Not even neutronium?
Is Starfleet a military or not?
- Thread starter Hypaspist
- Start date
Not even neutronium?
This, to me, is a very interesting concept, and probably one of the reasons you have "navigation shields" and "deflector arrays" which are designed, in Trek, to provide the kind of protection from particles moving near or at the speed of light.
I like the idea of a decentralized system, partially. But, given the fact that there is still a centralized authority in the captain, so, wherever the captain happens to be, should have some centralized function, to allow the captain to have that information.
Decentralization functions, in a way, because you have the chain of command, so, if the bridge crew is wiped out, some one will step in to command, either a department head, or another officer who recognizes the situation and can take command.
Exactly so. Even in BG, where you have a CIC and not a bridge, there is still a room where the commander can go in, and have access to all department information. So, there are benefits to having a centralized command center, even without being on top of the ship
If there is no working communications system capable of linking the distributed personnel, then there's no benefit to them sitting next to each other and shouting commands to each other. Their commands will have no effect on anything, because the net is down!
The Commander would be better off if he wasn't obligated to go to some "room" to get the information he needs. It should be coming to him, not to a facility that may or may not contain him.
Timo Saloniemi
The Commander would be better off if he wasn't obligated to go to some "room" to get the information he needs. It should be coming to him, not to a facility that may or may not contain him.
Timo Saloniemi
Yes, that's exactly why the space scientists Roddenberry consulted in developing TOS proposed the navigational deflector concept to him in the first place, because of the risk of high-velocity space debris. And it doesn't even have to be anywhere near the speed of light -- just the speeds of particles orbiting the Sun in the asteroid belt could send a small pebble clear through a spaceship or habitat. Think about bullets -- they're very lightweight, only a few grams, but a velocity of only a few hundred meters per second, on the order of a millionth of the speed of light, is enough to let them penetrate clear through cars or buildings. And kinetic energy increases as the square of the velocity, so even going ten times faster would give them a hundred times the penetrating power for the same mass.
Well, of course information would be available anywhere in the ship from any console or through the sentient AI. I think you've misconstrued what I'm saying. I'm not saying the command structure is fragmented in some way -- I'm saying that personnel are physically separated in different parts of the ship so that damage to one part doesn't kill too large a portion of the crew all at once, and all ship's systems are multiply redundant so that if the main command center is taken out, there are several backups that can duplicate its functions.
Since one person can not have all operational and contextual information required to make decisions, there are real advantages to having key people who can provide that information and key people who execute orders in the same space together and seeing the same information the same way at the same time. Voice communications or displays can only provide part of the picture, and some really bad accidents/incidents have happened because what someone said they were doing and what they did were different, and the person in charge didn't notice till it was too late. The old bomber model of the crew talking on intercom ("Pilot to bombardier...") was due to the physical constraints of aircraft size and design. Even then the USAF made Boeing change the fighter-canopy tandem pilot arrangement of the B-47 for a side-by-side deck on the B-52 so the pilots could actually see what the other was doing.
I guess not a lot of people here watched Andromeda. Of course the main command crew were all together in the command center. I'm just saying that the rest of the 4,000 people in the ship's crew were spread out more widely, and that when the ship was fully crewed, it presumably had officers that could take over for the command crew if they were lost. Although the ship itself was a sentient being, so she could've flown and operated herself if necessary. In the early seasons, she managed reasonably well with a crew of six.
Also known as "auxiliary control" in TOS. Of course, if they were worried about the bridge's vulnerability, the sensible thing would be for the XO to be in auxiliary control/battle bridge for battle stations, as in the real world.
The comm system can go down (or be deliberately jammed) without affecting other essential ship's systems. Loss of comm doesn't mean loss of helm or environmental control, for example.
Well, it should. That is, there's no reason to build the intercom system to be more vulnerable than helm control.
Or to build the two to be separate in the first place. One generic, survivable control net that can perform any task is better than a bunch of separate nets that can go down one by one and each take an entire functionality with them. Just use the resources you originally dedicated to multiple separate, single-use, parallel networks to making your generic network massively parallel and survivable.
Investing in survivable commnets enables distribution of crew, which further increases survivability. It's an investment that pays off. If you can't build a survivable commnet, you are building a deathtrap in any case: helm control or weapons control is just commnet by another name.
As for having people physically share a room for better interpersonal communications, it's a tradeoff that probably shouldn't be made. Input from a fellow ship command specialist is less useful than undisturbed overall information flow, which can be all the more complete if there's no need to make room for five or six faces (or, worse still, bodies, for subtle gestural hints) in the field of vision.
Timo Saloniemi
Or to build the two to be separate in the first place. One generic, survivable control net that can perform any task is better than a bunch of separate nets that can go down one by one and each take an entire functionality with them. Just use the resources you originally dedicated to multiple separate, single-use, parallel networks to making your generic network massively parallel and survivable.
