A Warp Fighter
- Thread starter Mars
- Start date
Why do you care, if its part of the standard design then all Galaxy Class starships come with captain's yachts whether the captain wants to use them or not, it is actually attached to the bottom of the Saucer section. Yep that's where the blueprints say it is. The enterprise has a lot of things that aren't shown in the show, including cetean water tanks, some of its crewmembers are dolphins and other aquatic creatures.
But as said many times over, there's no room for a Captain's Yacht in the TV show. Either it would have been shown whenever Picard travels, or then there are pressing in-universe reasons why Picard can never travel on it so it cannot exist.
There's nothing on the bottom of the saucer that would look the slightest bit like a "yacht", so that argument is moot as well. The only way to believe in the Yacht is to claim a priori that it exists, and then start seeing it everywhere or invent reasons why it's nowhere. Which we can do e.g. for things Paramount could not afford to show "for real" but did mention in dialogue. But the Yacht isn't one of those.
Timo Saloniemi
There's nothing on the bottom of the saucer that would look the slightest bit like a "yacht", so that argument is moot as well. The only way to believe in the Yacht is to claim a priori that it exists, and then start seeing it everywhere or invent reasons why it's nowhere. Which we can do e.g. for things Paramount could not afford to show "for real" but did mention in dialogue. But the Yacht isn't one of those.
Timo Saloniemi
Alright, I think that it is there, but there are good reasons it is not used (not-warp capable, no armor, problems with re-attachment, Picard doesn't like it ...) - as you said Timo.
But I can understand your point. Timo could you please list some (let's say 3-4) examples where you think they ought to have mentioned/used the yacht?
A big support for your argument is the Galaxy-X refit in "All Good Things...". After all, the Phaser spinal lance would prohibit the use of the yacht if it were still (or at all) on board.
But I can understand your point. Timo could you please list some (let's say 3-4) examples where you think they ought to have mentioned/used the yacht?
A big support for your argument is the Galaxy-X refit in "All Good Things...". After all, the Phaser spinal lance would prohibit the use of the yacht if it were still (or at all) on board.
According to Memory Alpha, Andrew Probert—you know, the only person credited for the design of the Enterprise-D in real life—disagrees [http://en.memory-alpha.org/wiki/Captain's_yacht] [http://en.memory-alpha.org/wiki/Andrew_Probert]. Speaking of Mr. Probert, he's a member of the board, isn't he? Perhaps he could chime in on the issue of whether anything on the bottom of the saucer of the Enterprise-D looks like a Captain's yacht.
Paging Mr. Probert!
"Samaritan Snare" involves a long trip that Picard performs for what he considers secretive, personal reasons - a good time to travel in comfort, on resources not needed by anybody else. The lack of a Yacht there seems to rule out its role as a private pleasure vessel. "Rascals" supports that view, again depicting a holiday trip; the conference in "Timescape" is only marginally less private an excuse. And it's not as if Picard used the craft for "Captain's Holiday", either - although everybody may have agreed that it was important to have him stuck on Risa, rather than free to travel and perhaps rejoin the crew before he had gotten sufficiently relaxed.
It might be the craft lacks warp engines and is just a glorified elevator for arriving on planets in style. (Why such a thing would be called a "yacht" evades me, though.) But "The Host" is an example of the Yacht not being a craft for ferrying dignitaries over short distances, either, or it would have been used by Odan there.
Also, "Q Who?" involves Q kidnapping Picard to a standard shuttlecraft. Why not the Yacht, all things considered? And "Final Mission" is unexplainable in its use of a non-Starfleet shuttlecraft to begin with, but that's a somewhat different issue.
It might be that the E-D did possess some sort of a utility craft for a mission type that never was witnessed in the show. But we saw pleasure yachting of various sorts, and that wasn't it. We saw infiltration missions, and that wasn't it. We saw flying through dangerous environments, and that wasn't it. About the only thing we missed was the ferrying of large numbers of troops (perhaps the Yacht performed an offscreen role of that sort in "Descent"?), or perhaps the establishing of a research or diplomacy outpost. The thing might be a flying barracks (the shape would certainly cater for it) - but why call it a "yacht", then?
Timo Saloniemi
Thank you. I will take a refresh course and re-watch those episodes.
As to why "yacht", can it be cultural issue? Do you see "yacht" used as the historical "hunting boat", or more like today's "recreational boat"?
PS From TNG Technical Manual:
This is one of those nifty things that we may never get to see on the show. We did briefly flirt with the idea of actually using the captain's yacht in "Samaritan Snare, "but it was decided to use an "executive shuttlecraft" instead. Patrick Stewart informs us that the yacht is named Calypso, after Jacques Cousteau's ship. Visual effects coordinator (and Navy veteran) Ron B. Moore points out that naval tradition would probably insist the craft be called the Captain's Gig.
The use of naval jargon in Trek may be at variance with RN or USN traditions, of course. After all, the shuttles aren't "boats" or "launches", either.
One might think that the TNG depiction of the craft, lacking warp engines and having fancy atmospheric flight systems in addition to impulse drive, might make her a "barge", in the sense of a "royal barge". In any case, there would appear to be a need to distinguish her from the shuttles that have significantly different propulsive capabilities. But "yacht" seems to go in an entirely wrong direction, being traditionally more capable in navigation than a "boat" or a "launch".
Timo Saloniemi
One might think that the TNG depiction of the craft, lacking warp engines and having fancy atmospheric flight systems in addition to impulse drive, might make her a "barge", in the sense of a "royal barge". In any case, there would appear to be a need to distinguish her from the shuttles that have significantly different propulsive capabilities. But "yacht" seems to go in an entirely wrong direction, being traditionally more capable in navigation than a "boat" or a "launch".
