Agreed that the saucer can probably borrow an existing warp field when separating but doesn't come with its own warp drive. There's nothing BtS to indicate that it was ever intended to have warp drive, and using inconsistent onscreen evidence opens the door to more problems than it closes.
The Pegasus...
- Thread starter gillmanjr
- Start date
They had rendezvoused with an Excelsior at the beginning of the episode. All the non-essential personnel could have transferred to that ship before the mission even began.
This is the simplest way of explaining away what is mostly just a plot hole of production limitations. This was all a covert op. Separating your ship in grand fashion & part of it going missing, with Romulans watching your every move, is not exactly covert. The fact that they turned up missing at all was a risky call, as clearly the Romulans caught on. Couple that with the fact that the attempt itself carried with it dangers, & it was ALL ill-advised. Under the circumstances, they should've just blown it to smithereens right off & been done with it. However, I doubt Picard would've had the leverage to explain away disobeying admiral orders without having the evidence available to make public. Certainly it would've been a tougher battle.
Veering off topic a bit, but as for Picard's choice to expose it, 1st it's the boyscout move, what he tells Wesley is their first duty, above all else, & if I'm being realistic about it, Picard might have tore down Pressman & his supporters with that move, but the blowback from that coming to light publicly would present a tremendous strain on UFP foreign relations, not even just those with Romulus. This isn't just a rogue captain anymore. It's a deep seated conspiracy from within. So, there would also be a certain contingent among the fleet that would see Picard as somewhat disloyal to his organization. I don't agree personally. He's loyal to their code above loyal to his organization. I can respect that. As I stated above, there'd have been no way to safeguard both the ship, & mission, & preserve the treaty, unless they'd blown it up right off, bringing down the wrath of admiralty, without any way to defend yourself
Secondly, They NEEDED the secret device to save the ship. If Picard hadn't exposed it when he did, it would've been swept under the rug & Picard's crew would've been sequestered & possibly dismantled, in order to minimize the risk of the classified info getting out
I'm of the opinion that as ugly as it must have become, Picard made the right move here. He didn't really have enough leverage to refuse taking the ship in, because they thought they had a window of opportunity (Which shut on them during the attempt) However, Will Riker let things go a little too far, by exposing the ship to a dangerous situation (Which maybe in the back of his head he thought he could overcome with his secret knowledge) but if that piece of gear hadn't got them out of it, he'd have been just as guilty of whatever consequences befell them as he blames himself for being in supporting Pressman the 1st time.
As to WHY there'd ever be a treaty that prevents the UFP from exploring cloaking tech, well that's a different discussion, but I'll just say I support it, because it lines up with their ideals of peace. You are taking the higher moral ground of being the non-aggressor in the militaristic escalation, & that's makes foreign relations MUCH smoother
I wasn't saying that it occurred. I was saying that there was a way to evacuate non-essential personnel before a potentially hazardous mission, had that been necessary.
Unfortunately by the time it became clear that the mission was that potentially hazardous they were past the point where it was a viable option.
Though it might have added a bit to the atmosphere of the episode if Picard had been ordered to offload civilians prior to the start of the mission.
Though it might have added a bit to the atmosphere of the episode if Picard had been ordered to offload civilians prior to the start of the mission.
Apparently on the 6-foot one they found that it was quite difficult to separate the ship. So they only did the effect once and then reused for all other separation shots.
The thing is, there is zero need to think otherwise. There is nothing to be won by claiming that the saucer lacks warp drive, because Star Trek never features the claim that the saucer would lack warp drive.
Which is a great thing, because we already know that warp nacelles are unnecessary.
What episodes? "Escape" happens a lot, and there's no need to separate the ship for that - the whole ship can escape at will. But the saucer is only separated in about four episodes, and the two that do feature an "escape" also make it clear that the saucer does have a warp drive - it uses that drive (or other form of faster-than-light drive, but why call it anything else but warp?) in order to make the escape happen.
