Why was the USS Enterprise F decommissioned so early?

[Kamen Rider Blade]

A lot more refined and often less labor intensive and less likely to kill you.

You need to wonder, how many people have died because of the "Console Exploding in their Face" due to the ship being in a critical situation.

Not because they died due to the enemy blowing apart the ship and the crew going with the vessel or getting sucked out into space.

But because the console blew up and sent shrapnel and other stuff into the end user?

That's got to be a record as to how many side characters have died because they can't seem to make "Non-Exploding Consoles".

If the ship got tossed around, and the person flew out of their seat and bumped their head wrong, I can understand.
Then you have to ask, why aren't there seat belts on every station or some form of restraint to prevent the crew from flying about in a emergency situation?

These are very basic logical questions that I think need answers.

 

[Ithekro]

Need to find a way to get the power and data transferred to the consoles that don't need a plasma filled EPS line.

 

[Kamen Rider Blade]

Need to find a way to get the power and data transferred to the consoles that don't need a plasma filled EPS line.

You mean like the way we do it with simple old "Copper Wiring" in the modern day?

Maybe using EPS isn't the best solution when it comes to running basic consoles when IRL we have plenty of safe touch panel interfaces.

Having the EPS down-convert to basic electricity over Copper Wiring when it comes to basic tech should be a common solution.

 

[CoveTom]

Look, the bottom line is that, for reasons we cannot fathom with our 21st century technical and scientific knowledge, Starfleet computer consoles are powered by rocks. Lots of rocks. They are essential to their functioning. Without them, 24th century computers simply could not exist. A few dead ensigns when the rock-filled consoles explode? Hey, if you want to make an omelette you've got to break a few eggs.

 

[Kamen Rider Blade]

Look, the bottom line is that, for reasons we cannot fathom with our 21st century technical and scientific knowledge, Starfleet computer consoles are powered by rocks. Lots of rocks. They are essential to their functioning. Without them, 24th century computers simply could not exist. A few dead ensigns when the rock-filled consoles explode? Hey, if you want to make an omelette you've got to break a few eggs.

The Cordry Rocks acts more like Shielding to "Charge Leptons" which would affect the Isolinear Circuitries Pathways that affects the Main Deflector.

Granted that the Main Deflector is used for so many things, it's a key piece of equipment.

Cordry rocks were pebble-like objects installed in Starfleet vessels. Starfleet engineers, such as Andy Billups, considered cordry rocks essential since their non-centrosymmetry disrupted the charge leptons in the isolinear pathways of the main deflector, which caused other things to transpire. However, they could also be dangerous projectiles when damage occurred. Jack Ransom was not fond of them for this reason.

In 2366, these rocks were among the debris that fell from the ceiling of the USS Enterprise-C and killed Captain Rachel Garrett. (TNG: "Yesterday's Enterprise")

Sometime in 2382, the USS Cerritos's supply of cordry rocks was replenished. (LD: "Upper Decks")

The Cordry Rocks also killed the Captain of the Enterprise-C. Who knows how the battle of Narendra 3 might've gone if she was alive and not dead due to exploding consoles & rocks that spray at her face.


But I'm sure the engineers in StarFleet can eventually figure out a better solution moving forward in time.

 

[knightgrace]

The Galaxy class was supposed to have a one hundred year space frame life span. Meaning that it should be able to stay out for up to one hundred years.

With fifteen to twenty year missions to be more typical.

The season 4 writer's guide is clear that the Federation had reached a plateau in warp drive technology. Meaning that the Federation was switching over to generation ships. This means that Federation Starfleet Explorer type ships are generational in nature.

This means that the Ambassador class explorers, which have less duration capacity, are also generational ships.

But not the Intrepid class - durable but not generational.

The Enterprise-F is even more so. With two factors involved.

The first being the Borg - get as many people out of Doge as possible, as soon as possible.

The second factor is the warp drive limitations. Such that the Odyssey class is vastly over built by Federation standards.

 

[BillJ]

The Odyssey class, much like the Galaxy before it, has the ability to be a mobile starbase.

Very cool.

 

[Ithekro]

It could be the remaining updated Galaxy-class starships are on decades long exploration missions as intended by the 25th century.

 

[fireproof78]

You need to wonder, how many people have died because of the "Console Exploding in their Face" due to the ship being in a critical situation.

