How do/did you feel about the return of the Enterprise-D?

[Daedalus]

That's what a Mothball Fleet is for. If a ship is turned into a museum, there will never be a need for it to reenter service again.

Things can be brought out of mothballs, Its all down to necessity and desperation.

A good hull, a team of savvy engineers, some spare parts and you've got a functional ship for light duties or minimal combat. The Hathaway was reactivated for a similar purpose.

 

[fireproof78]

In the event that the ships need to be recalled into combat.

How do we know the security levels? They have drones for loading, drones can be deadly.

We don't, hence the questions and the rather odd justifications of poor security.

The D fired real torpedoes because it had real torpedos loaded by potentially the most senior ranking starfleet officer in the entire galaxy, so

Um, what?

LaForge was a commodore rank, and that does not assure access to weapons depending on billet.

 

[David cgc]

There are operable historical vessels. Presumably, the museum ships in PIC aren't permanently moored with their engines removed, but are more like the Constitution or the Enterprise Lady Washington, which are fully operating vessels with all the necessary legalities even if their primary "mission" is educational. They even have cannons they can fire off, though just gunpowder charges with no projectiles. Apparently, the Coast Guard gets really uptight when you have a cannon, gunpowder, and shells all on the same ship, so you have to pick two. If you really need it explained, the phasers can be tuned to low power, just for demonstrations or mock battles, and you'd need a Starfleet Engineer to get them back to combat capability.

And it is Star Trek. There are apparently controls on technology that would seem to be horrifically dangerous in a more realistic context. Can we really be shocked that a Commodore has a working matter/antimatter reactor at his disposal when "Children of Mars" showed there's one on every school bus (thanks, VFX reuse!)?

Um, what?

There's a decent chance most or all of the active-duty Admirals had already been murdered by assimilated youngsters by that point, and they were certainly all indisposed.

LaForge was a commodore rank, and that does not assure access to weapons depending on billet.

He seems to be in command of a starbase, at least, even one that's got a primarily historical or educational mission. If some pirates roll up, or a rogue asteroid swings by, you really think he can't fire on them?

 

[Daedalus]

We don't, hence the questions and the rather odd justifications of poor security.

Most of the justifications seem pretty sound to me.

Even a fully functioning starship, and it's arsenal, can be commandeered on a whim in Star Trek. If this is about Starfleet not learning any lessons about security, well I think that's just a given at this point.

 

[fireproof78]

There's a decent chance most or all of the active-duty Admirals had already been murdered by assimilated youngsters by that point, and they were certainly all indisposed.

Assumption that LaForge knows this or has any eligibility to move up the chain.

He seems to be in command of a starbase, at least, even one that's got a primarily historical or educational mission. If some pirates roll up, or a rogue asteroid swings by, you really think he can't fire on them?

So limited authority for defense me maybe. I don't think that involves loading on to one of the ships and fully reactivating it.

Most of the justifications seem pretty sound to me.

Even a fully functioning starship, and it's arsenal, can be commandeered on a whim in Star Trek. If this is about Starfleet not learning any lessons about security, well I think that's just a given at this point.

That's true but that doesn't make this less egregious or acceptable because it's Geordi.

 

[David cgc]

Assumption that LaForge knows this or has any eligibility to move up the chain.


So limited authority for defense me maybe. I don't think that involves loading on to one of the ships and fully reactivating it.

Maybe the next "Short Trek" can be the Court Martial of Geordi LaForge.

 

[Ray Hardgrit]

Sad that he turned out to be another evil admiral, misusing his authority to go on a personal quest to prevent the destruction of Starfleet, the extinction of humanity and the end of the Federation.

 

[BillJ]

It's not like Picard was some abusive prick she had to hide from. Picard deserved to know he was a father. She took that experience from him without even giving him a chance. It was pretty much character assassination, in my opinion.

They desperately needed some story beats from The Wrath of Khan.

 

[Daedalus]

Sad that he turned out to be another evil admiral, misusing his authority to go on a personal quest to prevent the destruction of Starfleet, the extinction of humanity and the end of the Federation.

It's what he did afterwards in the museum's holodecks that was truly unspeakable..