As for why the saucer isn't separated, "Heart of Glory" gives us a blanket answer of sorts.
The Picard Doctrine is never to separate until it's too late to use separation as an escape maneuver...
Indeed, we never really learn why the ship was built to separate in the first place. The two times when the saucer is used for escaping from a battle seem to surprise even the heroes themselves! Is Picard innovating in "Farpoint" when suggesting a maneuver Data declares "unsafe at any speed"? And is Riker in "Heart of Glory" wondering whether Picard wants to innovate again (even if that's a bit of a contradiction in terms), and finding out that Picard wants to stick to the regulations and to the putative intended way of operating the saucer this time around - and thus never asking the silly question again?
Timo Saloniemi
Okuda's tech manual has nothing about this saucer warpdrve business IIRC. My reading of the trek universe comes from the writers/creators intent and I just don't get that signal from them. Cryptic, sketchy first season references doesn't break my threshold on this. There has to better explicit statements on par with Picard inquiring about the status of the saucer warpdrive once some villain or malfunction knocked out the main one. And I ain't getting that stuff. Others can keep their own counsel I guess.
Separation was Roddenbery's set piece spectacular for the premier. But it's usually unwanted dramatic ballast best left out of sight as it can partially defang many a ship crisis if almost your whole crew can just sit safely on the sidelines. Always more intense to put the entire ship on the chopping block.
Last edited:
I think its pretty obvious that the intention of the saucer separation is to be able to remove the civilians from danger during a battle, or at least to limit their exposure to risk. Hence why its called the "Battle Bridge". There is no other reasonable explanation for it.
I've heard and felt the same. However I've also heard or perhaps it was the Tech Manual... that with the added power output of the saucer's impulse engines, the total ship power output was increased significantly, allowing the ship to have stronger shields, phasers, structural integrity fields, etc. That while most of the power comes from the warp core via warp plasma, the impulse engines do generate a lot of usable power.
I need to re-watch a lot of TNG; I hadn't recalled the saucer ever travelling at warp speeds. I'm sure it did.. i just dont remember. But I tell ya, the one ship that NEEDED a cloaking device, treaty be damned, is Voyager... but then the entire series would have been cut down to 3 seasons of them silently and invisibly scanning gaseous anomalies and flying right past all hostiles. Would have made for much more "meh" in that series, infinite torpedoes or not...
The role of the saucer separation ability (or more exactly the reattachment ability, because supposedly all saucers can separate once, as suggested by "The Apple" and shown by ST Beyond) is never made explicit in Trek, is all. And unlike with the case of warp drive aboard (we sorta see it there a couple of times, we never get evidence to the contrary), information on the separation-reattachment itself is contradictory.
In "Farpoint", separation is used for taking part of the crew out of the harm's way, and we get two characters arguing that this shouldn't be done. Data tells that separation at any warp speed is inadvisable (debunking the idea of a "handoff" warp field), and Worf balks at being ordered to escape (confirming that flying the saucer is considered escaping by default, because Worf receives no orders beyond being told to command the saucer).
In "Heart of Glory", separation is dismissed as a pre-battle maneuver, but Riker does suggest it. For a rare once, it would be helpful, as the enemy is not yet in sight, and the supposed inferior ability of the saucer to fight thus would not jeopardize the escapees. Yet if it is intended Starfleet doctrine, why does Picard dismiss it?
In "Arsenal of Freedom", something ate a starship and yet the E-D again fails to preemptively leave the saucer behind. When separation and partial escape is commanded, Logan balks, feeling that total escape without separation would be the correct action. LaForge feels separation counteracts "risk".
In "Best of Both Worlds", fiddling with the saucer is a tactical ploy, without an escape aspect. Then again, escaping would be futile, both tactically (the Cube could catch the saucer) and strategically (having everybody die would be a small price to pay for victory, and saving a saucerful while the rest of mankind perishes would not help much).
