Post
Ships blow up a lot with antimatter still onboard and it never creates all that big a bang.
Well I'd have thought it depends what you try to do.

If the antimatter is simply released into space when the pods are destroyed, or magnetic containment loses power, it would need to come into contact with matching particles of matter to release energy.

Whenever antimatter has been created in a lab it has lasted only a tiny fraction of a second, in our universe it isn't very stable - so when containment goes maybe it simply disappears, unless, like Scotty, you are going to release the whole lot in one go into the reaction chamber, creating a whacking great reaction that would wipe out everything within a few thousand miles.
__________________
I believe in a better world, so I love Star Trek. I have to live in this one, so I love Battlestar Galactica.
USS KG5 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 18 2012, 03:27 PM   #26
Chemahkuu
Vice Admiral
 
Chemahkuu's Avatar
 
Location: United Kingdom
Send a message via Yahoo to Chemahkuu
Re: Did the Auto-destruct partially malfunction in TSFS?

Except the vast majority of ships explode instantly, no time to vent, drop or otherwise neutralise the antimatter, like the ships in First Contact shot point blank in the engineering section detonating the antimatter pods directly.
__________________
"But there's no sense crying over every mistake. You just keep on trying till you run out of cake."
Chemahkuu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 18 2012, 04:19 PM   #27
Timo
Admiral
 
Re: Did the Auto-destruct partially malfunction in TSFS?

explode instantly, no time to vent
Why would there be no time to vent? That is, why should venting take more than two milliseconds? Supposedly, the antimatter comes prepacked in ejectable pods, and Trek technology demonstrates high accelerations for projectiles.

Timo Saloniemi
Timo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 19 2012, 02:19 AM   #28
Hartzilla2007
Vice Admiral
 
Hartzilla2007's Avatar
 
Location: Star Trekkin Across the universe.
Re: Did the Auto-destruct partially malfunction in TSFS?

SchwEnt wrote: View Post
Also, maybe the destruct method was corrupted by the damaged nature of the Enterprise.

Between the limited repairs left from TWOK and the hit from the Bird of Prey, the damage may have affected the destruct system. What we saw in TSFS may be a self-destruct mishap, where certain scuttling charges didn't go off as designed or detonated prematurely out of sequence or whatever else you can think of. A self-destruct that didn't go as designed.
I'm guessing.
Plus Voyager and Nemesis showed that its possible for battles damage to completely disable the self destruct, so it being partially disabled isn't that much of a stretch.
Hartzilla2007 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 11:11 PM.

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