Timo Saloniemi
Tangental, but related: there's a blanket category of evidence against Voyager's aeroshuttle in the case of the Delta Flyer; this is a craft built from scratch to accomplish what the aeroshuttle should have been designed to do from the get go; indeed, the mission into that gas giant is the ONLY kind of mission you would ever need an aeroshuttle for, and if it was so ill-suited to the task they could have easily modified and enhanced it for that task instead of building a whole new ship from scratch. Conversely, if the shuttle was so badly damaged that they couldn't even use it (nothing on the USS Voyager was ever THAT badly damaged) they could have simply ejected and scrapped it and put the Delta Flyer into that saucer slot.
Two series' in a row where every single time a "captain's yacht" or similar craft ought to be used, they pick something else instead.
And the real-world reason never seems to be "it would be expensive", as something even more expensive is done in its stead.
From what little we learn in the TNG Tech Manual, the Yacht would have been done using the standard cabin set. The same wall curvature is there, the same window shapes, the same dimensions. Picard's table would just have been replaced by a helm console of some sort, apparently.
Might have looked silly. Might have been really cool if the miniature work were good. And if the thing was a success in TNG, it could have been done in more splendor with CGI and virtual sets in the TNG movies. But of course nothing ever came of it.
At least we have Probert's cool artwork of that which never was (incidentally, with what looks like phaser strips and recessed warp engines!).
Timo Saloniemi
From what little we learn in the TNG Tech Manual, the Yacht would have been done using the standard cabin set. The same wall curvature is there, the same window shapes, the same dimensions. Picard's table would just have been replaced by a helm console of some sort, apparently.
Might have looked silly. Might have been really cool if the miniature work were good. And if the thing was a success in TNG, it could have been done in more splendor with CGI and virtual sets in the TNG movies. But of course nothing ever came of it.
At least we have Probert's cool artwork of that which never was (incidentally, with what looks like phaser strips and recessed warp engines!).
Timo Saloniemi
I was under the impression that they build the Delta Flyer withe idea in mind that this shuttle should withstand a lot of beating, more than a typical shuttle and by extension the Aerowing could take.
With the advent of Remastered TNG, we could very well see a CGI model of it in the near future. I wouldn't bet on it, but you never know.
In which case upgrading the runabout-sized Aerowing would have been their best option.
Realistically, anyway. But since this is Voyager what ACTUALLY happened was "Tom Paris built a new shuttlecraft! In a cave! With a bunch of scraps!"
They haven't done anything NEARLY that ambitious with TNG-R. I doubt they're going to start now.
In terms of immediate need, the Delta Flyer came to be because the heroes needed a batyscaphe - a craft capable of diving deep into the atmosphere of a gas giant. Tom Paris just had some tangential fun when completing the construction work.
How did the DF do better than standard shuttlecraft in the pressure resistance thing? Was it a stronger hull (future materials might well suffice for that)? In that case, an all-new craft would be much better than any attempt at modifying an existing one. But if the trick were done with forcefields or structural integrity fields, all they'd really need would be a craft that could accommodate the required magic field generators - a good excuse to go for the Aeroshuttle, as its only known quality is its runabout-like size, at least equal to that of the DF, and probably a tad better.
Timo Saloniemi
How did the DF do better than standard shuttlecraft in the pressure resistance thing? Was it a stronger hull (future materials might well suffice for that)? In that case, an all-new craft would be much better than any attempt at modifying an existing one. But if the trick were done with forcefields or structural integrity fields, all they'd really need would be a craft that could accommodate the required magic field generators - a good excuse to go for the Aeroshuttle, as its only known quality is its runabout-like size, at least equal to that of the DF, and probably a tad better.
Timo Saloniemi
IIRC, at some point during the mission the Delta Flyer actually cracked under the pressure and B'elanna quickly sealed the breach using a hand phaser and a bunch of spare parts.
At the end of the day, the delta flyer in the first place was an excuse to do the "space race" thing with the Malon to capture that space probe they lost. They wrote the aeroshuttle out of the series just to justify that bit of silliness and then expected nobody would ask the obvious background questions of "How the hell are they able to do all of this and have it always work?"
They could have done that with a claustrophobic "special space batysphere", though, for even greater dramatic effect. But they really wanted a big generic secondary craft for future storylines, as separating and stranding part of the cast is always a good driving force for drama.
I agree that if they had chosen to declare in this episode "Hey, we have this special craft here that is especially good for atmospheric operations - let's dust it off!" and then proceeded to refurbish the thing at the bottom of the forward hull, there would have been major upsides.
It would have been a sudden burst of forward-looking continuity, really: it would establish that the ship has some limited-use hardware aboard that was never quite brought to active status, so the heroes could in the future activate further special hardware the same way as needed. It would also perfectly allow for Tom Paris to insert his "Chaotica" strokes. And while it would require shooting of new type of miniature footage of the Voyager flying without the craft in place, it would OTOH free them from building all-new sets because the runabout ones would be available in full. (Any shots of the craft undocking or redocking would not be "extra" work, as they would merely be the counterparts of the shots of the DF flying in and out of the shuttlebay.)
Timo Saloniemi
Depending on the shape of the ship underneath, perhaps only part of it would need to fold out of the way?
The more I think about it, the more it feels like a missed opportunity to do something original and interesting - each time the Aerowing (or Delta Flyer if that's what it became) launched would be an event in its own right, not just another "fly out of the magic shuttlebay" shot.
The more I think about it, the more it feels like a missed opportunity to do something original and interesting - each time the Aerowing (or Delta Flyer if that's what it became) launched would be an event in its own right, not just another "fly out of the magic shuttlebay" shot.
Similar threads
