• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Spoilers Things that grind my gears about S3

How many times was the starship taken over by unfamiliar or less than stellar capable people? Reality makes for poor drama, especially when it can be wrapped up so nicely and neatly. That's not the point of telling the story. How much have people complained about forgotten of technology being forgotten throughout the years, or lack of security or whatnot? At some point in time it becomes a feature not a bug.

Sorry, this asking more of Trek than I believe they will ever do. But, keep on fighting for it.
 
Imagine trek with fuses on consoles and passwords on systems

we know from Farpoint that there’s great camera coverage of the bridge.
 
Imagine trek with fuses on consoles and passwords on systems
One of my favorite examples of how passwords or authorized users would be helpful is when the 20th century business man keeps calling over the intercom and Picard goes, "Well, no one in this century would dare think of misuing this system."

And fuses? What are those? Some ancient technology that primitive barbarians used?
 
What most people don't seem to realize is that all this we're watching is actually 'science fantasy' not really 'science fiction'.
Here's an example of actual 'science fiction': https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0066769/
I enjoy watching that every once in a while, but most people would find it dry and boring.
I barely remember that film. It was OK in terms of the science, growing up with my medical practicing mom. I have enjoyed science fiction like Ben Bova and such, but it isn't why I like watching Star Trek. Reading tech manuals is one thing; watching a tech manual unfold on screen less interesting for me.
 
I didn't say, or even intend to imply, that anyone should stop watching Trek and go watch accurate and plausible science-based fiction, I was just pointing out the difference between 'science fantasy' and 'science fiction'. I watch Doctor Who for cryin' out loud, and it's about as 'fantasy' as you can get. :p
:wtf:
Um, did I miss a page of the chat where people were told to watching things?:vulcan:
 
Starships aren't military vessels...

dbe.gif
 
Haha, so many exploding consoles in Star Trek. Who designed the Enterprise? Imagine if you were at your job and your laptop exploded?

seat belts is another one. They didn’t put those in until the new movies.
 
Haha, so many exploding consoles in Star Trek. Who designed the Enterprise? Imagine if you were at your job and your laptop exploded?

seat belts is another one. They didn’t put those in until the new movies.
I recall when a phone might explode due to battery issues and it was all over the news, even with less tech savvy friends of mine. Imagine that being a routine part of the workplace?
 
..well, if your laptop got it's power from conduits carrying high-energy plasma, and the building you work in just happened to get hit by energy weapons fire that got at least partially through the buildings' shields, why yes, your laptop might explode, too. :nyah:
I knew I shouldn't have taken that government job.
 
Drama be damned.
Fail safes fail for the drama (again), backups are lost yes on a single starship (both of which is excusable under explainable circumstances and on a mobile platform like a starship more or less), but this means nothing when extrapolating onto a galactic organization that has practically endless backups and copies all over the galaxy... not to mention SF HQ.

I'm sick of writers dumbing things down because they are incapable of fitting the story within the scope of the universe and technologies they themselves created (or worse yet, not knowing what we could have done in real life decades ago, or heck years ago, and extrapolating from that - I mean, its almost a criminal offense in the 21st century and a great disservice to science fiction like Trek).

In schools, students would be failed for making errors on historical essays... and you're telling me Trek writers shouldn't do the research on Trek history, technologies, etc. and write a story that works with the established setting?
I don't mind minor errors as no one is perfect, but the amount of 'holes' Trek writers created with Discovery Season 3 are quite ridiculous - more to the point... to me, it showcases a lack of effort.

To top it off... no explanations were given.

Just think of how much better the story could have worked if they bothered to scale everything up and flesh it out better.
Who knows, maybe they will pay more attention in S4 and 5... but I'm not holding my breadth.
If we start applying this kind of thought, humanity in the 24th century should already be a technologically assisted proto-Q. The transporter itself can undo ageing, duplicate at will, beam across over a hundred light years, beam though time, beam to alternate universes.

And in Discovery's era they can do it all from a tiny badge. Apply the software patches and one person could raise an army of a billion clones, teleport to Earth 1991 and rewrite all of history.

I would love to see this, but it wouldn't be Star Trek.
 
If we start applying this kind of thought, humanity in the 24th century should already be a technologically assisted proto-Q. The transporter itself can undo ageing, duplicate at will, beam across over a hundred light years, beam though time, beam to alternate universes.

And in Discovery's era they can do it all from a tiny badge. Apply the software patches and one person could raise an army of a billion clones, teleport to Earth 1991 and rewrite all of history.

I would love to see this, but it wouldn't be Star Trek.

That is EXACTLY what should have happened and what we should have seen. It would illustrate exponential advancements and returns in a semi-realistic manner (at least within the confines of Trek universe) for a combination of societies like the Federation.
Essentially, Type 3 galactic civilization that's harnessing the power of not just the Milky Way, but other nearby and far away galaxies (on its way to Type IV status) in late 24th century (early 25th).
Though given the political aspects of Trek, I guess it would be more real it would take time for the Federation to spread out over the Milky Way... but it WOULD happen essentially over the course of several centuries (not because it takes long amount of time to travel... no that would be easy with faster than Warp engines like Slipstream, Hypersubspace Warp (an analogy of Hypersubspace communication technology) Coaxial Warp, TW, and transwarp beaming for instance... but mainly because not every species in the M.W. would necessarily immediately decide to join the Federation and some are downright hostile... but even that would cool off after about 100 to 200 years more or less and when they look at just how vast the Federation is and that obviously, things ARE working for them.