 

[Paul Weaver]

So limited authority for defense me maybe. I don't think that involves loading on to one of the ships and fully reactivating it.

"Sorry you only have the authority to defend your space station, not the entire Federation"

I suspect that defence of the Federation is a standing order.

 

[HotRod]

They desperately needed some story beats from The Wrath of Khan.

Yes, agreed. Kirk knew he was a father and he and Carol mutually came to an agreement that it was better for him to stay away. Crusher didn't even give Picard that option. She robbed him of a chance to be a father. She robbed him of the absolute joy being a father can bring.

Yes, she had her reasons, but that doesn't make it OK. As far as I'm concerned, as a character, she's dead to me. On the list of main characters from Trek, she moved straight to the bottom. Travis Mayweather, Harry Kim, even Nelix.... all better characters.

 

[BillJ]

Yes, agreed. Kirk knew he was a father and he and Carol mutually came to an agreement that it was better for him to stay away. Crusher didn't even give Picard that option. She robbed him of a chance to be a father. She robbed him of the absolute joy being a father can bring.

Yes, she had her reasons, but that doesn't make it OK. As far as I'm concerned, as a character, she's dead to me. On the list of main characters from Trek, she moved straight to the bottom. Travis Mayweather, Harry Kim, even Nelix.... all better characters.

Thing is, I never had all that high of regard for the character. She was just very bland, 90% of the time. McFadden was capable, she could hit it out of the park, with the right material. "Remember Me", "Sub Rosa".

 

[HotRod]

Thing is, I never had all that high of regard for the character. She was just very bland, 90% of the time. McFadden was capable, she could hit it out of the park, with the right material. "Remember Me", "Sub Rosa".

I'll say it.... I think I preferred Pulaski. She at least brought a little intensity to the role. McFadden always came off as extremely bland. Though, the older I get the more I feel that way about everyone from TNG.

 

[BillJ]

I'll say it.... I think I preferred Pulaski. She at least brought a little intensity to the role. McFadden always came off as extremely bland. Though, the older I get the more I feel that way about everyone from TNG.

The only TNG character I really "miss", is Data. So much potential for the character going forward post-TNG, so much disappointment.

 

[Firebird]

Museum ships are not supposed to be armed. At all. And it's not just torpedoes being loaded because of the crisis, the Enterprise D had working phaser banks, which on their own are still capable of meting out considerable destruction. I find it amusing given how blue in the face some people can get insisting Starfleet is not a military, yet they seem to be okay with a supposedly non-military keeping a museum ship fully armed when no actual military would ever dream of doing such a thing. Hell, just look at BSG, at the start of the miniseries Galactica is technically still on active duty, yet in the process of being converted into a museum. It had no weapons aboard at all and one of its flight pods was rendered permanently non functional.

And let's not get started on the idiocy of a working cloaking device being at the museum. Especially since it was illegal for the Federation to even have a cloaking device. Even if the Federation were to hold onto an illegal cloaking device, they would not leave it on a museum ship and have that be public knowledge.

Like many things in season 3, it boils down to Matalas taking his old Playmates toys out of the box and wanting to play with them, without any regard for logic or practicality.

 

[BillJ]

Like many things in season 3, it boils down to Matalas taking his old Playmates toys out of the box and wanting to play with them, without any regard for logic or practicality.

Or light bulbs.

 

[Firebird]

Or light bulbs.

The light would only make the plotholes even more glaring.

 

[UssGlenn]

Starfleet apparently leaves functioning matter/antimatter reactors on museum ships? So much can go wrong there.

We don't know that. For all we know the Defiant and Voyager etc, had no antimatter and were being powered by their fusion reactors, or even a wireless energy transfer from the station. The D wasn't finished being restored. It was still under restoration, so it's power systems weren't converted to museum mode yet. If you are restoring something for a museum, ideally you want put it into 100% operational condition before making whatever modifications are needed for display. That doesn't always happen, but that's the goal.

 

[BK613]

Given that this was posted a month ago, it seems very timely (pay close attention to where they got those Harpoon launcher tubes from):

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

 

[HotRod]

Like many things in season 3, it boils down to Matalas taking his old Playmates toys out of the box and wanting to play with them, without any regard for logic or practicality.