Star Trek VI: 2 pairs of gravity boots

[Sandoval]

Where would it be established that Chekov stayed aboard beyond ST5 (an adventure that only involved a few days, during which the ship's systems were not functioning properly)?

Equally, where would it be established that he wasn't aboard during the intervening time between STV and STVI?

To be sure, if he is shown to be a serving officer aboard the ship in the two consecutive films then the burden of proof is not on proving he was aboard for the intervening years, but rather on providing evidence that he was not onboard for those years if one feels otherwise.

In the same way that I don't feel that evidence is required to establish that Commander Riker was a serving officer aboard the Enterprise between First Contact and Insurrection, to be sure.

 

[Pauln6]

Chekov's bumbling in TUC is worse because at the time of TMP he was a security officer

Well, he sat at the gunnery station. Doesn't mean he knew anything about law enforcement or security protocols.

That's why I said it was in the TMP novel that he was indicated to be security chief. Personally, I'm with you; he's never shown any aptitude for security (as opposed to tactical) in any of his appearances so in my fan story I made the choice to separate out the functions of tactical and internal security and brought in a better security chief (an Andorian woman). Having said that, they did adjust the character in the novel Traitor Winds to explain how and why he transferred to security. It's a shame that they never showed any of his training on screen.

 

[Sandoval]

Personally, I'm with you; he's never shown any aptitude for security (as opposed to tactical) in any of his appearances so in my fan story I made the choice to separate out the functions of tactical and internal security and brought in a better security chief...

Regardless of what specific department he served in, whether it be tactical or security, do you truly believe that there is no overlap of knowledge between departments. For example a senior officer assigned to weapons would know nothing about security operations, even fundamental aspects such as hand-phasers triggering alarms?

I doubt that.

It's as silly as suggesting that an assistant manager wouldn't know that a fire in a shop will trigger a smoke alarm because another assistant manager is in charge of fire safety.

 

[Pauln6]

Oh no, I agree. As far as officers are concerned, they should be generalists who also have some particular areas of expertise, unlike the enlisted crew who may only have very basic training outside their area of expertise. All officers, including Chekov should know basic security protocols. I merely suggest that Chekov had displayed minimal knowledge of security protocols (he was a bit more of a science and trivia nerd) and the way he was portrayed was very inconsistent with someone who had functioned as a security chief.

 

[Tiberius]

I would expect that Chekov and Sulu would know how to read a map, use a compass and find the North Star.

Doesn't wash. A compass doesn't help you much unless you know where you are. A map only helps you if you can identify the counterparts of its features in the landscape around you. Being lost in the woods generally deprives you from both things. And you can't navigate by stars in daylight!

Really, the idea that the heroes can't get lost is so absurd that it would be a prime candidate for Johnny English III!

And what, Sulu's GPS broke? I expect in the 23rd century that Sulu has a padd with a little blinking dot that says YOU ARE HERE.

 

[Tiberius]

Oh no, I agree. As far as officers are concerned, they should be generalists who also have some particular areas of expertise, unlike the enlisted crew who may only have very basic training outside their area of expertise. All officers, including Chekov should know basic security protocols. I merely suggest that Chekov had displayed minimal knowledge of security protocols (he was a bit more of a science and trivia nerd) and the way he was portrayed was very inconsistent with someone who had functioned as a security chief.

Of course, if everyone knew about that and no one suggested it, it would leave everyone in the audience saying, "So why didn't they just vaporise the boots?" And we'd never get an answer...

 

[CorporalCaptain]

Oh no, I agree. As far as officers are concerned, they should be generalists who also have some particular areas of expertise, unlike the enlisted crew who may only have very basic training outside their area of expertise. All officers, including Chekov should know basic security protocols. I merely suggest that Chekov had displayed minimal knowledge of security protocols (he was a bit more of a science and trivia nerd) and the way he was portrayed was very inconsistent with someone who had functioned as a security chief.