In ST:GEN, the saucer is separated because the stardrive section is going to explode. The same is attempted at extreme warp in "Hollow Pursuits" but considered too risky because the ship is in poorer condition than in "Farpoint".
In ST:B, the saucer is separated because the rest of the ship is falling apart. There is a tech complication driving the separation: it will overcome a software issue where the saucer impulse engines won't work properly until severed from the warp reactor, and the heroes go for physical severing so that the ship (now just the saucer) will regain impulse and escape into the nebula. Further escaping at warp is not discussed, and it's unknown whether such a capacity would be built into the parallel-timeline ship's saucer. (Then again, we don't know the distance between this planet Altamid and safety - might be a short impulse hop rather than a warp journey for all we know.)
Those can easily be made up. The saucer could be a base to be deployed on planets of interest, capable of soft landing and extended stay. The saucer could be an exchangeable and interchangeable module, to be replaced by something more combatworthy in times of war, say. The whole concept could be modular, with various parts combining in various ways, there being multiple choices for the lower part, too. Lifeboating would be a secondary option in all the above cases, and would thus rightfully cause onscreen debate (fine with "options") rather than automatic action (mandatory in "emergencies") when suggested.
The main point is, the separation function is dismissed or ignored more often than not, so we get very little data on what it was created for. Barring explicit references, we can come up with better excuses for why separation basically never happens than if we did have explicit references to an escape doctrine!
Timo Saloniemi
In "Farpoint", separation is used for taking part of the crew out of the harm's way, and we get two characters arguing that this shouldn't be done. Data tells that separation at any warp speed is inadvisable (debunking the idea of a "handoff" warp field), and Worf balks at being ordered to escape (confirming that flying the saucer is considered escaping by default, because Worf receives no orders beyond being told to command the saucer).
In "Heart of Glory", separation is dismissed as a pre-battle maneuver, but Riker does suggest it. For a rare once, it would be helpful, as the enemy is not yet in sight, and the supposed inferior ability of the saucer to fight thus would not jeopardize the escapees. Yet if it is intended Starfleet doctrine, why does Picard dismiss it?
In "Arsenal of Freedom", something ate a starship and yet the E-D again fails to preemptively leave the saucer behind. When separation and partial escape is commanded, Logan balks, feeling that total escape without separation would be the correct action. LaForge feels separation counteracts "risk".
In "Best of Both Worlds", fiddling with the saucer is a tactical ploy, without an escape aspect. Then again, escaping would be futile, both tactically (the Cube could catch the saucer) and strategically (having everybody die would be a small price to pay for victory, and saving a saucerful while the rest of mankind perishes would not help much).
In ST:GEN, the saucer is separated because the stardrive section is going to explode. The same is attempted at extreme warp in "Hollow Pursuits" but considered too risky because the ship is in poorer condition than in "Farpoint".
In ST:B, the saucer is separated because the rest of the ship is falling apart. There is a tech complication driving the separation: it will overcome a software issue where the saucer impulse engines won't work properly until severed from the warp reactor, and the heroes go for physical severing so that the ship (now just the saucer) will regain impulse and escape into the nebula. Further escaping at warp is not discussed, and it's unknown whether such a capacity would be built into the parallel-timeline ship's saucer. (Then again, we don't know the distance between this planet Altamid and safety - might be a short impulse hop rather than a warp journey for all we know.)
Those can easily be made up. The saucer could be a base to be deployed on planets of interest, capable of soft landing and extended stay. The saucer could be an exchangeable and interchangeable module, to be replaced by something more combatworthy in times of war, say. The whole concept could be modular, with various parts combining in various ways, there being multiple choices for the lower part, too. Lifeboating would be a secondary option in all the above cases, and would thus rightfully cause onscreen debate (fine with "options") rather than automatic action (mandatory in "emergencies") when suggested.
