What are "pew pew parts". The intension of Starship was to show clever problem solving through science and personal risk. Not sermons. If pew pew parts means sermonizing, I fully agree with you. If you are familiar with Rendezvous with Rama, then that gives an idea for the approach of Starship.
Starship, the proposed 1970s Series
- Thread starter Doctor Jeffrey
- Start date
I doubt that was the reason for the design. The idea that a "warp ring" would actually be a plausible design for an FTL starship wasn't theorized until 2011, after which people retroactively started claiming the Starship/TMP ringship somehow "predicted" it.
Only in the movie. The original novel portrayed a much friendlier relationship between the American and Soviet crew members. Peter Hyams added the Cold War elements to make it more topical for the mid-'80s, but it just made it dated when the USSR fell a few years later.
"Pew pew" is onomatopoiea for the sound of ray guns firing. So they're talking about sequences of action and combat.
You want to talk dated...how about the fact that in 2010, we see Heywood Floyd using an Apple //c? 
True, but they are not identified as such and do not push the dramatic action in any way, which was the original point in saying that science fiction does not NEED weapons and military personnel to be interesting. Since those satellites are not identified as weapons, the original audiences did not see them as such.
No, the warp ring came from an idea of the "Fabric of Space" devised by Einstein and ring ship ideas started to develop in the early 60s. Matter/Antimatter propulsion was first suggested in the 1920s. I studies ring ship/warp drive concepts in high school physics in the 70s, and it was not new then. We did not study it as science fiction, but as theory. I also did some work with NASA in the 80s while writing my dissertation, and I had a discussion with some of their scientists about bubble drive and ring ships, and a similar discussion with Gerard K. O'Neill in his office in Princeton a few years before he died.
Pew pew means gun battles. It’s the universal shorthand for gun battles.
Oh, then I completely agree, and Roddenberry would likely have said that you really get his concept for Starship.
"
Oh, then I completely agree, and Roddenberry would likely have said that you really get his concept for Starship.
No, the warp ring came from an idea of the "Fabric of Space" devised by Einstein and ring ship ideas started to develop in the early 60s. Matter/Antimatter propulsion was first suggested in the 1920s. I studies ring ship/warp drive concepts in high school physics in the 70s, and it was not new then. We did not study it as science fiction, but as theory. I also did some work with NASA in the 80s while writing my dissertation, and I had a discussion with some of their scientists about bubble drive and ring ships, and a similar discussion with Gerard K. O'Neill in his office in Princeton a few years before he died.
Wayyyyy back in the 70's I bought a set of blueprints/drawing of this ship from Lincoln Enterprises. There were blueprint views of the ship, and then some Jeffries drawings of parts of the ship's interior. Also, there was a poster of the ship in flight. I wish so badly that I still had these now.
Last edited:
I had the same blueprints, purchased at the same time. I, too, would love to still have them, especially to see the interiors, again. I remember that the sphere on the starboard side was a transporter chamber that would be completely enclosed when the transportation process was in progress. I think the control station for the transporter was in the concave spar connecting the 2 cylinders. The smaller, lower cylinder was all scientific equipment. The larger, upper cylinder was between 80 and 100 feet long and about 30 feet wide. I believe it was divided into 2 levels, with a ladder connect the levels, and also leading down to the transporter below. The dome at the forward end of the big cylinder could be closed with a protective cover. It was also divided in half so that each level had a big window at its forward end. The large cylinder had the control room, observation areas, wardroom, state rooms for each crew member, laboratories, and medical and exercise areas.
Here's the Forgotten Trek page about the Ringship. The article is outdated, the ringship has since appeared as a desktop model in Star Trek Into Darkness.
Eaglemoss also sell an officially-licensed model
Eaglemoss also sell an officially-licensed model
Except that the ring ship for the series Starship was not in the Trek universe and the Trek version was modified. It looked very similar, but there are important differences between the Starship ring ship and the Trek universe ring ship.
I agree, it doesn't need weapons and military but ...
This is a bad example because 2001 is one of the dullest movies I've ever seen.
Of course, but I think it's fun that this unmade series is remembered in a small way in the Trek universe.
Oh, I agree, and thank you for saying so. There are 3 unmade series that should be remembered, at least in a small way. From the late 60s, HOPESHIP with Dr. M'Benga (https://memory-alpha.fandom.com/wiki/M'Benga), from the early 70s STARSHIP and STAR TREK: Phase 2 Version ONE (see above).
