What episode is this from?Tho we have actually seen it being built.
Starship Museums: why?
- Thread starter Admiral Jean-Luc Picard
- Start date
Season 1 finale of Discovery. Will You Take My Hand?
I am on S2, how did I miss this?
From near the beginning of the episode, showing the Klingon fleet, then zooming past Jupiter, until coming upon Earth.I am on S2, how did I miss this?
I just don't see the risk based upon their technological capabilities, power scaling and warp ability."Because they can" isn't really a reason to do something like risk destroying an entire city-size space station (Spacedock).
To me it's a non-issue.
It treats the space station like cheap CGI, and it bails on realism.
Imagine someone suggesting to Picard in an episode of TNG that something like Spacedock be moved from one solar system to the next via warp drive. Everyone would think he's bonkers. Yes, handwave it with "but better technology," but to me, this is bad writing. Give the technology some limits for Trek's sake.
I just don't see how. There's no weight in space and we see the antigravity tech already in place in TOS. Just scale it up and add warp drive.
It's really not that hard. Not sure about realism because neither is warp drive, phasers, transporters, or ESP yet those exist quite simply in Trek .
Realism, meaning writing a story that "feels" real, even if the science and tech is BS. In 90's Trek, the made-up sciences and technologies had limits. In Picard, limits, what's that?
The limits were set by the needs of the plot. If for some reason a plot in TNG required a space station to be move from System A to System B it would happen. No one on staff would be complaining it can't be done or it was unrealistic. They use some technobabble and make it so. The in the next tech manual/encyclopedia/reference book Sternbach and Okuda would explain the treknical details.
How many times did the bad guys get away from the Enterprise or escape the brig and get past security, because of limitations of what tech can do?
I would imagine everyone in the TNG writer's room would shoot down moving a space station like Spacedock to begin with.
Too many times that strain credulity.
That assumes the writers care. I've met a couple; not everyone gives a rip about these little details.I would imagine everyone in the TNG writer's room would shoot down moving a space station like Spacedock to begin with.
Moving spacedock is just scaling up tech. That's all. You have enough power it becomes simple.
Why? What makes you think that? These are writers looking things to build interesting stories around and would use "tech the tech" when they weren't sure of the exact science. But since Trek's fake science incudes things like tractor beams and force fields, I can't see them even batting an eye.I would imagine everyone in the TNG writer's room would shoot down moving a space station like Spacedock to begin with.
Now, that's actual bad writing, because they need the villain out and about villaining. So they use some handwavium to get him free.
Or the Enterprise being taken over by a single individual, or a couple of Ferengi or whatever.
They've installed a revolving door on the bridge to accommodate all the traffic.
Adds to the hotel lobby feel.
Starfleet does seem to update ships a lot, and retire designs all too easily. The Galaxy class was said to have a lifespan of 100 years, with intended upgrades, but it seems that by PIC, it was gone. Even within the TNG era, we saw Starfleet frequently adding new designs (admittedly for a reason), and others fell by the wayside. The Ambassador class didn't seem to have a long life, and the likes of the Cheyenne class were also among those to disappear very quickly.
There's also a bit of contradiction. The Miranda and Excelsior designs were still in service several decades after they were first introduced. Perhaps Starfleet got worse at designing ships between the TOS and TNG eras, and found themselves having to design new ships, rather than update old ones?
Similar threads