Not because they died due to the enemy blowing apart the ship and the crew going with the vessel or getting sucked out into space.

But because the console blew up and sent shrapnel and other stuff into the end user?

That's got to be a record as to how many side characters have died because they can't seem to make "Non-Exploding Consoles".

If the ship got tossed around, and the person flew out of their seat and bumped their head wrong, I can understand.
Then you have to ask, why aren't there seat belts on every station or some form of restraint to prevent the crew from flying about in a emergency situation?

These are very basic logical questions that I think need answers.

Space is dangerous and risk is a part of the game , and is their business.

 

[The Wormhole]

I think the usual suspects would have had an absolute meltdown over "fan service" and "nostalgia" if they included both the Enterprise-E AND -D.

Thing is, Picard S3 is meant to be TNG's Last Ride, and therefore the Enterprise E very much should have been a part of that. Hell it could tie in perfectly with the season's theme about our heroes getting on in age and being shoved aside. Ever since its introduction in 1996, Trek fandom has viewed the Enterprise E/Sovereign class as Starfleet's most newest and most advanced, and unlike the Galaxy class we haven't see Sovereign class ships get destroyed just to prove that Shit Just Got Real. To see the Enterprise E getting retired would represent the end of an era for Starfleet to the fans in the audience who remember this ship being a Big Deal when it was unveiled back in the 1990s. And in universe, by the time Nemesis rolled around, the ship had already been in service for seven years, all the TNG characters besides Worf served on it for nearly the exact same amount of time they served on the D. Meaning it should have just as much meaning to them as the D did. And as for Worf, it's apparently the first ship he commanded, so it would have a special meaning to him. To see the E being put out to pasture should have been a bittersweet moment for the TNG gang, a reminder of time marching on and that their day is done. And that's before you get into the poetic angle, we see the E get destroyed at the Frontier Day celebrations, the TNG gang regroup aboard a restored Enterprise D, which could become the proverbial phoenix rising from the ashes to avenge the loss of its successor.

Would having the Enterprise E be fanwank, nostalgia and memberberries? Yes, probably. But it would have been organic fanwank which would serve the story and its themes and would have a logical purpose to the narrative. Which of course is not something Lord Terry had any interest in.

 

[Nerys Myk]

It's a TV show (and sometimes a movie) Its job is to creating exciting entertainment not "safe" technology. Technology that is 100% perfect and never damaged makes for boring entertainment.

 

[Dukhat]

It could be the remaining updated Galaxy-class starships are on decades long exploration missions as intended by the 25th century.

I would prefer that explanation to the idea that they are all obsolete. It's just that nuTrek seems to be adopting the idea that ships are completely disposable and will live out their service lives in just a decade or two, which is, quite frankly, ridiculous. Why the hell should anybody care that they're serving on an Enterprise when it's just going to get replaced in ten years?

 

[Kamen Rider Blade]

Space is dangerous and risk is a part of the game , and is their business.

Yes, but having your own equipment be the thing that kills you is silly instead of the enemy out there.

On WhatCulture's 10 Most Horrifying Technologies in Star Trek.
@ #1 = Exploding Consoles

At this point, you'd be safer not having any of the equipment.

It's a TV show (and sometimes a movie) Its job is to creating exciting entertainment not "safe" technology. Technology that is 100% perfect and never damaged makes for boring entertainment.

Yes, but it's more logical from a common sense perspective to make sure your basic Computer Touch Panel Screens aren't the things that kill you.

It's the enemy out there doing something to hurt you, not the stupid touch panel interface that you're dealing with.

I can find ways to damage the tech w/o making the tech look like it's the hazard.

Enemy Invader beams onto the Bridge, shoots up the place, console explodes because his disruptor hit the console station and causes a small explosion.

You have damaged tech that is "LOGICAL" in terms of how it gets damaged.

 

[Nerys Myk]

Yes, but having your own equipment be the thing that kills you is silly instead of the enemy out there.

On WhatCulture's 10 Most Horrifying Technologies in Star Trek.
@ #1 = Exploding Consoles

At this point, you'd be safer not having any of the equipment.


Yes, but it's more logical from a common sense perspective to make sure your basic Computer Touch Panel Screens aren't the things that kill you.

It's the enemy out there doing something to hurt you, not the stupid touch panel interface that you're dealing with.

