How do/did you feel about the return of the Enterprise-D?

[Allyn Gibson]

The Enterprise-D was armed. Geordi said they the drones were loading the torpedo bays.

This is the thing that irritates me the most, frankly. Geordi was allowed to, on his own time and off the books, assemble a fully operational mobile weapons platform that could be armed at a moment's notice.

I've seen people justify this by saying that Geordi is no different than a car enthusiast, restoring vintage hot rodders and things like that. Yeah, but that old Studebaker rebuilt from pieces from junkyards isn't capable of bombing a planet back to liquid magma. A car is not a weapon of mass destruction. Geordi's kitbashed Enterprise-D is. We don't think of Federation starships this way because Star Trek does not condition us to see them this way, but it doesn't alter the fact that Geordi's pet project is capable of doling out unimaginable death and destruction. But we forgive it, or just ignore it altogether, because it's Geordi and he has Main Character Armor.

 

[Ray Hardgrit]

I got the impression that he was mostly just doing his job as the guy who supervises the restoration of famous ships for the museum. It's just that the Enterprise-D was more of a write-off than most and it was his own pet project to actually get it working again.

The security at the museum is another thing; they just walked off with that cloaking device!

 

[Admiral Jean-Luc Picard]

This is the thing that irritates me the most, frankly. Geordi was allowed to, on his own time and off the books, assemble a fully operational mobile weapons platform that could be armed at a moment's notice.

I've seen people justify this by saying that Geordi is no different than a car enthusiast, restoring vintage hot rodders and things like that. Yeah, but that old Studebaker rebuilt from pieces from junkyards isn't capable of bombing a planet back to liquid magma. A car is not a weapon of mass destruction. Geordi's kitbashed Enterprise-D is. We don't think of Federation starships this way because Star Trek does not condition us to see them this way, but it doesn't alter the fact that Geordi's pet project is capable of doling out unimaginable death and destruction. But we forgive it, or just ignore it altogether, because it's Geordi and he has Main Character Armor.

I mean, you've literally described every Starfleet starship. The Ent-D is different, because....?

 

[Paul Weaver]

Geordi was clearly authorised to restore the D. You can't do a project like that and keep it hidden from your boss. And obviously restoring such a key piece of history is clearly in his remit as someone in charge of the fleet museum, whether that's a direct "do this" order, or part of his more general remit.

As a senior officer in Starfleet (a higher rank than Picard had when he was in command of the fully armed D and E, several ranks above Worf and Dax when they commanded the Defiant) he also has the authorisation of rank to do all sorts of things even if it's not been directly ordered. He's not some ensign who's been ordered to clean the holodeck filters.

It's fair enough to assume Geordi was in charge of the entire station that we saw, which means he was authorised to have and fire torpedos and other weapons on his station - the type of station we've seen which has multiple defence systems. As a Commodore - two ranks above where Sisko was when Sisko was in charge of DS9 at the start, and higher than the Sisko that led massive fleets against the Dominion, he is of the rank where he's trusted to be in charge of such enormous weaponry, and as we've seen time and time again, for good reason. He was first in charge of such a weapons platform way back in Arsenal of Freedom 30 years earlier, where he even deployed such weapons.

We don't know what career path he had between Nemesis and Picard, but we've seen a potential future where he was a starship captain for a while, and I see no evidence in Picard that that didn't happen.

Whether he had the authorisation to load torpedoes is another matter, but given that didn't happen until after the entire fleet was wiped out, as the highest ranking active duty officer known about in Starfleet he could do whatever he wanted. Not that he needed anyones permission to load them

So having established he has a long history of legitimate command of Galaxy Class (and more) weaponry, and has the authority to restore the Enterprise D, the only quesiton is whether he was authorised to restore its weaponry to a level it can be used if torpedoes are loaded.

For Torpedoes I believe we only saw them coming from the stardrive station. We don't know how long the Syracruse had been there - it's possible that the ships were only connected a month earlier and that the Syracruse was still being decomissioned from being an active ship. The saucer phasers of the D are plausibly needed for navigational purposes - no reason to assume a museum ship can't run around on special tours, and thus needs at least a limited ability to deal with errant asteroids for example, with their power limited by the energy provided

 

[Allyn Gibson]

I mean, you've literally described every Starfleet starship. The Ent-D is different, because....?

It's a museum piece, not an active, frontline vessel. Why is a museum piece capable of mass destruction?

