Why is there resistance to the idea of Starfleet being military?

Well, considering how bold was Romulans move against one of the Federation core world, the Starfleet probably adopted the policy "if you suspect cloaked ship, fire broadside first, identify later. If it happens to be klingons, just claim that they have a glorious death".

 

I don't mean filming the separation was a pain in the ass, though it could have been. I mean the actual act of separating and re-attaching the model, regardless if it was filmed or not was a pain in the ass.

 

That being said I often wonder why the battle bridge wasn't used more often as a back-up bridge. Most especially in Brothers, when Data takes over the bridge, the bridge crew set up a command post in engineering. Why not the battle bridge? As this episode was also only filmed a few weeks after TBOBW they still had access to the battle bridge set, so it obviously wasn't production related reasons.

My favourite example of a time when saucer separation would have helped is in The Pegasus when they're searching inside the asteroid. Picard threatens to call off the search because there's less and less room. But if they went in without the saucer, the ship would have been smaller and they could have gone further in.

 

IIRC, that set was reused and recycled with reckless abandon. So there may not have been anything left of the battle bridge layout.

 

After only a few weeks? They would have known while filming TBOBW that another episode in the very near future would be using the set and they could have saved it then in preparation.

 

Mine is "New Ground" the soliton wave knocked out the Enterprise's warp engines for over a hour, then they chased after the wave and place the ship in front of the wave. Prefect situation to leave the saucer behind.

A far as the separation taking too much time, Picard announces a separation, brief establishment shot of just the engineering section (stock footage), back to the bridge.

It's like saying a away team is going to beam down, cut to the team on the surface, no actual beam down shown.

 

Saved? How quaint.

 

I'm pretty sure it's all stock footage. There's that opening scene in 101101011 where they approach that giant starbase(which is already stock footage from Star Trek 3. Yeah, so they visit like 6 different Starbases like that throughout the series. It's always the same stock footage. Same planet, same sunset, etc, even though the dialogue identifies them as 6 different places.

Likewise for the separation sequence. Every time it's used, it's the stock footage from the Encounter at Farpoint.

Imagination Exercise: Just picture the separation sequence and reintegration sequence in your mind. Next, add some background music. Let's use "Go go power rangers!!"

If you have read this, you will never look at the saucer separation the same way again.

 

Was probably easier to use an already standing set than reconstruct the Battle Bridge. In universe? Maybe Data cut off access to it?

 

The Star Trek Writers/Directors Guide (Third Revision, April 17, 1967) possibly describes the original motivation for the resistance to the idea of Starfleet being a military:

Is the starship U.S.S. Enterprise a military vessel?

Yes, but only semi-military in practice -- omitting features which are heavily authoritarian. For example, we are not aware of "officers" and "enlisted men" categories. And we avoid saluting and other annoying medieval leftovers. On the other hand, we do keep a flavor of Naval usage and terminology to help encourage believability and identification by the audience. After all, our own Navy today still retains remnants of tradition known to Nelson and Drake.​

This implies that Starfleet wants to portray itself as an organization that has "evolved" beyond a military by omitting "annoying medieval leftovers" like saluting, among other "heavily authoritarian" features. None of the examples have to do with making Starfleet vessels less armed and armoured than a military fleet; none have to do with Starfleet members being less trained for combat.

There is no dictionary available from the Star Trek universe to check the formal definition of a military by the Federation standards. Luckily, we do have a time period when Starfleet and a military organization from the United Earth called MACO existed at the same time.

MACOs were foot soldiers with traditional military features; they did not have their own fleet of starships. This indicates that Starfleet's idea of a military is defined by "heavily authoritarian" and "annoying medieval leftover" features like saluting; not the training, firepower and defence of the Federation.

This, finally, reveals the absurdity of such a definition when combined with the fact that Starfleet is a heavily armed force and the only organization that fights the Federation's wars.​

 

Yes Starfleet is a military group made of member planets like the United Nations is made up of member countries peace keepers. The U.N. sends help to many people all over the world and yes a military presence is sent with them to keep order and that's the way Starfleet works. But in the U.N. group's have different ideas who what is right that why we had Korea and Vietnam wars ; and others fighting in the world. Starfleet does it on a interplanetary scale of cost of life's and destruction of resources.

 

It's too soon..

 

This thread had mercifully died back in July.

 

It's as simple as this. If Starfleet fight the wars, it's military. Even todays military does a lot of research and science. Heck most of our technical inventions today come from military research.

So Starfleet is a military organisation which also does science. Easy.

 

If only...if only...

 

You are my favorite Mod.