Point of the MSD?

[Tribble puncher]

If you're in this forum, you know what an MSD is, Why have a huge display like this that couldn't really display anything but very basic information? I mean, sure you could look at it and see that the engines are damaged or deck six might be breached, but any sort of details like (where the breach is on deck six) couldn't really be displayed, what if its to the left or right of the exact axis of the ship? I just wonder why one would waste so much screen real estate on a display that would prob belong in the engine room (like the ent-d). any information it could convey could be retrieved in detail from any bridge station. plus the captain would have to turn 180 degrees in the heat of battle to even utilize it. It seems redundant, and inefficient....

 

[F. King Daniel]

To look cool. That's all. The art deparment was seperate to the guys writing the shows, which led to such goofs as Voyagers two warp cores and two computer cores, Defiant's four decks and landing pads (all contradicted by or ignored by the scripts), and the Enterprise-E's MSD having slightly different preportions to the actual ship.

In-universe, a 3D hologram or graphic would be FAR more useful. Something like this:
[YT]www.youtube.com/watch?v=JWrsEL0TyPk[/YT]

 

[Tribble puncher]

This would have looked freakin cool....

 

[SchwEnt]

I'll suggest something more...

Due to time and technology and budgets constraints of the series production, we didn't see much of it. But there are some examples of the MSD being more useful to the crew.

By that I mean, it wasn't solely a giant static display. We did see some animation and zoom and other features of the MSD. I think in-universe, the MSD isn't a big graphic wallpaper for the crew. I'm sure it's got features to rotate and isolate and zoom and enhance and all kinds of things that would be useful. We didn't always see it in action but I think it worked that way.

You know with most things Okudagram-wise and treknical, we see a bit of it on-screen, let your imagination fill in the rest to make it awesome.

 

[DEWLine]

Yep. If they'd had the tools back then for stuff like this animation, they would have used them.

 

[ngc7293]

It should be noted that STNG came out in the late 1980's and the other shows followed. The stage tech wasn't what you could get on your current PC, so they just had layered plastic.

 

[QuinnTV]

...which led to such goofs as Voyagers two warp cores

I was under the impression that the second warp core on the cross section was the spare.

By that I mean, it wasn't solely a giant static display. We did see some animation and zoom and other features of the MSD. I think in-universe, the MSD isn't a big graphic wallpaper for the crew. I'm sure it's got features to rotate and isolate and zoom and enhance and all kinds of things that would be useful. We didn't always see it in action but I think it worked that way.

Exactly how I always imagined it. I'm sure in-universe it was quite a versatile display. We just always "happened" to see the MSD in a default overall view. Kind of like the LCARS station displays: usually just blinkies, but there were several shots in TNG with animations added.

 

[Timo]

Even in-universe, the MSD might see very little practical use. But it could be something of a fallback option, a display to be utilized when the main viewer was down or unusable for some reason - and it just happened to have the ship's cutaway diagram as the "screen saver" setting while waiting for more useful employment.

Too bad that those bridges that had a rotating CO's throne did not have the rear-mounted MSD!

Timo Saloniemi

 

[Use of Time]

It could also serve as one of those snapshot operational status of the ship kind of displays that would allow the crew to brief the Captain on a certain topic without him having to leave the bridge. We see often in TNG the staff utilizing the aft stations to pull up information and they use it as a place to have little "pow wows" that are less formal than piling everyone into the observation lounge for a full on meeting. It would be almost like the U.S. Army's version of a station that a "Battle Captain" would man as a single hub of information for the command group.

 

[swaaye]

There are some small 3D MSD displays even on TNG occasionally I think. But the big MSDs stay static. I remember Seaquest was maybe the first show to try large projection displays for the sets.

I bet today they would grab some huge LCD monitors and make some amazing sets.

 

[Colonel Midnight]

I kind of see it being used basically as a TNG version of the DC (damage control) plates onboard naval ships these days. First thought that popped into my mind.

Granted, some suitably sci-fi spiffy version is more along the lines of what you see onscreen during TWOK with Spock's line of "They knew exactly where to hit us...", but the bad part about a system like that is that it's powered.

Even with redundant batteries upon redundant batteries, et.al.... In combat or general emergency, you're going to lose power or get circuits disrupted enough at some point that you'll be down to grease pencil and DC plate. Not to mention an elegant example of the good ol' KISS principle.

Just IMO, though.

Cheers,
-CM-

 

[QuinnTV]

...but the bad part about a system like that is that it's powered.

It gets its power from the same protected source as the red alert lights. There are some things there is always juice for.

 

[Timo]

Note that (due to the way the prop is constructed) when power is lost, the image itself is not lost. It just loses its backlight! It's thus probably every bit as good as a solid painted-on graphic, then - just shine a flashlight or a candle at it, and you can read it again, just like you could a damage control plate today.

Merely because something features moving graphics doesn't establish that it would be dependent on external or even internal power sources. The default setting of such technology may be "on and readable", in absence of all power; power might only be required for altering the image being portrayed.

Timo Saloniemi

 

[Sumghai]

Note that (due to the way the prop is constructed) when power is lost, the image itself is not lost. It just loses its backlight! It's thus probably every bit as good as a solid painted-on graphic, then - just shine a flashlight or a candle at it, and you can read it again, just like you could a damage control plate today.

Merely because something features moving graphics doesn't establish that it would be dependent on external or even internal power sources. The default setting of such technology may be "on and readable", in absence of all power; power might only be required for altering the image being portrayed.

It might be that the LCARS display work on the same principles as "electrofluidic" displays that only consume power when changing images - no power is required to maintain it:

http://gammadynamics.net/news/aploct2010/