 

[The Wormhole]

Museum ships are not supposed to be armed. At all. And it's not just torpedoes being loaded because of the crisis, the Enterprise D had working phaser banks, which on their own are still capable of meting out considerable destruction. I find it amusing given how blue in the face some people can get insisting Starfleet is not a military, yet they seem to be okay with a supposedly non-military keeping a museum ship fully armed when no actual military would ever dream of doing such a thing. Hell, just look at BSG, at the start of the miniseries Galactica is technically still on active duty, yet in the process of being converted into a museum. It had no weapons aboard at all and one of its flight pods was rendered permanently non functional.

And let's not get started on the idiocy of a working cloaking device being at the museum. Especially since it was illegal for the Federation to even have a cloaking device. Even if the Federation were to hold onto an illegal cloaking device, they would not leave it on a museum ship and have that be public knowledge.

 

[A Ruffian]

Museum ships are not supposed to be armed. At all. And it's not just torpedoes being loaded because of the crisis, the Enterprise D had working phaser banks, which on their own are still capable of meting out considerable destruction. I find it amusing given how blue in the face some people can get insisting Starfleet is not a military, yet they seem to be okay with a supposedly non-military keeping a museum ship fully armed when no actual military would ever dream of doing such a thing. Hell, just look at BSG, at the start of the miniseries Galactica is technically still on active duty, yet in the process of being converted into a museum. It had no weapons aboard at all and one of its flight pods was rendered permanently non functional.

That is a really good example. Also, what about naval ships as museums like the Yorktown? Could they be used as an example?

And let's not get started on the idiocy of a working cloaking device being at the museum. Especially since it was illegal for the Federation to even have a cloaking device. Even if the Federation were to hold onto an illegal cloaking device, they would not leave it on a museum ship and have that be public knowledge.

Defiant’s cloaking device wasn’t illegal, and it was Romulan or something, but I’m also pretty sure I wouldn’t want a civilian to find out either.
Probably “let’s just have both cloaks just cause” or something weird.

 

[Admiral Jean-Luc Picard]

It's a museum piece, not an active, frontline vessel. Why is a museum piece capable of mass destruction?

In Star Trek, phasers and photon torpedoes are not "weapons of mass destruction," they are standard defensive weapons.

 

[Admiral Jean-Luc Picard]

Museum ships are not supposed to be armed. At all.

Says who and what on screen? I argue you shouldn't be able to move a spacedock from one solar system to the next, argue that ships like the Defiant-A should still be in service. If we're gonna go silly, might as well keep them armed too to service the plot.

 

[fireproof78]

In Star Trek, phasers and photon torpedoes are not "weapons of mass destruction," they are standard defensive weapons.

They are weapons of mass destruction though. TOS demonstrates that again.

Keeping them armed strains credulity.

Mileage will vary as to the strain

 

[Admiral Jean-Luc Picard]

They are weapons of mass destruction though. TOS demonstrates that again.

Keeping them armed strains credulity.

Mileage will vary as to the strain

No one calls them "weapons of mass destruction," they're simply standard defense weapons.

 

[Daedalus]

Up until very recently, it was only a handful of people manning an ICBM silo who would turn the keys. Of course, they'd need the PAL codes from further up the chain of command, but  Trust is basically principal behind the whole thing. Plus, a tonne of discipline. Stanislav Petrov could've easily launched a nuclear arsenal, but he didn't. I presume Geordi is just as conscientious, otherwise he wouldn't have got the position.

I will say, it does remind me of Demolition Man, with that museum full of functional weapons and ammunition. But, I suppose the idea is that they live in a better society, and are better people. At least, we're supposed to believe that...as with Star Trek.

 

[The Wormhole]

Also, what about naval ships as museums like the Yorktown? Could they be used as an example?

Sure. Where I live, there is an old WWII corvette used as a museum ship. It doesn't even have a working engine. Which is another oddity, Starfleet apparently leaves functioning matter/antimatter reactors on museum ships? So much can go wrong there.

In Star Trek, phasers and photon torpedoes are not "weapons of mass destruction," they are standard defensive weapons.

The weapons are still capable of mass destruction regardless of their intended purpose. A single starship after all is capable of annihilating all life on a whole planet with its phasers and photon torpedoes. Why does a museum need such weapons.

Says who and what on screen?

We can't apply logic based on how actual museum ships work? Regardless, we circle back to my previous question, why does a museum need to be armed with phasers and photon torpedoes?

Up until very recently, it was only a handful of people manning an ICBM silo who would turn the keys. Of course, they'd need the PAL codes from further up the chain of command, but  Trust is basically principal behind the whole thing. Plus, a tonne of discipline. Stanislav Petrov could've easily launched a nuclear arsenal, but he didn't. I presume Geordi is just as conscientious, otherwise he wouldn't have got the position.

