The E-D was built on the ground, don't see why The 1701 couldn't

[GodThingFormerly]

Funny -- Voyager landed and took off several times, without doing any particular damage to the local area and did a flyby of Los Angeles without damage

Aside from the fact that Voyager was a smaller vessel specifically designed to land on planetary surfaces, the damned thing was built over a century after the Enterprise and so obviously benefited from the presumable evolution in the relevant technologies.

Enterprise (NX-01, that is) flew over New York without damaging anything they weren't trying to damage.

As deeply ashamed as I am to admit it, I never saw that episode. However, The Apple made it clear that atmospheric entry for the NCC-1701 was a virtual death sentence.

TGT

 

[GodThingFormerly]

As to surface launch safety, very mature, very redundant anti-grav tech would long since have made such events a yawn. We've also seen many trekships operating in atmo with somewhat less than continent-sized wakes of destruction.

What anti-gravity technology? Those hand-held modules they used in The Changeling and Obsession? Where during the 23rd century did we see them scaled up to the point where they can lift entire starships into orbit?

If you want the big E packin' anti-matter at launch (by no means a certainty), I bet the storage pods would probably be up to a pretty high velocity impact without the restraint fields letting the AM near the physical containment cell walls. Think about the tech that would have to preceed common use of AM as a power source.

Possibly, but why risk even the slightest chance of containment failure within Earth's atmosphere if you don't absolutely have to?

TGT

 

[ST-One]

As deeply ashamed as I am to admit it, I never saw that episode.

From 'Storm Front, Part II'

 

[shipfisher]

As to surface launch safety, very mature, very redundant anti-grav tech would long since have made such events a yawn. We've also seen many trekships operating in atmo with somewhat less than continent-sized wakes of destruction.

What anti-gravity technology? Those hand-held modules they used in The Changeling and Obsession? Where during the 23rd century did we see them scaled up to the point where they can life entire starships into orbit?


TGT

Fair enough, but remember gravity manipulation tech is crammed into almost the entire volume of even mid-22nd century ships and shuttlepods. The NX-01 seems to be coping well with a low pass over NYC in ST-One's pretty picture. The virtual "death sentence" the 1701 faced coming down from orbit in TOS:The Apple did involve her being roughed up by a cranky machine doing a little almighty role-playing.

Extrapolating the above up to big ships being "floated" to orbit by the mid-23rd century doesn't seem outside the realm of reason to me, however beyond that realm I may be.

 

[Psion]

As deeply ashamed as I am to admit it, I never saw that episode.

From 'Storm Front, Part II'

Well, if Star Trek: Enterprise is the quality we're shooting for here, I suggest a scene showing Captain April grabbing Tinkerbell and drizzling fairy dust all over the ship so the crew can launch on little more than happy thoughts and a joyful melody.

It's fiction, after all ... right?

 

[ST-One]

Well, if Star Trek: Enterprise is the quality we're shooting for here, I suggest a scene showing Captain April grabbing Tinkerbell and drizzling fairy dust all over the ship so the crew can launch on little more than happy thoughts and a joyful melody.

It's fiction, after all ... right?

The point is, that in the on-screen 'canon' of Trek (which Star Trek can ignore as far as I'm concerned) it is very much established that starships can operate within a planet's atmosphere.

 

[Jackson_Roykirk]

What anti-gravity technology? Those hand-held modules they used in The Changeling and Obsession? Where during the 23rd century did we see them scaled up to the point where they can lift entire starships into orbit?

It was never established that the technology didn't exist, either. Therefore, if Abrams' Trek establishes that large-scale antigrav exists in the 23rd century, then -- voilà -- it exists.

Possibly, but why risk even the slightest chance of containment failure within Earth's atmosphere if you don't absolutely have to?

So are you saying that in Voyager's time, they reduced the chance of containment failure to be literally "ZERO"? If they did succeed in reducing the chance to zero, what is the specific technology that permitted them to do this that they didn't have in the 23rd century?

I surmise that whatever technology Voyager uses to allow them to safely fly in Earth's atmosphere without a major concern of planetary contamination due to catastrophic conatiment failure could also have been used in the 23rd century.

 

[trevanian]

Well, if Star Trek: Enterprise is the quality we're shooting for here, I suggest a scene showing Captain April grabbing Tinkerbell and drizzling fairy dust all over the ship so the crew can launch on little more than happy thoughts and a joyful melody.

It's fiction, after all ... right?

The point is, that in the on-screen 'canon' of Trek (which Star Trek can ignore as far as I'm concerned) it is very much established that starships can operate within a planet's atmosphere.

NOT the canon of TOS, it doesn't.

And that is what they're dealing with here, not every bit of ModernTrek Berman burdened us with.