HOPESHIP was inspired by "Journey to Babel" and gave the opportunity to have lots of aliens. Since HOPESHIP would rarely need new sets; so, the scenic budget could be used for alien make-ups and costumes, thus satisfying NBC's need for new and colorful images. (NBC's parent company, RCA, was the largest producing of color TVs at that time, and STAR TREK was the second most popular NBC series among color TV owners at the time. BONANZA was the first. NBC insisted on new sets each week so that the color TV owners had something new at which to marvel.) Dr. M'Benga would have been the lead, making him not only one of the first prime time leads played by an African American, but probably the African (Ugandan) lead character in prime time.
STAR TREK: Phase 2 Version ONE would have solved a lot of production problems, raised the quality of stories, and would have attracted all of the original cast, with the possible exception of Nimoy, but their is evidence that he would have joined the others for that project. BTW, STAR TREK: Phase 2 was not the title for Version One; it was a production category. Each episode would have been STAR TREK: (new subtitle), much like the recent STAR TREK movies.
HOPESHIP was inspired by "Journey to Babel" and gave the opportunity to have lots of aliens. Since HOPESHIP would rarely need new sets; so, the scenic budget could be used for alien make-ups and costumes, thus satisfying NBC's need for new and colorful images. (NBC's parent company, RCA, was the largest producing of color TVs at that time, and STAR TREK was the second most popular NBC series among color TV owners at the time. BONANZA was the first. NBC insisted on new sets each week so that the color TV owners had something new at which to marvel.) Dr. M'Benga would have been the lead, making him not only one of the first prime time leads played by an African American, but probably the African (Ugandan) lead character in prime time.
STAR TREK: Phase 2 Version ONE would have solved a lot of production problems, raised the quality of stories, and would have attracted all of the original cast, with the possible exception of Nimoy, but their is evidence that he would have joined the others for that project. BTW, STAR TREK: Phase 2 was not the title for Version One; it was a production category. Each episode would have been STAR TREK: (new subtitle), much like the recent STAR TREK movies.
Hi @Doctor Jeffrey. Welcome aboard! This is an interesting subject, and one I have no recollection of ever having been a topic here previously (that I noticed, anyway). I have some concept sketches from it, some of which are frequently misidentified as concepts for Star Trek.
Just a neighborly FYI: I see you posting a lot of sequential replies, sometimes quoting messages without actually replying. I am guessing you're getting used to the board software. You probably ought to review the board FAQ (linked HERE). The most relevant portions related to posting frequency are:
-No Spamming. You can't post the same thing multiple times on the board, or post the same thing over and over in a certain thread or forum, or continuously make posts that have no real content or relevance to what is being discussed. Spamming can even just be posting too much--as a general rule, don't post more than two or three threads [topics] in a forum within a reasonable length of time. Just posting stuff like "Okay, " or "I agree!" could be spamming. Contribute to a discussion; don't just build post count.
- Post no more than twice in a row. This is so you don't dominate a discussion/thread. Use the quote function if you need to answer multiple posts aimed at you.
As per that second item, if you want to reply to multiple messages instead of hitting reply to each individually you can click the +Quote button at the bottom right of each message you wish to reply to and then you'll see an Insert Quotes button to the lower left of the reply box at the bottom of the page and that'll put the text from the selected messages into a single post you can reply to.
Again, welcome!
Just a neighborly FYI: I see you posting a lot of sequential replies, sometimes quoting messages without actually replying. I am guessing you're getting used to the board software. You probably ought to review the board FAQ (linked HERE). The most relevant portions related to posting frequency are:
-No Spamming. You can't post the same thing multiple times on the board, or post the same thing over and over in a certain thread or forum, or continuously make posts that have no real content or relevance to what is being discussed. Spamming can even just be posting too much--as a general rule, don't post more than two or three threads [topics] in a forum within a reasonable length of time. Just posting stuff like "Okay, " or "I agree!" could be spamming. Contribute to a discussion; don't just build post count.
- Post no more than twice in a row. This is so you don't dominate a discussion/thread. Use the quote function if you need to answer multiple posts aimed at you.
As per that second item, if you want to reply to multiple messages instead of hitting reply to each individually you can click the +Quote button at the bottom right of each message you wish to reply to and then you'll see an Insert Quotes button to the lower left of the reply box at the bottom of the page and that'll put the text from the selected messages into a single post you can reply to.
Again, welcome!
Similar threads
