What are your controversial Star Trek opinions?

[Bad Thoughts]

I'll remember that the next time I'm stargazing at the points of light across a dark expanse and tell myself "you want something cool."

They could be in a firefight.

 

[BillJ]

Anything is better than the holographic viewscreen from First Contact.

Yeah, that was one of those design decisions that I struggled with. Let’s all sit here and stare at a dull brown wall until something happens outside.

 

[drt]

Yeah, that was one of those design decisions that I struggled with. Let’s all sit here and stare at a dull brown wall until something happens outside.

If they wanted to go that route, it would have been better if the conn and ops stations swiveled inwards to face the captain when the screen is off, then rotate around to face out when the screen is activated.

I think folks who think the bridge window is some kind of vulnerability tend to forget the 1701-D had a moonroof, so that's really been an issue since 1987.

 

[Kamen Rider Blade]

Anything is better than the holographic viewscreen from First Contact.

You didn't like the Holographic ViewScreen?

 

[HotRod]

You didn't like the Holographic ViewScreen?

No, it was stupid. What's worse is that the film showed that it wasn't always switched on. So you've presumably got the bridge crew staring at an empty wall half the time.

 

[FredH]

If they wanted to go that route, it would have been better if the conn and ops stations swiveled inwards to face the captain when the screen is off, then rotate around to face out when the screen is activated.

I think folks who think the bridge window is some kind of vulnerability tend to forget the 1701-D had a moonroof, so that's really been an issue since 1987.

If you go by “The Cage”, so did the no-bloody-A, even if the inside and outside were weirdly out of proportion and angle with each other.

 

[Richard S. Ta]

No, it was stupid. What's worse is that the film showed that it wasn't always switched on. So you've presumably got the bridge crew staring at an empty wall half the time.

To be fair, 99% of time, what’s on the viewscreen is basically a wall of black with white flecks all over it.

I think if I worked on the bridge, I’d just stream movies from my own console most of the time when there’s nothing going on.

 

[CoveTom]

Ron Moore, who wrote First Contact and also the two DS9 episodes with the holo-communicator, didn't like the viewscreen. He kept pushing for trying something different. Here's what he had to say in the Deep Space Nine Companion:

That's something I had been pushing for because I just think it's so absurd that in the twenty-fourth century they have holodeck technology that allows them to recreate Ancient Rome, but everybody talks to each other on television monitors. It's just so lame. The viewscreens have been around for over thirty years. Can't we move to something a little more interesting? But it's like pulling teeth.

 

[Bad Thoughts]

I think folks who think the bridge window is some kind of vulnerability tend to forget the 1701-D had a moonroof, so that's really been an issue since 1987.

Only because it was out of sight, out of mind. It is no more or less preposterous than any exterior window. Moreover, it was seldom part of the set: the space was generally left open for lighting.

 

[Richard S. Ta]

Only because it was out of sight, out of mind.

It’s clearly visible in pretty much every exterior shot of the ship… hardly out of sight.

 

[CorporalCaptain]

It’s clearly visible in pretty much every exterior shot of the ship… hardly out of sight.

Heck, the TOS Enterprise had her moon roof that we peered through in the flashback footage of "The Cage" that was shown in "The Menagerie," and it was there for the whole series.

 

[Kamen Rider Blade]

Heck, the TOS Enterprise had her moon roof that we peered through in the flashback footage of "The Cage" that was shown in "The Menagerie," and it was there for the whole series.

Regardless of View-Screen Window or Moon Roof, having the Bridge on top central area of the Saucer section is a general bad idea.

You generally want to bury it in the hull. near the main computer and main center routers that connect to all the other computer lines across the vessel.

 

[Richard S. Ta]

*shrug*

It’s just one of those Star Trek things.

 

[Bad Thoughts]

It’s clearly visible in pretty much every exterior shot of the ship… hardly out of sight.

But it's not obviously a window in any of those exteriors. It looks like just another light source.

 

[Richard S. Ta]

But it's not obviously a window in any of those exteriors. It looks like just another light source.

It’s obviously a window.

Should’ve gone to Specsavers.

 

[CorporalCaptain]

To be honest, I'm not actually sure what the Ent-D moon roof is. However, you can clearly see a window to space on the ceiling of the bridge:



Is this the Ent-D moon roof?

 

[Richard S. Ta]

To be honest, I'm not actually sure what the Ent-D moon roof is. However, you can clearly see a window to space on the ceiling of the bridge:

View attachment 47584

Is this the moon Ent-D moon roof?

That's the one, yes.

 

[knightgrace]

As for the holographic viewscreen onboard the Enterprise-E, it prevents distraction. Because the only thing to watch, is your station. Safety first.

But if you really want to get serious ( is that anything like getting down?) The original Enterprise-D bridge idea was to be so automated that only three people under normal conditions were sufficient for proper vessel control, with a fourth in volumes of space where a stronger watch is the better idea. The fourth crew, would be sitting down, and toggling through the various stations.

As opposed to the TOS version where six people are generally required for a proper watch. Which raises the question of what was going on with computer control ninety years before TOS...

 

[Tallguy]

Hell, even Picard season 3 had the crew ordered to look out the windows and watch for the enemy.

Which works if the enemy ship is maybe a few kilometers away. (I forget, was the adversary in PIC3 Star Destroyer sized? That's been all the rage these days.)

Even classic Star Trek would occasionally fall prey to "The ship is too close" syndrome. But not often due to budget constraints.

Since the post-TOS age we get ships just about on top of each other and then (hopefully) some dialog saying the other ship is 5,000 km away. (At least in TUC Kirk mentions that he's "never been this close" to a K't'inga class ship.)

Then you have SNW where they re-imagined Balance of Terror. We see that the Enterprise was actually RIGHT NEXT to the asteroid base when it was destroyed and we see that the Neutral Zone is one a few hundred meters wide!

 

[Henoch]

Even with 20/20 vision, I'd have a hard time making out most details and small things beyond the edge of the ship's saucer. At five kilometers, a space ship the size of the Enterprise is just a little more than a dot assuming it is barely moving; at small percentages of the speed of light, it's a steak <edit. streak> of light, both assuming it is well lit.