|
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. |
|
|||||||
| The Next Generation All Good Things come to an end...but not here. |
![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools |
|
|
#16 |
|
Writer
|
Re: Is it smart to have families on the Enterprise-D?
__________________
Christopher L. Bennett Homepage -- Includes purchasing links for Only Superhuman, on sale now! Updated 12/30/12 with annotations for the novel. Written Worlds -- My blog |
|
|
|
|
|
#17 |
|
Vice Admiral
|
Re: Is it smart to have families on the Enterprise-D?
I gotta agree, I keep thinking the same thing as Swede...what do you tell the kids all those times they were on the brink of destruction along with the Enterprise and how many counselors would you need to keep them from growing up as traumatized wrecks?
__________________
"The world is made for people who aren't cursed with self-awareness." Annie Savoy |
|
|
|
|
#18 |
|
Captain
|
Re: Is it smart to have families on the Enterprise-D?
But I also think part of it is the Starfleet philosophy not to fear the unknown and not to fear death. |
|
|
|
|
|
#19 | |
|
Writer
|
Re: Is it smart to have families on the Enterprise-D?
Granted, I only grew up under the abstract threat of doom, not actual enemy fire. (Although I grew up in tornado country, which can be pretty darn scary.) But I had a friend in college who'd been a child in Vietnam during the war, and she'd just seen the violence and death around her as an ordinary part of life and taken it in stride. Whatever we grow up with, that's normal to us.
__________________
Christopher L. Bennett Homepage -- Includes purchasing links for Only Superhuman, on sale now! Updated 12/30/12 with annotations for the novel. Written Worlds -- My blog |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#20 | |
|
Vice Admiral
Location: Star Trekkin Across the universe.
|
Re: Is it smart to have families on the Enterprise-D?
Except the amount of firepower necessary to destroy or even devastate a planet or space station is far more than needed to take out a starship, in fact I'm pretty sure there were way more threats to a starship than threats to a planet show in Star Trek, so you have better odds living on a planet or space station. |
|
|
|
|
|
#21 |
|
Commodore
Location: Unmarked grave, Ekos
|
Re: Is it smart to have families on the Enterprise-D?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xfHhKLz6TKc They were shown during the '50s and '60s in classrooms or school assemblies, and I remember us doing such drills in elementary school. Sometimes their true intent was disguised as "tornado drills".
__________________
"Every time you think, you weaken the nation." --Moe Howard |
|
|
|
|
#22 |
|
Vice Admiral
Location: Saint Louis (aka Defiance)
|
Re: Is it smart to have families on the Enterprise-D?
I think that any civilian that chooses to be a passenger aboard a starship or any Starfleet crewmember who brings their family with them accepts the risks of being in an untamed frontier just like the pioneers and colonists of old did.
__________________
"Shout, shout, let it all out..." |
|
|
|
|
|
#23 |
|
To boldly go...
Location: Kansas City
|
Re: Is it smart to have families on the Enterprise-D?
It's sort of like saying it's too risky living in the city because a couple of times over the last few of years you almost got in a traffic accident. IIRC "Pen Pals" is an episode where the ship is doing research in a remote part of space and that episode in of itself passes over the course of weeks of time during which the ship was dicking around in that sector doing an analysis of the region. Yeah. Dangerous. Dangerously boring.
__________________
Just because it's futuristic doesn't mean it's practical. |
|
|
|
|
#24 |
|
Writer
|
Re: Is it smart to have families on the Enterprise-D?
This is one reason I like it that a lot of shows these days have shorter seasons. At 13 episodes per year, and including the occasional 2-parter or cliffhanger, it means the heroes only get into trouble roughly once a month on average, rather than every couple of weeks. Still implausible, but not quite as bad.
__________________
Christopher L. Bennett Homepage -- Includes purchasing links for Only Superhuman, on sale now! Updated 12/30/12 with annotations for the novel. Written Worlds -- My blog |
|
|
|
|
|
#25 | |
|
Shit Supreme
|
Re: Is it smart to have families on the Enterprise-D?
The entire point of "duck and cover" was to give the illusion that you could walk away from a nuclear attack.
__________________
ENOUGH OF THIS TURGID BASH WANKERY! |
|
|
|
|
|
#26 | |
|
Commander
Location: Bay Area, CA
|
Re: Is it smart to have families on the Enterprise-D?
And as the Yamato was during the Roddenberry era, I'm sure it had families as well. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#27 | |
|
Vice Admiral
Location: Saint Louis (aka Defiance)
|
Re: Is it smart to have families on the Enterprise-D?
__________________
"Shout, shout, let it all out..." |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#28 | ||
|
Commodore
Location: Unmarked grave, Ekos
|
Re: Is it smart to have families on the Enterprise-D?
What to do in case of nuclear attack: 1. Bend over. 2. Grab your ankles. 3. Put your head between your legs. 4. Kiss your ass goodbye.
__________________
"Every time you think, you weaken the nation." --Moe Howard |
||
|
|
|
|
#29 | ||
|
Captain
Location: The Enterprise's Restroom
|
Re: Is it smart to have families on the Enterprise-D?
It's a problem with the intentions of the original team being at odds with those of later writers/producers, though people like Ron Moore and Michael Piller seemed aware of the issue but unable to figure out how to resolve it. So the families would appear occasionally when relevant to a story, but would vanish without trace if not.IMO they'd have been better off making it a plot point after Best Of Both Worlds, ie. that it was becoming increasingly too dangerous for this kind of civilian presence to be aboard ships. Instead they kind of acknowledged it right up to the death of the Ent-D, and then quietly tried to ignore it (IIRC Janeway acted like the very idea of children on Starfleet ships was unheard of when Naomi Wildman was born; and the Ent-E famously ditched any hint of there being families on board as well). Re: the Enterprise originally being a 'deep space' exploration craft: ISTR a season one episode (Conspiracy?) sees Starfleet command being very surprised at the arrivial of the Enterprise in Earth's solar system, with the admiralty even saying that the presence of a Galaxy Class ship in proximity of Earth was rare. Later seasons it seemed like they were always going back to Earth!
|
||
|
|
|
|
#30 |
|
Lieutenant Commander
Location: Earth
|
Re: Is it smart to have families on the Enterprise-D?
|
|
|
|
![]() |
| Bookmarks |
«
Previous Thread
|
Next Thread
»
| Thread Tools | |
|
|
All times are GMT +1. The time now is 03:57 AM.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2013, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
FireFox 2+ or Internet Explorer 7+ highly recommended.
Copyright ©2000 - 2013, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
FireFox 2+ or Internet Explorer 7+ highly recommended.














It's a problem with the intentions of the original team being at odds with those of later writers/producers, though people like Ron Moore and Michael Piller seemed aware of the issue but unable to figure out how to resolve it. So the families would appear occasionally when relevant to a story, but would vanish without trace if not.




