Rick Sternbach, Rick Sternbach, Rick Sternbach...

[Albertese]

...

Still, near the middle of the heavily populated saucer and just below/behind the bridge doesn't seem like the ideal place to put such vents. I'd think you'd want them more out toward the edge and further to the rear.

I dunno. I think it makes sense. Assuming the problem is that serious that you'd need to eject it from the hull, you'd want to do it quickly given that that is where most the people are. Having such vents centrally located seems pretty reasonable. You wouldn't want them blowing down for fear of interfering with the deflector dish. Also keeping them in the middle would keep them more-or-less out of the way of the ship's phasers, which might be an important consideration given that a combat scenario is as likely a place as any to incur damage that might require such venting in the first place.

--Alex

 

[Ar-Pharazon]

I think the toast pops out there!

Just had a "Red Dwarf" recollection from that comment...

Was the Enterprise designed by the same team that gave us "Talky Toaster?"

Right on! And Data was designed by the friendly folks at Sirius Cybernetics Corporation.

As others mentioned, the ST-TNG blueprints (by Rick) are calling them Emergency Flush Vents.

 

[Captain Robert April]

Would that make Data our "plastic pal who's fun to be with?"

 

[B.J.]

About "Cause & Effect", were the inertial dampeners still online? That *might* help with the explanation of how venting the shuttlebay was able to move the ship.

 

[Rick Sternbach]

About "Cause & Effect", were the inertial dampeners still online? That *might* help with the explanation of how venting the shuttlebay was able to move the ship.

With any kind of magical mass-lightening effect, sure, you could move the ship a bit easier. You'd also pitch the ship tail-up because of the thrust vector at the shuttlebays. Right into the oncoming Bozeman. We hardly ever did truly complicated and clever failures/fixes; mostly because of the time to explain it to the audience. Simpler was better to the producers. We did fun and interesting stuff, but I would have loved to have seen some faster-paced solutions to tech problems. Stargate SG-1 and Atlantis did some better space tech stuff, but then they had us to learn from.

Rick

 

[Patrickivan]

About "Cause & Effect", were the inertial dampeners still online? That *might* help with the explanation of how venting the shuttlebay was able to move the ship.

With any kind of magical mass-lightening effect, sure, you could move the ship a bit easier. You'd also pitch the ship tail-up because of the thrust vector at the shuttlebays. Right into the oncoming Bozeman. We hardly ever did truly complicated and clever failures/fixes; mostly because of the time to explain it to the audience. Simpler was better to the producers. We did fun and interesting stuff, but I would have loved to have seen some faster-paced solutions to tech problems. Stargate SG-1 and Atlantis did some better space tech stuff, but then they had us to learn from.

Rick

SG1 and Atlantis (Both fun shows), also had more time in a sense, with continuing story lines, eh? As opposed to TNG being so episode singular.

But I'll be honest, I didn't need explanations for every little thing when watching any series like that. That's why I come here...

 

[Forbin]

About "Cause & Effect", were the inertial dampeners still online? That *might* help with the explanation of how venting the shuttlebay was able to move the ship.

With any kind of magical mass-lightening effect, sure, you could move the ship a bit easier. You'd also pitch the ship tail-up because of the thrust vector at the shuttlebays. Right into the oncoming Bozeman. We hardly ever did truly complicated and clever failures/fixes; mostly because of the time to explain it to the audience. Simpler was better to the producers. We did fun and interesting stuff, but I would have loved to have seen some faster-paced solutions to tech problems. Stargate SG-1 and Atlantis did some better space tech stuff, but then they had us to learn from.

Rick

I thought I was the only one who served as an example to others for what NOT to do.

 

[Ar-Pharazon]

Would that make Data our "plastic pal who's fun to be with?"

Tasha would agree with that.

 

[Timo]

...Of course, the smart thing to do would have been to vent the gases through the very slots that were the OT of this thread. That'd give you a nice downward vector to the saucer that'd be maximally effective in sending the ship flipping over, and if you timed it right, it would present a minimal profile to the incoming Bozeman and allow her to pass right beneath the E-D stern...

I wonder if the inertia trickery could be divided into removing all the rotational inertia while retaining the translational. I mean, with rotation, you're essentially canceling out opposing pairs of vectors; it might be less energy-intensive to do than fighting a single translational vector.

Dunno. It would have been fun to see the ship flipping out of the way without actually moving from the spot where she had got stuck.

Timo Saloniemi

 

[Patrickivan]

...Of course, the smart thing to do would have been to vent the gases through the very slots that were the OT of this thread. That'd give you a nice downward vector to the saucer that'd be maximally effective in sending the ship flipping over, and if you timed it right, it would present a minimal profile to the incoming Bozeman and allow her to pass right beneath the E-D stern...

I wonder if the inertia trickery could be divided into removing all the rotational inertia while retaining the translational. I mean, with rotation, you're essentially canceling out opposing pairs of vectors; it might be less energy-intensive to do than fighting a single translational vector.

Dunno. It would have been fun to see the ship flipping out of the way without actually moving from the spot where she had got stuck.

Timo Saloniemi

Oh I see what you're seeing. Rotate the ship in one spot as the Bozeman is passing over. That would have been neat.

One thing I'm afraid of with TNG remastering, is that they go too far i.e. TOS-R, where we see ships zipping around like atmospheric fighters as well as unusual and space un-natural bobbing around scenes, almost like a ship on waves. You're proposition sounds more spacey realistic.

 

[David cgc]

One thing I'm afraid of with TNG remastering, is that they go too far i.e. TOS-R, where we see ships zipping around like atmospheric fighters as well as unusual and space un-natural bobbing around scenes, almost like a ship on waves. You're proposition sounds more spacey realistic.

All indications are that they'll be using a vast majority of the original effects footage, so there's no danger of that.

 

[Christopher]

One thing I'm afraid of with TNG remastering, is that they go too far i.e. TOS-R, where we see ships zipping around like atmospheric fighters as well as unusual and space un-natural bobbing around scenes, almost like a ship on waves.

There was nothing like that in the TOS-R I watched.

 

[sojourner]

Yeah, the TOS-R I watched was very faithful to the style of the show.

 

[Forbin]

...sometimes.

 

[Captain Robert April]

coughcoughDoomsdayMachinecoughcough

 

[sojourner]

I will admit that I haven't seen alot of them. What did they change in Doomsday Machine?

 

[Timo]

They removed the cartoon inserts and replaced them with some actual visual effects.

Not state of the art, but better than the original crap.

Timo Saloniemi

 

[Maurice]

They removed the cartoon inserts and replaced them with some actual visual effects.

Not state of the art, but better than the original crap.

Timo Saloniemi

More like they replaced something outdated with something that'll be just as outdated in less than 10 years.

 

[Captain Robert April]

Lemme put it this way: They don't quite reach the point of the fanfilm "In Harm's Way", where the Enterprise is zipping around like a Colonial Viper, but it's pushing it.

 

[EmperorTiberius]

They could vent radiation from bleed-through weapons damage