• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Re-doing Enterprise

^I don't see how a purely civilian ship would work. I mean the only kinds of civilian expeditions I know of are either scientific or humanitarian.
There's also trade explorers, there are anthropologists who travel to study people. Historically the people who explore the Earth would be armed so they could handle problems.

Exploration ships would have cannons to protect themselves.

In many of the episodes, the NX-01 could have been a purely civilian ship with just a few changes in dialog.

:)
 
^I don't see how a purely civilian ship would work. I mean the only kinds of civilian expeditions I know of are either scientific or humanitarian.
There's also trade explorers, there are anthropologists who travel to study people. Historically the people who explore the Earth would be armed so they could handle problems.

Exploration ships would have cannons to protect themselves.

In many of the episodes, the NX-01 could have been a purely civilian ship with just a few changes in dialog.

:)
But there would have to be a chain of command. Who would be in charge in case of a combat situation?
 
But there would have to be a chain of command.
It would depend on who owned the ship. If a university or a explorer society (National Geographic?) contracted a ship, then the ship's master would command the ship, but the mission leader would command the mission. The explorers and the ship's company would be two separate groups, the master would be a "hired driver."

If the ship were directly owned by a explorer society there might not be a hard separation, more casual. If you've ever watched the old Jacques Cousteau documentary films it would be something like the Calypso.

Who would be in charge in case of a combat situation?
On a armed civilian ship it would likely be the ship's master. On a planet's surface either the mission leader or a hired security contractor. Basically a team of body guards.

In some cases combat would come down to individuals or a small group using their best judgement on the spot.

:)
 
But there would have to be a chain of command.
It would depend on who owned the ship. If a university or a explorer society (National Geographic?) contracted a ship, then the ship's master would command the ship, but the mission leader would command the mission. The explorers and the ship's company would be two separate groups, the master would be a "hired driver."

If the ship were directly owned by a explorer society there might not be a hard separation, more casual. If you've ever watched the old Jacques Cousteau documentary films it would be something like the Calypso.

Who would be in charge in case of a combat situation?
On a armed civilian ship it would likely be the ship's master. On a planet's surface either the mission leader or a hired security contractor. Basically a team of body guards.

In some cases combat would come down to individuals or a small group using their best judgement on the spot.

:)

This is all well and good but what if there is a potential for interstellar war. Could a ship's owner be trusted in handling delicate diplomatic matters. How would you like it if a war between two planets rested on the random skills of some ship's master, who would have no specific rules to follow?
 
While T'Pol is undeniably curvy, I don't have a problem with her costume conceptually. It ties in with the old sci-fi idea of "in the future we'll all wear silver unitards" (also suggested by previous post-TOS series uniforms, except those were mostly black). Simple and functional, and a lot more practical than those heavy ceremonial robes the diplomats wear.

I'd buy this if it weren't consistently the boobliest member of the crew who wears the unitard. Wouldn't this have been a twist: male Vulcan observer, same outfit. :rommie:
 
While T'Pol is undeniably curvy, I don't have a problem with her costume conceptually. It ties in with the old sci-fi idea of "in the future we'll all wear silver unitards" (also suggested by previous post-TOS series uniforms, except those were mostly black). Simple and functional, and a lot more practical than those heavy ceremonial robes the diplomats wear.

I'd buy this if it weren't consistently the boobliest member of the crew who wears the unitard. Wouldn't this have been a twist: male Vulcan observer, same outfit. :rommie:

Thank God, it's not manboobs though.:guffaw:
 
While T'Pol is undeniably curvy, I don't have a problem with her costume conceptually. It ties in with the old sci-fi idea of "in the future we'll all wear silver unitards" (also suggested by previous post-TOS series uniforms, except those were mostly black). Simple and functional, and a lot more practical than those heavy ceremonial robes the diplomats wear.

I'd buy this if it weren't consistently the boobliest member of the crew who wears the unitard. Wouldn't this have been a twist: male Vulcan observer, same outfit. :rommie:

Thank God, it's not manboobs though.:guffaw:
There ya go. New rule: the crewman with the biggest package gets to wear the unitard!
 
New rule: the crewman with the biggest package gets to wear the unitard!
Something that would nicely show off his "Decker-unit."
I'd have watched ENT just for that :bolian:

Mayweather on the bridge in his posing pouch. :rolleyes:

I'd buy this if it weren't consistently the boobliest member of the crew who wears the unitard. Wouldn't this have been a twist: male Vulcan observer, same outfit. :rommie:
So its boob size we have a problem with?

