Star Trek Haynes Manual Discussion?
- Thread starter Admiral_Young
- Start date
^But Ping-ti Ho isn't the same name as Ti-Ho any more than, say, Annabel Mann is the same name as Belmann.
I once read something where Shane Johnson said the name's origin. I think it may actually have been a post here (but if it was, it was nine years ago, and has long since passed into the mists). Anyway, Ti-Ho was a tribute to a friend of his who had passed away and used the name for a spaceship in a story. No idea where the friend got it from.
Sure, but that's all that came up in a search, and it's just as likely to have a hyphen typo as anything else. I just thought it was interesting.
Yeah, that rings a bell.
Interesting, that link says Johnson was told that "Paramount at the time told Johnson... that not only everything that had been onscreen was canon, but that all liscensed (sic) material was canon" because that's how "Mr Scott's Guide" in 1987 (and "Worlds of the Federation", also 1987) fell so afoul of Richard Arnold and the ST Office. And along came that 1989 memo.
Last edited:
I guess since this thread has gone off on a tangent that no one here has got the book either?
Mine is still in transit.
I need to sell a lot more t-shirts from my CafePress stores first.
(1) Just who was this Richard Arnold guy who wielded so much power? I've heard the name slung around the TrekLit forum but never spoken of with much affection.
(2) And why did Roddenberry let this individual get away with slamming so many restrictons down?
(3) Whatever became of him, then, that TrekLit turned out much better than apparently it had been while he was running the show? It sounds like the authors miss him like the residents of Tokyo miss Godzilla.
You know what, never mind, folks; I'm gonna ask these questions in a separate thread since I'll probably get more Trek author response and hence more people who have interacted with him.
I now return you to your original Haynes Manual discussion, already in progress.
I now return you to your original Haynes Manual discussion, already in progress.
Thanks much, Therin
My copy just arrived in the mail. Haven't read any of the text yet, but it looks (and feels) great! The style of LCARS presentations, and various cutaways, remind me of the UK "Fact Files", but what fun to have all the Enterprises in the one manual.
I can see where the techie types wanted something twice as thick and twice as detailed, but this is a very attractive coffee table book, which I can see being browsed by the various, broader, book-buying demographics, not just ST book collectors.
I can see where the techie types wanted something twice as thick and twice as detailed, but this is a very attractive coffee table book, which I can see being browsed by the various, broader, book-buying demographics, not just ST book collectors.
Last edited:
In truth it's also what's in (or not) the book. Beyond the TOS and TMP ships I really don't care. And if there's a paucity of material then so much the worse. From what I've gathered and can see there's better material available online and in other works on the subjects I'm interested in than paying for a half-assed effort on a lot of stuff I don't care about.
Another awesome post from Warped. Brought a tear from my eye.
Anyways, I enjoyed the book and I kind of hoped for some tidbits about the NuEnterprise as well, not a little section about AU ships.
Anyways, I enjoyed the book and I kind of hoped for some tidbits about the NuEnterprise as well, not a little section about AU ships.
Finally got a good look at one at B&N, and it is a fun little book. Yeah, it does read like an RPG supplement, and frankly, the bit about the JJprise was more than it merited, but enough to acknowledge the new movie.
Is it worth $27? Well, it may be my current state of destitution weighing in, but I don't think so. $15, maybe.
I'll still wait for the remainder table, but a little more eagerly now.
Is it worth $27? Well, it may be my current state of destitution weighing in, but I don't think so. $15, maybe.
I'll still wait for the remainder table, but a little more eagerly now.
I've gotta ask...how big do they say the 2009 Enterprise is?
I forget the exact words, but it was something to the effect of "somewhat larger."
Seems to me, though, that a Haynes manual ought to have instructions on how to tear down the engines and rebuild them.
Should've had David Mack write it.
Sort of as a follow-up to the Starfleet Survival Manual.
Sort of as a follow-up to the Starfleet Survival Manual.
The caption notes "... a significantly larger ship than..."
Sure, then people would say it wasn't canonical enough, and that the author took liberties.
Similar threads