The main point is, the separation function is dismissed or ignored more often than not, so we get very little data on what it was created for. Barring explicit references, we can come up with better excuses for why separation basically never happens than if we did have explicit references to an escape doctrine!
Timo Saloniemi
I thought that it was strange that Picard treated Pressman with more animosity than he showed to the Romulans.
It was the Romulan warbird that cause the Enterprise to be trapped inside the asteroid. The Romulan ship deliberately fired its disruptors at the asteroid to cause the entrance to cave in. That was clearly an act of aggression. Yet Picard, instead of responding to the hostility, eagerly appeased the Romulans by decloaking within sight of the warbird and immediately confessing to wrongdoing. That was weak.
I doubt the Romulans would go to all-out war over the Pegasus phase cloak experiment. Picard could just as well consider the warbird blowing up the asteroid entrance as an act of war. The Romulans were not innocent bystanders in this incident. Starfleet could have used this incident as an opportunity to renegotiate the treaty.
About that treaty, what was the Federation thinking when they negotiated it? What concessions did the Federation get in return from the Romulans for denying themselves cloaking technology?
I have a different opinion. I don't view cloaking technology as solely a "first strike" or anti-peace technology. You could use cloaking technology for reconnaissance missions or other non-hostile missions, like the one Picard and Data took in "Unification", although that was a Klingon ship. Cloaking technology can be useful in scenarios other than warfare. Why deny yourself the technology.
Picard couldn't prove that the Romulan ship fired its disruptors at the asteroid knowing that the E was inside it. And even if he could, there doesn't seem to be any evidence that the asteroid was located in Federation space.
Picard treated Pressman with more animosity because Pressman was betraying Starfleet's principles (not to mention a peace treaty) while the Romulans were, frankly, acting perfectly in character. They never actually attack the E.
Picard confessed to the treaty violation because in all likelihood the treaty required that he do so, and because he has a sense of honor. If that's weak, I sure wouldn't mind sharing Picard's weakness.
How exactly would firing on the asteroid entrance, without any proof that the Romulans knew the E was inside it, in non-Federation space, constitute an act of war? What might constitute an act of war is the Federation showing the intent to pursue technology that they stipulated in a peace treaty they would never pursue.
Since we don't know why the Federation agreed not to pursue cloaking technology, our only options are to either assume they had a good reason for it, or assume the negotiators were idiots. I'm more inclined to assume the former. And it doesn't matter whether cloaking technology has non-military applications, what matters is how the Romulans perceived it, since they're whom the Federation was negotiating with.
Picard treated Pressman with more animosity because Pressman was betraying Starfleet's principles (not to mention a peace treaty) while the Romulans were, frankly, acting perfectly in character. They never actually attack the E.
Picard confessed to the treaty violation because in all likelihood the treaty required that he do so, and because he has a sense of honor. If that's weak, I sure wouldn't mind sharing Picard's weakness.
How exactly would firing on the asteroid entrance, without any proof that the Romulans knew the E was inside it, in non-Federation space, constitute an act of war? What might constitute an act of war is the Federation showing the intent to pursue technology that they stipulated in a peace treaty they would never pursue.
Since we don't know why the Federation agreed not to pursue cloaking technology, our only options are to either assume they had a good reason for it, or assume the negotiators were idiots. I'm more inclined to assume the former. And it doesn't matter whether cloaking technology has non-military applications, what matters is how the Romulans perceived it, since they're whom the Federation was negotiating with.
The Romulan warbird contacted the Enterprise (not the other way around), after the Enterprise had been sealed inside the asteroid. The Romulan captain asked Picard if he needed assistance to get out of the "very unfortunate circumstance" the Enterprise found itself in. The Romulans knew the Enterprise was inside the asteroid when they caused the entrance to cave in. Imo, that is an act of hostility.
Take whatever leverage you can get. Like I wrote above, the Romulans were not innocent bystanders.
