My take on The Galileo Seven

The one thing I always disliked about the episode The Galileo Seven, was the fact that everyone seemed to forget their phasers had a Stun setting. The choice was always presented as using the weapons to kill the native inhabitants, or fire near them to frighten them off. Now for the dramatic purposes of the story I understand why this Amnesia occurred, but it's one thing that I always disliked about Trek in that certain elements would be conveniently forgotten for dramatic purposes.

And that's because if they did manage to focus fire their phasers had a few individuals of that species and stunned them oh, the others might be frightened into leaving them alone because it appeared their comrades were in fact dead. But of course once the shuttle lifted off, the stunned beings would course regain consciousness and everything would be fine; but that type of situation would have made for a very boring 55 minutes.

 

So what would be the "bloody nose". If it were stun then Spock wouldn't have been concerned. So if it were the disinitegrate setting would the natives have understood it at all. I mean suddenly some guy was there and then he wasn't. Would they have even understood the aliens were responsible?
And then what abour the Prime Directive. In order for the bloody nose tactic to work they would have to kill in front of the others and demonstrate their superior weapons.
Also would the bloody nose tactics work. If some group of strangers killed half my warriors would I run off and hide? Yes. But if I was a great hairy native I'd probably want revenge, a fight.

 

I have never hear of ion drive being used for launch in real life.

Considering the occasional use and mention of anti-gravs in TOS, I would guess that some sort of gravitty control would be an important part of any launch from the ground in TOS.

 

Yes gravity thrusters could make sense but are never mentioned as a form of propulsion. Presumably, the amount of force needed to generate enough thrust would be as destructive as any other but what gravitons are, how they are generated, and how long they persist are never explained that I recall. Artificial gravity can be switched on and off locally but bleed into turboshafts where they are actually a hindrance and a health and safety hazard.

Shuttlecrafts do have tractor beams so they must have graviton generators though.

 

Oxygen, CO2, LNG, propane, etc. The fullness of pressurized tanks are often measured by the PSI of the contents stored inside.

I have and it does.

 

So, if it is a gas under pressure, then you give the fuel as pounds psi versus just pounds as used for liquids under one g? This is new to me. I searched via google and could not find the use of pounds psi...

 

Yea, you should have one or the other; Probably a script screwup. I was referring to situations like, for example, that the gauges in the reaction control tanks on the lunar module were temperature (°F), pressure (psia) and percentage, with the first two probably feeding output of the third. Another example is a portable fire extinguisher, which uses pressure to let you know that the cylinder is undercharged, full or overcharged.

ETA: LM panel closeup (and I misread your initial post)

 

Only one thing makes sense for how the shuttlecraft launches and lands, particularly given how it doesn’t land and takeoff like a plane but more like a helicopter: antigravity.

Advanced antigrav technology obviously exists in TOS on Starfleet ships. They have hand-held antigrav devices. The starships don’t have obvious reaction thrusters on the hull or an impulse drive on the bow to push the ship in reverse. They have obvious artificial gravity systems as well as very advanced inertial systems that keep the crew from being turned into paste whenever the ship maneuvers at unimaginably high velocities.

This all adds up to manipulation of gravity and antigravity fields on a gross or fine scale.

I would also argue the ship’s impulse drive is actually an antigravity generator despite conflicting or contradictory references and a distinct lack of specifics regarding operation. And the last point is perfectly in keeping with how much of TOS’ technology is never actually explained.

 

@Warped9 Absolutely. Furthermore, we know from Obsession and Cloud Minders that, small or large, the tech works a planet's surface. Lifting a shuttlecraft to space should be child's play.

 

Part of the tech problems, or inconsistencies, in “The Galileo Seven” is they are talking about fuel yet they are draining phasers of their energy.

???

Okay, so they are talking about fuel and fuel lines (and later refer to jettisoning the fuel and igniting it) but what they really should have been talking about were energy reserves. The tech babble was sloppily written. Something happened within Murasaki 312 and the shuttlecraft’s subsequent crash landing (more like abrupt landing with the crew saved by very sturdy vehicle construction, fantastic inertial fields and robust antigrav tech) that near completely drained off their energy reserves. Hence the need for the phasers as a paltry substitute “fuel” (and note that later in “The Immunity Syndrome” they would be referencing power reserves on the shuttlecraft when Spock enters the ginormous space going amoeba).

The drained phasers allowed for enough power to lift the shuttlecraft to orbit, except Spock used part of that reserve to counter the added weight of the aliens trying to hold them down. Consequently they did not have enough power to attain a sustainable orbit. More accurately they couldn’t reach an altitude to maintain a stable orbit. They couldn’t get high enough wherein the shuttlecraft would eventually be dragged back down into the atmosphere to burn up.

Spock “jettisoning” the remaining “fuel” and “igniting” it might simply have been a way of using the remaining energy reserve to create a visible energy discharge, one hopefully the Enterprise would see if they were looking in the right direction. Like sending up a flare, just as Scotty said.

 

One thing which I always wondered about "the Galileo Seven".

Was it named after the shuttlecraft Galileo 7, or after the seven people aboud the Galileo 7?

 

Ion thrusters require both fuel and energy but usually use inert gases - so not able to ignite - to avoid any risk of explosions.

If vessels use hydrogen thrusters then presumably they might use hydrogen as fuel for their ion propulsion too, which becomes combustible with oxygen. At least this explains all those exploding starships.

 

Yes. ( And that isn't meant as a facetious answer. It's how the person who reads the title interprets it for themselves; and neither interpretation is inaccurate/wrong.)

 

The ep is apparently based on the film Five Came Back, which makes the double meaning now kind of triple. TOS titles were the best!

And they use the stun setting in the very next episode! ("The Squire of Gothos" -- or as a local newspaper listed it: "The Squire of Bothos"!)

 

Was watching TNG the other day and saw a model of the Galileo 7 on a table. Was the Galileo shuttle famous for some resaon 80 years later?

 

Continuity Nod and Prop Recycling. Do you need more than that?

 

IIRC that model was accurate but while the hull graphics had the right words the position and sizes were way off...

 

During the first season of TNG, they were really concerned with making sure the audience knew this was Star Trek even though overall the tone and visual had changed quite a bit. They put the TOS models and props in the background of various shots basically to scream to the audience:

"See? This IS Star Trek!"

 

I think in another thread "we" determined that the shuttlecraft model seen in TNG was the actual filming model from TOS. Apparently over the years it became damaged and needed repair and repainting for its TNG return.

 

Many, many years ago I recall reading that very same thing in some magazine or other.