 

[John Picard]

Enterprise (NX-01, that is) flew over New York without damaging anything they weren't trying to damage.

As deeply ashamed as I am to admit it, I never saw that episode. However, The Apple made it clear that atmospheric entry for the NCC-1701 was a virtual death sentence.

TGT

What about the episode of Star Trek where the Enterprise somehow time warped to the 1960's and was able to be spotted by jet aircraft pilots? She was limping along with Scotty trying to garner enough power to push her into orbit.

 

[trevanian]

one early ep before everything was locked in that needed to rely on stock footage of jets against blue, if you cite that than you torpedo the show for the phaser/torp issue in BOT and realize Kirk changed his middle Initial too.

 

[John Picard]

one early ep before everything was locked in that needed to rely on stock footage of jets against blue, if you cite that than you torpedo the show for the phaser/torp issue in BOT and realize Kirk changed his middle Initial too.

\

Perhaps that was a tactic to avoid paying child support and prevent his wages from being garnished?

 

[GodThingFormerly]

It was never established that the technology didn't exist, either. Therefore, if Abrams' Trek establishes that large-scale antigrav exists in the 23rd century, then -- voilà -- it exists.

...and yet Kirk and Scott chose not to invoke them in either Tomorrow is Yesterday or The Apple when the Enterprise found itself dipping into planetary atmospheres, but instead chose plain old impulse engines that GR stated function as rockets. Eppur si muove.

So are you saying that in Voyager's time, they reduced the chance of containment failure to be literally "ZERO"? If they did succeed in reducing the chance to zero, what is the specific technology that permitted them to do this that they didn't have in the 23rd century?

My apologies, but it was a dreadful mistake for me to even discuss the point considering I have never accepted the existence of DS9, VOY or ENT. Please consider my arguments mentioning them unreservedly ceded.

I surmise that whatever technology Voyager uses to allow them to safely fly in Earth's atmosphere without a major concern of planetary contamination due to catastrophic conatiment failure could also have been used in the 23rd century.

Peachy. That said, I have effectively blown my wad as far as this thread's topic is concerned so it's back to the BDSM parlor for moi. But seriously, J.J. Abrams is lucky to have fans like you.

TGT

 

[Jackson_Roykirk]

Peachy. That said, I have effectively blown my wad as far as this thread's topic is concerned so it's back to the BDSM parlor for moi. But seriously, J.J. Abrams is lucky to have fans like you.

TGT

Actually, I only care about this argument in the context of this board -- i.e. it's fun to take the position that I really care about this stuff. The truth is I don't care THAT much about how scientifically accurate Star Trek -- any Star Trek -- is, nor am I terribly concerned with absolute continuity among the various Star Trek endeavors.

All I want from Abrams is a good film with good dialogue and believable characters; a film that is basically consistent with existing Star Trek characters and with major events in Star Trek history -- plus a film that can be easily identified as "Star Trek".

oh...and:

...and yet Kirk and Scott chose not to invoke them in either Tomorrow is Yesterday or The Apple when the Enterprise found itself dipping into planetary atmospheres, but instead chose plain old impulse engines that GR stated function as rockets. Eppur si muove

Well, that wouldn't be the last time that the show's creative team had Kirk or Picard (especially Picard) ignore technology -- one that was used on other occasions -- simply for dramatic purposes. In this case, it wasn't technology the Kirk or Scotty used on another episode, but like I said, If Abrams' team says it existis, then it does. If Roddenberry or Coon suddenly revealed that this tech existed, say late in the 3rd season, then we would not have questioned it, so why question Abrams' revelation (if he in fact does establish that large-scale antigrav exists.)

Star Trek canon is a living and cumulative thing, and Abrams is free to add whatever he wants to the 23rd century, as long as it doesn't absolutely contradict what has already been established as a significant fact.

 

[Herkimer Jitty]

Well, that wouldn't be the last time that the show's creative team had Kirk or Picard (especially Picard) ignore technology -- one that was used on other occasions -- simply for dramatic purposes.

Spock: The Romulan War was fought at close quarters with nuclear weapons.

Kirk: Don't you mean photonic?

---------

Pike: Good thing we brought these laser pistols with us. Prepare to fire the main laser batteries.

Spock: Captain, lasers are a hundered years out of date.

Pike: I'VE BEEN LIVING A LIE!!

--------

Data: I am curious, what was it like in your time?

Rasmussen: The technology sucked, we didn't have anything like the phaser at all, nor the tricorder.

Data: Really?

Rasmussen: Nahh, it's pretty much the same except you guys have have holodecks and touchscreens.