Of course, if everyone knew about that and no one suggested it, it would leave everyone in the audience saying, "So why didn't they just vaporise the boots?" And we'd never get an answer...

I believe that even a mediocre Hollywood writer could have come up with a better way to make the point that vaporizing the boots with a phaser was not an option, without making Chekov or any crew member look incompetent.

 

[Maurice]

Hell, Valeris could have suggested it and Chekov could have explained why it wasn't possible.

 

[Tiberius]

Of course. Just saying that someone had to explain it for the cabbage heads in the audience to answer the question we'd inevitably ask.

 

[Timo]

...However, the "show and tell" is, well, a case of "show and tell" rather than "talk". And that's always better in the movie medium, just because.

Also, in retrospect, Valeris starting shooting at things is perfectly sensible. The heroes have gathered together to figure out whodunnit. Valeris dunnit. So she better stop the figuring out. Shooting at things always works.

...Plus, as said, it might also help conceal the fact that this very gun was used to kill Gorkon.

And what, Sulu's GPS broke? I expect in the 23rd century that Sulu has a padd with a little blinking dot that says YOU ARE HERE.

What would be the point of going hiking in that case?

Of course, if everyone knew about that and no one suggested it, it would leave everyone in the audience saying, "So why didn't they just vaporise the boots?" And we'd never get an answer...

We already have to be specifically told that the assassins couldn't get rid of their gear, even though the natural assumption would be that they could. Dozens of options there: dumping out of airlock, beaming out, using garbage disposal systems (which were seen back in TOS already), hiding. Special babble has to be introduced to tell the audience that the assassination gear in fact does stick to the assassins. And it's just plain unfortunate that this special babble a) comes out of nowhere (no phaser alarms in preceding Trek), b) requires a cabbagehead, c) features behavior one would not expect of the character behavin' (although it's valid behavior and valid character expansion), and d) still leaves open numerous other disposal methods.

Timo Saloniemi

 

[CorporalCaptain]

If the assassins can illicitly beam over from the Enterprise and then beam back, why can't they also beam all the incriminating evidence out into space at maximum dispersion?

 

[Timo]

Exactly - this is one of the scenarios not covered by Valeris' "objection".

The audience realizes that the assassins aren't supposed to destroy the evidence: the whole deed was committed with the explicit purpose of leaving evidence, so that the warmongers on both sides would have valid grievances. Without the evidence, this might look too much like an internal Klingon affair...

However, our heroes should not be thinking in those terms, as they are not aware of a two-party conspiracy yet, nor is it an obvious explanation to the events. And whoever fired the torps of the Enterprise, or made the computer think the Enterprise had fired, was certainly trying to cover his or her tracks. Somebody with such powers could easily arrange for the disappearance of the gravity boots, I'd think! Which is an issue the writers try to address, but they only get halfway there.

Timo Saloniemi

 

[malchya]

And why couldn't the sensors on the Enterprise localize the firing point for the torpedoes? Let me guess: no one built ventral sensors into the ship because "down" would just look at the ground, right?

This movie, despite the popularity of it, was one of the worst written in the franchise.

 

[Sandoval]

Let me guess: no one built ventral sensors into the ship because "down" would just look at the ground, right?

Your statement makes close to no sense since Starfleet ships are constantly scanning planetary surfaces.

That aside, you are seriously suggesting that the Enterprise couldn't detect Chang's bird-of-prey because it somehow lacked sensors that could 'see' beneath the ship?

Goodness me...

 

[Timo]

Umm, again, are you for real, Sandoval? Or are you truly that blind to sarcasm? (Some people are, mind you. It's nothing to be ashamed of. It just puts you into really awkward situations sometimes.)

As for the subject matter, it wouldn't matter what the sensors of the ship saw or didn't see. Valeris would take care that the evidence was falsified; thanks to her ministrations, the computers were convinced that the Enterprise had indeed fired the shots. If anybody asked the computers, they'd insist that the launchers had fired, that the targeting scanners had locked to the battle cruiser, and that every external camera confirmed the flight of the torps from the dastardly launch to the fiery finish.