I will say, it does remind me of Demolition Man, with that museum full of functional weapons and ammunition. But, I suppose the idea is that they live in a better society, and are better people. At least, we're supposed to believe that...as with Star Trek.

Even if we entertain that the Federation is a perfect society that doesn't need to worry about weapons being left in the open, there are other hostile powers neighboring it that would certainly love to take advantage of the fact there's a low security public museum with starships with working weapons and other tactical technology. Hell, what's to stop the Dominion from sending a shapeshifter to the museum and triggering a warp core breach on one of the ships, causing an enormous amount of damage and deaths of many civilian tourists?

 

[fireproof78]

No one calls them "weapons of mass destruction," they're simply standard defense weapons.

They also don't call themselves a military.


Sometimes the subtext is just there.

will say, it does remind me of Demolition Man, with that museum full of functional weapons and ammunition. But, I suppose the idea is that they live in a better society, and are better people. At least, we're supposed to believe that...as with Star Trek.

It's not about better people but risk. It's already been demonstrated time and again that Starfleet vessels and their weapons are extremely dangerous and that there are bad actors who will engage in violence to get access. Starship Mine springs immediately to mind.

If the purpose is a museum then why have the weapons at all? If the purpose is defense then why not better security?

 

[Paul Weaver]

We can't apply logic based on how actual museum ships work? Regardless, we circle back to my previous question, why does a museum need to be armed with phasers and photon torpedoes?

Many "museums" are functioning. You claim that such a ship doesn't need an engine, but why doesn't it - why can't you have a museum which can travel under its own power.

Working matter/antimatter ships - ones capable of wiping out an unshielded planet - are available to private people in the Alpha Quadrant, from Quark to Rios, so not much different to having an old car. No danger to post-warp civilisations due to planetary shields.

Even in the 21st century a "museum ship" doesn't mean it's not commissioned. The USS Constitution in the US Navy is a "museum" ship yet is also commissioned. The SS Jeremiah O'Brien is an old US Navy ship with working engines which has occasionally fired blanks. The Netherlands has an ironclad - the Buffel - with a working engine. The Victory has working canons, the USS Texas and has working weapons systems (again used with blanks)

 

[The Wormhole]

Even in the 21st century a "museum ship" doesn't mean it's not commissioned. The USS Constitution in the US Navy is a "museum" ship yet is also commissioned. The SS Jeremiah O'Brien is an old US Navy ship with working engines which has occasionally fired blanks. The Netherlands has an ironclad - the Buffel - with a working engine. The Victory has working canons, the USS Texas and has working weapons systems (again used with blanks)

These ships are not armed with nukes and therefore can not obliterate entire countries if given the chance, and if their engines malfunction it is not going to cause destruction on a massive scale like a warp core breach would. There is a difference between firing blanks and live munitions, which Starfleet museums apparently do.

 

[Daedalus]

It's not about better people but risk. It's already been demonstrated time and again that Starfleet vessels and their weapons are extremely dangerous and that there are bad actors who will engage in violence to get access. Starship Mine springs immediately to mind.

If the purpose is a museum then why have the weapons at all? If the purpose is defense then why not better security?

In the event that the ships need to be recalled into combat.

How do we know the security levels? They have drones for loading, drones can be deadly.

 

[Paul Weaver]

The D fired real torpedoes because it had real torpedos loaded by potentially the most senior ranking starfleet officer in the entire galaxy, someone who has been authorised to use such weapons on his discretion for the majority of his life.

A museum ship capable of giving demonstrations of how that very ship saved a planet by using its phasers to drill into the core of the planet, or used its torpedos to blow up an asteroid aimed at a colony, seems reasonable to me

Life in the 24th century is that warp core breaches can be triggered by anyone from an arms merchant to to a shuttle pilot, as they all have access to them. Look at what Nero had available to him on a mining vessel.

There's no evidence the D's can obliterate any countries on any post-warp planet thanks to planetary shields and other defences, and pre-warp planets are protected by other means. Anyone with a high impulse capable shuttle can simply target it at a pre-warp planet and cause an extinction level event.

 

[The Wormhole]

In the event that the ships need to be recalled into combat.

That's what a Mothball Fleet is for. If a ship is turned into a museum, there will never be a need for it to reenter service again.

 

[Paul Weaver]

I suspect museum ships were brought back during the Dominon war