Producer to Blalock: Too big! Go away and try again.

I notice there is no similar reaction to DS9's Kira, who had basically the same outfit but with smaller boobs.
 
...
I notice there is no similar reaction to DS9's Kira, who had basically the same outfit but with smaller boobs.
If she was flat-chested she could go topless without drawing attention. That's the ticket, the more their breasts look like a guy's the more it is ok to wear tight shirts...
 
Never minded the ship design really, only thing I'd change is moving the deflector dish to hanging off the bottom of the saucer in a more 23rd-early TOS style as opposed to a Voyager style integration.

On to my changes:

Technology: No phase pistols or crap like that, plasma weapons and rail gun type weaponry only (keeps in line with real world development). No transporters -- ever, except as maybe alien tech. No subspace radio, or limited capabilities for it (text, mission files only, perhaps audio, no video). Enterprise would receive more advanced tech like shields, tractor beams, etc... as the series progressed and it became allies with more aliens. Also, no automatic doors on the ship, and no button push doors. the Enterprise would be designed more like a submarine.

Concept:
Keep the concept the same, no Temporal Cold War garbage, first contact with the Klingons begins a massive cold war that scares the hell out of Earth since they have just pissed off a major empire. Most of the earlier episodes would be a cold-war footing and Earth trying to get it's act together in case of invasion. (The decades of war can come later).

The Enterprise would have been built by a private company, much like the Nadesico from it's own series. This would allow following current trends how basically all our space development and research is being pioneer by Space-X, Google, etc.. as opposed to NASA in the past. The civilian crew would be contracted out by UESPA (who until then used probes, occasional small ships, to do their research but this would be the first deep space mission). The civilians would have cooperated with the United Earth military to have a contingent on board. eventually UESPA and the UEM would join to become the UE Starfleet and keep the trend of the "Starfleet is not a military" concept.

Keep the Vulcans as twats and have their arc continue as planned, Romulan developments were mostly fine. Xindi arc could be changed to involve the Klingons and the cold war concept, or could be start of Romulan invasion. But a Klingon attack first would inspire Earth to create a mutual defence treaty encompassing nearby allies before the Romulans attack so I'll lock that in as my final answer.

Key concepts like the Prime Directive would not be directly addressed, only inferred or touched on much like how it was in TOS, with the occasional ramifications of tampering appearing as the series progressed.

Crew: Would do away with T'Pol as a crew member, only an observer and have her recurring. Would keep Daniels as a sorta-shifty kinda guy, eventually to be revealed as a member of an advanced race watching humans taking their first step into the galaxy, trying very hard not to be caught up in events or interfering (Maybe a younger Traveller? Would tie in with the lessons he was teaching Wesley in TNG).

Probably get rid of Travis too, I can't think of a single important thing he ever did in a series that couldn't be done by a "guest star of the week", and we've seen a helmsmen is not necessary as a main character in a series thanks to TNG and DS9.

Liked Phlox, would try to make him less Cardassian looking though.
 
It's true that the writers didn't do their jobs, that is lay the foundations for "its" next generation, IE Kirk time. They should have striven from the very beginning to explain why the situation was as it was when we started with Pike and then Kirk. Not creating new stupid problems (like the temporal cold war, what the hell is a temporal cold war opposed to, btw?) or introducing the ferengi and the borg when they didn't belong. Their Organians for example didn't sound at all like the original organians, that needed not to inhabit people's bodies to appear solid. They made their own bodies out of thin air and also they were concerned about people getting hurt. Which these ones weren't. The series would have been much better if they had kept to that task, which is the only point for going back in time. Why else talk about Kirk's forefathers if not for that?
 
I dislike the Temporal Cold War primarily becuase it could never happen. Any interference from the future would already have taken place. Thus the victor would already have been decided before the war began. Say one faction wanted to send a bomb back in time and blow up the White House in 1960. Their efforts would be doomed to failure because the White House wasn't blown up in 1960. No matter how hard they try it wont work for some reason or another because we know it didn't happen. A Temporal War(hot or cold) could not happen because any group from the future couldn't change what has already has been; even if those events are still in our future.
 
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top