We see it in modern Star Trek where the Tactical Away Team uniform has shoulder mounted Flash Lights. The EV / Space Suits have Head Mounted Flash Lights as well. In Voyager, you see wrist mounted Flash Lights as well. Modern tactical doctrine also has Weapon mounted lights near the end around the muzzle of your hand held weapon. Where else are good locations on your body, weapon, or suit should Flash Lights show up when you're out there exploring, doing stuff, etc?
The best place isn't on your body at all---easy to aim at. Security guards are taught to hold flashlights out wide, if possible.
On any sort of suit or body armor, I think I'd choose the outside of the wrist/forearm. That way it can be aimed, with or without a sidearm in hand, or held away from the body a bit to provide a less central aim point for an adversary. If tech permitted it, I'd also go for 'drone' or hovering lights that could be sent downrange, or placed anywhere in LOS so as to provide illumination but not an aiming point for an adversary.
How about on a extendable / retractable arm that you can control / reposition that's attached to your backpack? Similar to those moveable lamps or stable cam arms? Or you can have a light mounted on those flexible goose neck armatures that retain their position and is linked to your armor / back pack / belt / etc and you can pull or reposition the Emitter head as needed to point where you want. That is a good idea, they already had drones in the 23rd century. Just look at Mirror Georgiou when she joined S31 & was disguised on the Klingon Home World. She had attack drones that vaporized enemies. I'm sure lighting and recon drones can be easily made. We already have tiny recon drones that can fit in the palm of your hand IRL. Just look at the Black Hornet Nano. That adorable little thing fits in the palm of your hand and lets you scout an environment or building at range so that you won't get surprised.
Surprisingly, I think Voyager had the best solution with the wrist mounted units they used. Nonvital area if targeted, as well as easier to move around including with aiming, while still freeing up second hand for operations. So, either on the wrist or weapon mounted.
I thought about that, but it just seemed sort of clunky. You want your suit to be versatile, but not weighed down with an overabundance of 'stuff.' I guess it might depend on materials tech, as well. If you could make it light enough and what not, maybe.
Trek really should be using some sort of night vision. I'd think with their tech they could have full visible spectrum night vision in addition to IR, UV, etc.
Sure, but we never see others using such tech in a combat capacity. One would hope an adaptive visor would be able to attached to a helmet for multiple visual spectrums, and routing sighting information from weapons. But, then, one would hope Starfleet would use armor too.
One would hope StarFleet does ALOT of things and improve on their SOC (Standard Operating Procedures) as they learn lessons and add more cultures to the UFP. Imagine what a competent StarFleet / UFP would look like. Even in the face of adversity, they show professionalism and competence in a worst case scenario to solve the current crisis.
I can't imagine that in a TV show setting. Thus far Starfleet has not demonstrated any willingness to learn from much of any thing in terms of operational procedures. They do not use armor, personal protection of any kind. Security is defeated on a whim, and they largely ignore basic combat safety.
"That's a fundamental problem" IMO since they're supposed to be a "Professionally" trained force at whatever they're supposed to do. Be it Physiological, Medical, Psychological, Tactical, Mechanical, or Technological, etc. There's a serious profesionalism gap. In all of ST, in your expert opinion, how have they portrayed every incarnation of a Psychologist / Counselor in StarFleet? I only bring this up because this is close to your wheel house. We've seen: - Deanna Troi - Ezri Dax - That talking bird on Lower Decks - The Doctor on Discovery doubling up as a Counselor.
The show "24" has shown that you can show drama without portraying the characters as incompetent. And many Star Trek Alumni have shown up in "24" either in the show or as directorial staff. We need competent bad guys and competent good guys. I would love to see Space Pirates who know nothing of StarFleet security systems try to break in and rob a StarShip and fail.
That is the overall premise of the show. Part of the challenge is that Starfleet as an organization is not perfectly defined, and is subjected to both the era of Starfleet, as well as the what philosophy governs this interpretation. Since there is not a clear through line with Roddenberry wanting to avoid some of the more militaristic ideas that interpretation has vacillated greatly over the years. Until you create a very consistent organizational philosophy then drama will trump all. Real world vs. fictional world.
You still want to shift the portrayals of competency over to be realistic as possible. Regardless of the setting. It's about portraying your "Well Trained Officers" as competent in their jobs. No matter the profession.
I do? You won't get disagreement on what is ideal. I just don't expect it in Star Trek. And I work with well trained professionals who still swear, make mistakes and snap some times. That's life.
I'm not worrying about cussing, or making mistakes, or losing their cool. But doing their jobs competently. If you were to evaluate Deanna Troi, what would you recommend to the writers to do with her character to portray her as a "Professional" Ships Counselor?
I hardly see her counseling so I could not make such an assessment on limited information. In general, she allows her personal business impact her ability to conduct sessions which means she struggles and may need further training. That said, I don't hold Star Trek to real world standards of competency. I just don't do it. Tactics and combat should have armor, lights, full spectrum head gear, and personal shields. They don't use it. Why? Because they hate us? No, wait, it's because drama is preferred over professionalism. Which means lights are going to get knocked down to create atmospheric shadows, people are going to scream, fire wildly and break protocol.