Visuals are but one of the things subject to forgery in Star Trek. Indeed, when evidence was forged in Kirk's "Court Martial" trial, it was the forged visuals that were the most damning, as they established him as ejecting the ion pod with criminal carelessness or indeed possibly murderous deliberation.

Timo Saloniemi

 

[Sandoval]

Umm, again, are you for real, Sandoval?

That is, to be sure, the second time you've asked that.

I'm real in as much as I'm not a figment of your imagination if that is what you're trying to determine by repeatedly asking that question.

I am, to be sure, a real person if that's what is concerning you.

 

[MarsWeeps]

As for the subject matter, it wouldn't matter what the sensors of the ship saw or didn't see. Valeris would take care that the evidence was falsified; thanks to her ministrations, the computers were convinced that the Enterprise had indeed fired the shots. If anybody asked the computers, they'd insist that the launchers had fired, that the targeting scanners had locked to the battle cruiser, and that every external camera confirmed the flight of the torps from the dastardly launch to the fiery finish.

I have to wonder, wouldn't it have been easier just to fire the torpedoes from the Enterprise instead of having to falsify all that data?

 

[Timo]

Quite possibly. Although I think arming of weapons is a relatively complicated procedure that could have triggered alarms or otherwise attracted the attention of the non-conspiring officers, despite the best precautions that Valeris could take. Firing the weapons (possibly genuine Starfleet issue, provided to Chang by Cartwright) from another vessel would eliminate the preparation stage and deny our heroes the advance warning.

Not that the heroes would have had a good track record of quickly stopping their ship from doing unwanted and surprising things, such as launching shuttlecraft. There don't seem to be "general abort" switches on most of the machinery (even though many a complex and expensive vessel or factory today has such things). It might have been impossible to prevent a torpedo launch in time even if it proceeded with all the usual warnings and indicators.

But even if Valeris was ready to take that chance, it still makes some sense to falsify the launch instead of doing the real thing. This leaves the good guys guessing and wasting their time and planting seeds of discord that may grow to sprouts of war eventually. Chang would love to see Starfleet fighting with itself over the issue of guilt in Gorkon's death because the evidence was ambiguous; Cartwright would love to see a Klingon ship perform the actual dastardly deed so that he would have a noose from which to eventually hang his co-conspirator.

Timo Saloniemi

 

[Elder Knight]

... But yes, much is made about the fact that our heroes listening in on the trial hear "some sort of magnetic boots" being mentioned, and Spock then immediately goes "hmm, gravity boots!".

Timo Saloniemi

As I read the responses here, I was wondering about that. Did the assassins really need some kind of high-tech footware, or just something with strong magnets built into it? The latter is 19th century technology in action!

If magnets will suffice, then I'd be surprised if all of the crew didn't have an set of magnetic shoes or spats for emergency situations (e.g., if an attack disabled the ship's artificial gravity, exactly as we saw in the film). (Better still, why not include magnets in all of the standard issue footwear?)

Maybe the Klingon ship interiors didn't have sufficient metallic content, so a more sophisticated type of boot was needed.

 

[Timo]

I'm pretty sure pure magnets would be too unreliable for general spacewalk footwear, due to there being too many nonmagentic materials around. This even if the interiors of a Klingon warship did feature suitable floors...

Plus, even shoes with magnets (or velcro, or Post-it glue, or whatever) in their soles would need to be "high tech" in the sense that they would require fairly intelligent automation that constantly adjusts the grip. Otherwise they wouldn't grip the floor hard enough when needed, and wouldn't let loose when needed. I guess it would be impractical to have that in everybody's daily footwear.

Surprisingly, loss of gravity is extremely rare even in combat situations. Indeed, loss of pressure or breathable air is (narrowly) more common, yet daily wear doesn't incorporate built-in helmets or air bottles (as far as we know).

...However, perhaps those fancy belt buckles in ST:TMP were life support belts, streamlined a bit from their TAS appearance?

Timo Saloniemi