I can find ways to damage the tech w/o making the tech look like it's the hazard.

Enemy Invader beams onto the Bridge, shoots up the place, console explodes because his disruptor hit the console station and causes a small explosion.

You have damaged tech that is "LOGICAL" in terms of how it gets damaged.

It's still a TV show. They aren't making Star Trek: Common Sense. When the ship is under fire they want a sense of danger and interesting action happening. Sparks flying. Someone screaming, Maybe a dead crewman to up the stakes.

 

[fireproof78]

Yes, but having your own equipment be the thing that kills you is silly instead of the enemy out there.

On WhatCulture's 10 Most Horrifying Technologies in Star Trek.
@ #1 = Exploding Consoles

At this point, you'd be safer not having any of the equipment.

Pretty sure that the vacuum of space is more dangerous.

 

[Tosk]

When the ship is under fire they want a sense of danger and interesting action happening. Sparks flying. Someone screaming, Maybe a dead crewman to up the stakes.

And sometimes inexplicable flame bursts that seem to be on a set schedule.

 

[Daedalus]

My idea was that Starfleet would take the time to figure out how to correct the systems failures in the USS Enterprise-F that forced her early retirement (and repair the damage done in battle). It will take some time now that Starfleet needs to rebuild a lot of starships and repair Spacedock. So in the interim, the USS Enterprise-G will fly the flag. By 2409, the USS Enterprise-F will be ready for recommissioning. The former Titan-A might be retired, given her old name back, or given a third name after seven years of service. This assumes the USS Titan-B was not launch in the interim. Also it brings into question that that Neo-Constitution-class starship had an original name before being rechristened the Titan.

It's not quite what you were thinking, but there is a real life precedent in regards to two ships originally christened with the same name existing alongside each other.

The HMS Ark Royal launched in 1914 was renamed HMS Pegasus in 1934 so a new HMS Ark Royal could be launch a few years later. Both ships remained in naval service together for a period of time.

I could imagine that the F becomes a test bed for the new Yorktown modifications and a class of that name is launched as a result. It would be quite ironic that a USS Yorktown of 2286 got renamed Enterprise, only for the reverse to happen over a century later.

 

[Kamen Rider Blade]

It's still a TV show. They aren't making Star Trek: Common Sense.

We can change that, for the better.

When the ship is under fire they want a sense of danger and interesting action happening.

That can be done w/o the consoles exploding in the users face.

Sparks flying.

We can do that somewhere else on the ship.

Someone screaming,

Definitely can show some lower deckers screaming

Maybe a dead crewman to up the stakes.

That can be easily done as well.
Plenty of places outside of "The Bridge" to show that.

Pretty sure that the vacuum of space is more dangerous.

There's already plenty of times where we've seen crewman sucked into the 'Vacuum of Space' due to the hull being ripped apart.

It won't be the first time, it won't be the last.

But it makes more sense for that to happen than exploding touch panel in the face.

 

[fireproof78]

There's already plenty of times where we've seen crewman sucked into the 'Vacuum of Space' due to the hull being ripped apart.

It won't be the first time, it won't be the last.

But it makes more sense for that to happen than exploding touch panel in the face.

To quote one of my friends, "But without that there wouldn't be an drama!" (pronounced dr-Ei-ma!

Because, that's what it is. The drama is meant for excitement for of the audience to show the situation is serious, not be realistic. Because...well, that's not Star Trek.

It's a TV show (and sometimes a movie) Its job is to creating exciting entertainment not "safe" technology. Technology that is 100% perfect and never damaged makes for boring entertainment.

Exactly so. It's not meant to be this documentary style presentation of real life. It's meant to be exciting and possibly entertaining. It's not meant to be dull.

 

[Kamen Rider Blade]

And sometimes inexplicable flame bursts that seem to be on a set schedule.

Ah, yes, I remember on DISCO and the Flame Thrower Pyro Show.

That was so silly.

To quote one of my friends, "But without that there wouldn't be an drama!" (pronounced dr-Ei-ma!

Because, that's what it is. The drama is meant for excitement for of the audience to show the situation is serious, not be realistic. Because...well, that's not Star Trek.

"The Expanse" managed to do it, w/o the silly Pyro Technics.

We can do that better, a more realistic portrayal w/o silly gimmicks.

While showing Drama.