 

[M'Sharak]

...
oh...and:

...and yet Kirk and Scott chose not to invoke them in either Tomorrow is Yesterday or The Apple when the Enterprise found itself dipping into planetary atmospheres, but instead chose plain old impulse engines that GR stated function as rockets. Eppur si muove

Well, that wouldn't be the last time that the show's creative team had Kirk or Picard (especially Picard) ignore technology -- one that was used on other occasions -- simply for dramatic purposes. In this case, it wasn't technology the Kirk or Scotty used on another episode, but like I said, If Abrams' team says it existis, then it does. If Roddenberry or Coon suddenly revealed that this tech existed, say late in the 3rd season, then we would not have questioned it, so why question Abrams' revelation (if he in fact does establish that large-scale antigrav exists.)

Star Trek canon is a living and cumulative thing, and Abrams is free to add whatever he wants to the 23rd century, as long as it doesn't absolutely contradict what has already been established as a significant fact.

I should caution you (tongue planted firmly in cheek) that, besides the condition stated here:

...considering I have never accepted the existence of DS9, VOY or ENT.
...

...I believe that TGT has further avowed his disbelief in the existence of third-season TOS. He may feel free to correct me if that supposition is in error.

 

[Jackson_Roykirk]

^
^^Ha ha! That's okay -- he's entitled to his beliefs.

My argument still works if I say "late in the second season".

My point is that if Abrams adds some unique ideas to 23rd century Trek, then it is just as valid a fact as if it was added by Gene Coon or GR himself. It gets included -- in equal standing -- on the laundry list of items that are "Trek Canon", right alongside facts like "Spock's Mother and Father are Amanda and Sarek", and "Kirk's brother died on Deneva"...it would be irrelevant who added it and when.

Therefore if Abrams feels like saying that large scale antigrav existed, then it did exist, and the fact that Kirk never used this technology means nothing, since the use of stated technologies was often inconsistent during the three (or two ) seasons of TOS anyway.

 

[Psion]

Well, if Star Trek: Enterprise is the quality we're shooting for here, I suggest a scene showing Captain April grabbing Tinkerbell and drizzling fairy dust all over the ship so the crew can launch on little more than happy thoughts and a joyful melody.

It's fiction, after all ... right?

The point is, that in the on-screen 'canon' of Trek (which Star Trek can ignore as far as I'm concerned) it is very much established that starships can operate within a planet's atmosphere.

And my point is, that I'd hope for something better than that for this movie. But ... what the hell -- fairy dust and happy thoughts it is!

 

[ancient]

Like debating a fundamentalist, they just keep pulling made up stuff into an argument. F'getaboutit.

Yeah?
It is Science Fiction we are talking about. Pretty much everything is made up stuff.

SF has science in there somewhere, you folks are talking fantasy. I'm talking extrapolation. Shit, I'm talking to walls.

Star Trek is about 90% fantasy, 5% science, and 5% foam foreheads. Sure, you can ignore shields, warp drive, anti-gravs and all those other fantasy elements, but then you ain't talking about a Trek Movie anymore, then you're back to the Guessed Documentary of the Future.

Well, if Star Trek: Enterprise is the quality we're shooting for here, I suggest a scene showing Captain April grabbing Tinkerbell and drizzling fairy dust all over the ship so the crew can launch on little more than happy thoughts and a joyful melody.

It's fiction, after all ... right?

The point is, that in the on-screen 'canon' of Trek (which Star Trek can ignore as far as I'm concerned) it is very much established that starships can operate within a planet's atmosphere.

NOT the canon of TOS, it doesn't.

And that is what they're dealing with here, not every bit of ModernTrek Berman burdened us with.

Actually, that's exactly what the movie is dealing with, not some imaginary fan-regulated version of canon.

 

[Brutal Strudel]

Sadly, you're right--Star Trek's canon is overwhelmngly dictated by the artistic choices of two science- and science fiction-illiterates who had an open contempt for TOS. Bad Trek drove out the good in the exact inverse of BSG, where a stupid kid show was rehabilitated as state-of-the-art drama. And so we get threads like this.

 

[shipfisher]

It was never established that the technology didn't exist, either. Therefore, if Abrams' Trek establishes that large-scale antigrav exists in the 23rd century, then -- voilà -- it exists.

...and yet Kirk and Scott chose not to invoke them in either Tomorrow is Yesterday or The Apple when the Enterprise found itself dipping into planetary atmospheres, but instead chose plain old impulse engines that GR stated function as rockets. Eppur si muove.


TGT

I'm not sure "TOS:Tomorrow Is Yesterday" is the best ep for proving the 1701 had no anti-grav systems. It opens with her bobbing at low speed (slow enough for an F-104 to intercept) amongst the clouds. The impulse engines would still be needed to get her back up to orbital speed, but it seems pretty obvious they're getting help without cramming more dialogue into the scene to establish this. Dialogue + visuals is literally the best way to complete the picture.