But the point is not to get into war or justify war. The point is to play out the confrontation with the hand that you're dealt with, and try to come out of it in the best way possible.
Why did Picard think it was necessary to decloak within sight of the Romulan warbird in the first place? Would the Romulans, with their mindset, really believe that a rogue admiral conducted this experiment all on his own? The Romulans are going to hold this against the Federation whatever excuse Picard came up with (even if it was the truth). The Federation should be prepared to make even more concessions to appease the Romulans.
But Picard did what he did. On a side note, if Picard was such a stickler to the terms of the treaty, he should turn himself in to the authorities as well. He actually used the treaty-violating-cloak technology.
I doubt the Romulans are willing to go to war over this incident, so why appease the Romulans so quickly. Once Picard decloaked for the Romulans to see, from then on the Romulans know Starfleet possesses cloak technology. You can't put the genie back into the bottle, so to speak. They would have to react according to that assumption. Therefore, Starfleet should use that as leverage.
Take whatever leverage you can get. Like I wrote above, the Romulans were not innocent bystanders.
But the point is not to get into war or justify war. The point is to play out the confrontation with the hand that you're dealt with, and try to come out of it in the best way possible.
Why did Picard think it was necessary to decloak within sight of the Romulan warbird in the first place? Would the Romulans, with their mindset, really believe that a rogue admiral conducted this experiment all on his own? The Romulans are going to hold this against the Federation whatever excuse Picard came up with (even if it was the truth). The Federation should be prepared to make even more concessions to appease the Romulans.
But Picard did what he did. On a side note, if Picard was such a stickler to the terms of the treaty, he should turn himself in to the authorities as well. He actually used the treaty-violating-cloak technology.
I doubt the Romulans are willing to go to war over this incident, so why appease the Romulans so quickly. Once Picard decloaked for the Romulans to see, from then on the Romulans know Starfleet possesses cloak technology. You can't put the genie back into the bottle, so to speak. They would have to react according to that assumption. Therefore, Starfleet should use that as leverage.
I do kind of question why Picard chose to decloak in front of the Romulans. I know he is fully committed to peace and, as a character, was designed to be of the highest level of integrity. But the Romulans have proven they can't be trusted, literally over and over again throughout the series, with only a very few exceptions. It seems to me like Picard (and Starfleet) should have kept this technology in their back pockets, just in case the treaty ever collapses in the future. And we all know it isn't a stretch to think that might happen, case in point is what happens in Redemption.
They never are. Everything with them is brinkmanship. Everyone knows that if you show a sign of weakness or place yourself in vulnerable situations where the Romulans can take the upper hand, they will. Whatever the case may be. That's not an act of war. That's ruthlessly opportunistic, & to be expected from them. That's how the game is played with them. They never actually planned to hurt the ship or crew, only take them into custody & have their way with them. It's kind of hard to call that an act of war. They didn't even engage them directly. Plus, it's kind of hard for Picard to be hostile or take the antagonistic approach with the Romulans when, they are in fact the ones who are in the wrong, according to the treaty
#1 The truth. It's the righteous act. #2 It was the only leverage he had to take down Pressman & Co. If he had warped out of there under cloak, & THEN later on, tried to get Pressman busted for his transgressions, he'd have absolutely NO leverage to do so. They'd sweep it all under the rug, & anyone making waves would be reassigned, or sequestered, mothballed or whatever. They'd have shut down Picard's whole command crew before they'd let this get out, even the people who had no part in it, or would otherwise condemn it. Hell, they might do that anyway. So making a public spectacle out of it was really the best option for Picard, if he both wanted to keep his crew intact, and also wanted to take Pressman down for violating the treaty. It was the only chip he held that could push around his superiors
no it was to get the non-essential crew and civillians out of they way and that's pretty much what it was intended for. At the end of the day, it was deemed detrimental to the story telling (i.e slowed it down) which was why it was so seldom used.
Similar threads
