One example I’m thinking of is “The Neutral Zone”, where Picard gives La Forge a specific direction and warp factor rather than a set of 3D coordinates (sent to his terminal) or “Outpost 123 in the Neutral Zone” along with a note to be there by tomorrow at noon. This pretty much looks like Picard asked the computer how to get there and the computer was able to give a straightforward course and speed in this instance — or maybe La Forge understands that he’s the one flying the ship and he can do whatever he wants to so long as the end result is equivalent to straight-line travel in that direction at 1024c?
I'm sorta siding with the first one here: Picard would be secretive, keeping his confidential orders to himself and flying the ship "blind" to where she needed to be. I'm not sure we can determine whether Picard would know his ETA there. Defining warp 8 as the speed might be due to this speed being the textbook compromise between economy and performance (and perhaps stealth and whatnot), not due to Picard believing in a specific hour during which to arrive. But LaForge taking liberties with the warp factor would mean deviating from that desired compromise, and him taking liberties with the route might mean he ends up in an utterly wrong location when Picard finally commands "Halt!". So this is a good example of the reasons for favoring a simple model where "optimal routes" don't really exist and navigators seldom let the ships meander. Navigation still isn't trivial in TOS, and on a strategic scale it poses challenges as late as VOY. I wonder how it was handled in ENT. Did they just skip the whole exercise and forge on along routes any later navigator would shudder to even think about? Or did Mayweather get his route cues from twenty-six people working in the Chart Room, half of them peering into telescopes and crunching numbers with supercomputers and half digging into alien star maps for nuggets of information? Timo Saloniemi
To remember, the official reason why T'Pol joined the crew was her knowledge about Vulcan star charts.
The NX-01 didn't even have a dedicated navigator like TOS (and Disco seems to have retconned the position out of existence, replacing it with a TNG-style Ops console)
The problem is that TOS is filled with archaisms, like the binoculars or the ear thing, and the total lack of holograms, doors that make a squeaky sound, switched boards, paper boards.. etc;. That makes it hard to come up with something that looks futuristic while being one hundred years older than TOS. For example, people transporting pads on foot throughout the ship is unsustainably stupid by today's standard.
Yes, which is why new Star Trek series should be made so that 2396 maps to this network TV season, with this year’s hypothetical Star Trek movie set in late 2396. You can then say that PADDs have evolved on the basis of iPad technology since we last saw them.
Or then using physical transfer media is a vital step in protecting sensitive data, one we'll have to adopt soon enough as well... Or then they had a whole department, too many to fit on the bridge (which didn't have a dedicated engineer, either). Not aboard Pike's ship, though. Perhaps science vessels that aren't supposed to fight or even travel to anywhere interesting are different? Lorca's ship did have a navigator on the bridge - they just called her the spore drive wizard. And then another navigator down below! Timo Saloniemi
On the one hand, Enterprise was incorporating a lot of retro TOS elements into their set design, but on the other hand, those sets from 2001 still look a lot more futuristic than a modern day naval ship in 2019. Military equipment is generally rugged, bulky, boxy, and heavy, with buttons and knobs.. I don't think I had a flat monitor until around 2008, and I didn't have one at work until I went out and got my own and brought it in. I know Picard will do this, because I saw it in the trailer, but holographic control panels are so annoying. Movies have been doing these things since at least 2001. They're just not cool anymore. I get that it's probably a cheaper way to make something look "futuristic" by just sticking some glowy floaty semi transparent things in front of people, but I am ready for the beyond-holographic-control panels.
I think the holographic control panel, as well as screen, is the future. And not the distant future, a decade and we'll be there, with virtual goggles most likely, IE you put them on and you see your screen in 3-D. They're anticipating these kinds of goggles that in fact will be more like a pair of glasses, you'll just look at someone and it will show you everything it knows about that person. It will be a great help for blind people as it will identify people and things to them.
From a safety point of view, buttons are safer than trying to touch a screen or a holo-image while the ship rocks and rolls from phaser hits and Warp 8 maneuvers. Hell, I mis-touch items on my cell phone several times a day sitting still, extrapolate that to controlling a starship with weapons and such in battle. Give me buttons.
Or switches. Quite often, the important thing about a control is the control bit - what is the status of this thing right now, and can I tell it at a glance without having to dredge my unreliable memory for whether I already operated this control or not? This is compounded in "virtual", graphics-based controls by even a slight delay, which may result in a double-operation that usually has catastrophic results (as a double-click is its own distinct command, or then a second click is an undo command). But even delay-free display interfaces can promote double or triple operations - all you need to do is blink. A switch that goes into a position and stays there is very convenient in dealing with that. Timo Saloniemi
I think DSC did a great job in suggesting that this is outdated technology in the 2250s, the sign of a starship being woefully behind her times: a VR helmet is seen aboard the Shenzhou, ("Backup Tactical" or whatever), then briefly on the Discovery during the war, and then disappears. This is the fun way to do scifi. McCoy: "They are still using nanobots for repairing arteries? What is this, a medieval torture chamber?" Timo Saloniemi
Just as knives are safer than guns. A gun can jam, it can even blow up in your face at times, a round can misfire ect. Some people blew themselves up making a time bomb. There are always reasons to use outdated technology but the reality is that people use the available technology regardless of the inconveniences.
I'm sort of seeing the TOS approach as the best of both worlds: physical buttons and flip switches, but no doubt fully configurable, so that the third button from the left and fifth from up is green for Auxiliary Gossip when it's Uhura's user card in the slot, but is red for Redirect Bleed Plasma to Hooch Still when it's Scotty's... Also, Kirk's chair armrest buttons can serve many functions as needed. DSC also sort of goes for this, with the actual control pulpits generously provided with physical touchables that light up in bright colors. It's only when the eggheads gather to speculate on space tardigrades that the free-floating holographic interfaces get used, much as in early TNG. ENT is a bit of an opposite where the colored squares are all virtual... Perhaps a lesson was learned early on? Timo Saloniemi