Investing in survivable commnets enables distribution of crew, which further increases survivability. It's an investment that pays off. If you can't build a survivable commnet, you are building a deathtrap in any case: helm control or weapons control is just commnet by another name.
As for having people physically share a room for better interpersonal communications, it's a tradeoff that probably shouldn't be made. Input from a fellow ship command specialist is less useful than undisturbed overall information flow, which can be all the more complete if there's no need to make room for five or six faces (or, worse still, bodies, for subtle gestural hints) in the field of vision.
Timo Saloniemi
While I can see the point, there are aspects where having a representative of each of the ship's departments in a command center. I'm not sure I follow the reasoning as to why if the bridge is compromised, then the entire ship is compromised. Even if Starfleet is on an exploration mission, there is still a chain of command, which means that not every senior officer must be on the bridge or command center at all times. Damage to the bridge means that the next senior officer takes command. That's how the chain of command works.
And, if real life cell phones or wireless networks are any indication, I can see communications being far more vulnerable than most systems. Just because you lost the comm doesn't mean you've lost weapons control. Heck, the movie "Crimson Tide" is all about the loss of communications but not weapons.
Finally, while I will concede survivability, there is finally a factor of human interaction. Even counting the other alien species, humans need interaction with other humans. The idea of having a small, isolated (in terms of protection) groups that are communicating purely through data streams is something will many humans would struggle with. It may be a less tactical method, but it is a more human one, if you follow my meaning.
Of course. And something that TV Trek usually ignores is that there are other shifts, people who man the bridge when the main command crew is off-shift or asleep. So presumably you've got two whole backup command crews. Which it's why it's so aggravating when an episode or movie has a crewperson from a completely different department assist or fill in for a given character -- like Kirk in Into Darkness making Chekov chief engineer instead of Scotty's number two, or that DS9 episode where Bashir and O'Brien and others were trying to fill in for Worf's various duties while he was away.
There's a certain irony to conveying that observation over the Internet.
Heck, these days I communicate through data streams more than I interact with other humans in person.
Well, ID hinted that Chekov had been apprenticing with Scotty, so there is the possibility that he was being trained to be the number two officer. Or maybe it was Keesner who left as well. Not disagreeing with the annoyance that so often a whole starship department appears to be made up of Scotty, rather than being a small team.
Regardless, it should be obvious that even if one took down an entire senior bridge crew, there would be a secondary crew prepared to take their place.
There's a certain irony to conveying that observation over the Internet.
Indeed, there is a great irony to my post. However, I would prefer, and often miss the fan groups, because of the human interaction. But, it seems easier to find people to have thse discussion online
It's rather interesting, because I work for a larger retail chain that uses supervisors to travel to various stores. One aspect that seemed relevant to this discussion, is the fact that i recently had a regional manager visiting the store and reviewing our operations. In the course of his visit, he helped customers, asked me to help him find a product in the stock room, and took it up to the register for the customer. He is only one step removed from a senior VP of Operations.
My point being, he could direct the store from his office, send emails, figures, directives and the like, but there is a human need to be out and connected with people, either your customers, or fellow crewmembers. Plus, being on a starship, surrounded by the vacuum of space, I would probably want to see people's faces too.
Communications with HQ weren't hardwired; communications with the onboard SLBMs were. Any communications between command crew members would of course be fully internal and hardwired, and probably far less vulnerable to damage than, say, warp engines or life support. Or the crew, for that matter. If you can take down comms, the entire ship is your oyster (without the annoying hard shell)...
It might also be considered that if Scotty walked out, then anybody trained by him would be a risk factor as well. Better bypass the obvious choices, then, and appoint a junior yes-man Kirk could count on.
In TNG, and probably in ENT already, those data streams could carry the whole range of human interaction, though. Instead of just text messages, an officer could send text, graphics, sound, his face, his body, his body temperature and his odors if need be. And every user could scale this virtual reality to match her personal needs (something she couldn't do in physical interaction where turning off sounds, involuntary gestures or body odors would require so much technology it would amount to virtual reality anyway).
It wouldn't be a struggle for our heroes, who would have grown up with such technology and the associated user culture. But it would be a struggle for the audience - which is why something like that will for the time being only be seen in individual scifi movies, not in long-running television shows.
Timo Saloniemi
Sure, but on a ship that big there should be hundreds of other engineers with a lot more experience than an 18-year-old part-time apprentice.
But then, the film did the same thing when Spock objected that having "Carol Wallace" onboard was redundant because it would mean they'd have two science officers. There's a whole department of science officers. What are all those background crewpeople supposed to be doing if they aren't engineers or science officers or what-have-you?
Keenser did leave with Scotty, and was with him in the bar later in the film.
Sounds like a good supervisor.
We have an example that shows us that while the command crew is generally centralized on the bridge, they are there to relay orders, via buttons, to other parts of the ship.
In Balance of Terror, we see a phaser control room. When the Captain orders the phasers to be fired, Sulu would press the fire button at the Helm. The order to fire is then relayed to phaser control and someone down there fires the phasers.
Similarly, engineering station on the bridge monitors what is going on with the engines, and relays commands down there, though it is also seen that Kirk will often just us the comm directly to engineering as he likes to push for results in that area.
On a traditional ship, the commands from the bridge are relayed to the other parts of the ship via one system or another and the actual work is done in their own areas. When the ships speed is increased, it is indicated on a system that signals engineering to increase speed, were they do the actual processs of increasing the rovolutions per second of the engine so that drive system pushes the ship faster in the water. Helm also works on indication. There are multiple ways to turn the ship via extra wheels. Usually there is one in a aft compartment closer to the rudder.
So it would make sense that any button push on the bridge would be sent to the correct area of the ship to give those crewmen their orders to press other buttons to get the system to do what ever it is the Captain ordered a few moments earlier.
We also see what happens when you automate this process without a crew. It can be done, but it requires a lot of effort and is not entirely reliable even if done by Mr Scott. The engines were pushed (second wind) and the system was overloaded attempting to raise the shields. It probaby didn't have enough mult-tasking to handle the shields, the weapons, and the engineering functions all going on at once after a hard warp trip from Earth to Genesis. Normally, there would be several dozen people to relay that order and the shields would have raised normally while the phasers charged and more torpedos loaded.
By the 24th century, the automation seems better, but it is also suggested that to handle the complex nature of something like a Galaxy-class starship at full capacity actuall requires an android to pull it all off smoothly. It can still be done, but the efficiency of all the power usage for all the ongoing science projects on the ship and uses of all the various sensor arrays seems to be an operational nightmare without Data's abilities and in some cases, speed in button mashing.
In Balance of Terror, we see a phaser control room. When the Captain orders the phasers to be fired, Sulu would press the fire button at the Helm. The order to fire is then relayed to phaser control and someone down there fires the phasers.
Similarly, engineering station on the bridge monitors what is going on with the engines, and relays commands down there, though it is also seen that Kirk will often just us the comm directly to engineering as he likes to push for results in that area.
On a traditional ship, the commands from the bridge are relayed to the other parts of the ship via one system or another and the actual work is done in their own areas. When the ships speed is increased, it is indicated on a system that signals engineering to increase speed, were they do the actual processs of increasing the rovolutions per second of the engine so that drive system pushes the ship faster in the water. Helm also works on indication. There are multiple ways to turn the ship via extra wheels. Usually there is one in a aft compartment closer to the rudder.
So it would make sense that any button push on the bridge would be sent to the correct area of the ship to give those crewmen their orders to press other buttons to get the system to do what ever it is the Captain ordered a few moments earlier.
We also see what happens when you automate this process without a crew. It can be done, but it requires a lot of effort and is not entirely reliable even if done by Mr Scott. The engines were pushed (second wind) and the system was overloaded attempting to raise the shields. It probaby didn't have enough mult-tasking to handle the shields, the weapons, and the engineering functions all going on at once after a hard warp trip from Earth to Genesis. Normally, there would be several dozen people to relay that order and the shields would have raised normally while the phasers charged and more torpedos loaded.
By the 24th century, the automation seems better, but it is also suggested that to handle the complex nature of something like a Galaxy-class starship at full capacity actuall requires an android to pull it all off smoothly. It can still be done, but the efficiency of all the power usage for all the ongoing science projects on the ship and uses of all the various sensor arrays seems to be an operational nightmare without Data's abilities and in some cases, speed in button mashing.
Yes, it would be a conceit that has to be granted for a modern audience, who don't work with or grow up with such technology. Often times, future tech has to have some sort of real world feel to them to make accessible. A good example is the scan lines on holograms in Star Wars.
While a hardline communication system makes sense, I don't see that as being the only form of communication, since wireless technology should only see an improvement versus what we have now. There could be two systems, one a hardline and what a wireless, with the wireless used for convenience, and the hardline for emergency situations, but still able to communicate. I think comms could still be a more vulnerable system, but that's just me and how I see comms evolving.
And hardlines can always be cut, resulting in isolation of different command functions. The decentralized system could be used against the crew as well.
Definitely some pros and cons to both systems.
Yeah, things didn't work out too well for that fire control officer (otherwise known as Danno) with the yips, and presumably the rest of the world afterwards, on that claustrophobic bridge in the Bedford Incident, did they?
^ I read one account of a B-47 pilot who, as he decided to abort a landing and go around for another try, said "Shit" over the intercom. The co-pilot behind him, without a good a view of what was going on, thought he said "Chute," and pulled the landing brake chute. The pilot had poured on more power, but the jet just hung in the air. The pilot jettisoned the chute quickly, but the bomber was past the runway and her wheels skimming through the top of a corn crop before she built up enough speed to climb. Of course without their braking chute they had to find a longer runway, but they did make it down successfully.
Similar threads