It can still be Trek.
Nothing says that Trek cannot be like this.
It shows massive scale, unprecedent technological power and potential (or at least next logical step for Trek), prompts the writers (and possibly the audience) to think in larger frames of reference. Retains the concept of a better future (cooperation, no money, free exchange of ideas, resources, etc.). Not a utopia... just 'a heck of a lot better'.

You can still have external conflicts etc. like before that could challenge the Federation, just need to be done differently than what was done to date due to changes in scale.
 
Haha, so many exploding consoles in Star Trek. Who designed the Enterprise? Imagine if you were at your job and your laptop exploded?

seat belts is another one. They didn’t put those in until the new movies.

I think consoles exploding has more to do with the integrated nature of the design on a starship and the thing running on plasma (which permeates the ship).

Each console is essentially like an extension of a keyboard and a monitor connected to the computer core deep in the ship, so you can do your thing (thing is, isn't it a bit of an overkill to have those running on plasma directly?).
The problem arises that when in combat, the EPS grid becomes strained (aka feedback from weapons fire) which results in occasional discharges.

One way to get around this would be wireless displays and kb... or a laptop like the one each crewmember has in their quarters.
Thing is that on a starship, you need large displays or a larger work area, but in that case, just have the consoles be separate of their main EPS gird.
Otherwise, each plasma discharge is like a lightning strike... which can easily short out your computer (unless you have a circuit breaker).
Maybe plasma is more difficult to control (aka shut down) in such a capacity.

As for seat belts... well, inertial dampers work wonders and would technically be far superior to seatbelts. Also, where are you going to install them all given that a lot of workspaces on a ship don't necessarily come with chairs?
If you're on the go, then you'd need to strap yourself up to a wall... that, or just reinforce structural integrity and innertial damping systems to be more resistant (similar to how difficult it is to knock out aritificial gravity... in which case, the inertial dampening tech would need to be integrated into the gravity plates themselves).
 
So, it's Star Trek but completely different?

You can say that for any other Trek series.
They are all different.
DS9 for crying out loud was initially on a space station with the defiant there to allow the crew to go places.
What exactly would making the Federation Type III civilization and on its way to being a Type IV detract from exactly?
Space exploration live and with automation could be portrayed... only slightly differently.

First contact with alien species?
Sure... can still happen (and would happen).
Anomalies? Studied to disproportional levels to learn from them.. and an odd anomaly could still impact a ship, a station or something else... adapting what they learned from those anomalies into ship functions that can help them out in some other situations - clear progression, acknowledgment of past discoveries, new ones and their integration (no more 'advanced tech of the week, forgotten by next week').

Want an enemy for the Federation?
Make it a compelling one like a close to becoming Type IV civilization from say half a universe away.
That's just on the regular plane.
We're not even talking about multi-dimensional aliens, etc.

Why not allow the Federation to exceed the Q's expectations and end up coming close to them by 32nd century?
That would probably blow away their previous projections of taking eons to get anywhere close to the Q.
 
Last edited:
You can say that for any other Trek series.
They are all different.
DS9 for crying out loud was initially on a space station with the defiant there to allow the crew to go places.
What exactly would making the Federation Type III civilization and on its way to being a Type IV detract from exactly?
Space exploration live and with automation could be portrayed... only slightly differently.

First contact with alien species?
Sure... can still happen (and would happen).
Anomalies? Studied to disproportional levels to learn from them.. and an odd anomaly could still impact a ship, a station or something else.

Want an enemy for the Federation?
Make it a compelling one like a close to becoming Type IV civilization from say half a universe away.
That's just on the regular plane.
We're not even talking about multi-dimensional aliens, etc.

Why not allow the Federation to exceed the Q's expectations and end up coming close to them by 32nd century?
That would probably blow away their previous projections of taking eons to get anywhere close to the Q.
The problem with what you're suggesting is that it would be specifically the same thing that led to the end of the Berman Era fifteen years ago. It sounds new and shiny on paper but it's in effect only superficially different from the previous series. The same old tropes, the same old storylines, the same old dynamic with a cosmopolitan Federation safe heaven in the background and heroic explorers encountering sci-fi high-concepts-of-the week on the dangerous frontier. They'd just have different names and fx, because the high-concept-of-the week from the previous series is not an issue anymore. They'd be capable of hopping between galaxies, but they'd still be hopping from planet to planet every week. The enemy would still pose a threat and be on a comparable technology level to the Federation, so most battles would still be about exchanging fire, only with different names for the weapons and their countermeasures. And so on.

And no matter what, any story you produce needs to stay relatable to the audience. Remove it too far from the present day and it becomes far too esoteric for most people to enjoy.
 
And no matter what, any story you produce needs to stay relatable to the audience. Remove it too far from the present day and it becomes far too esoteric for most people to enjoy.
And that's my feeling as well. Like, I regard myself as a fairly educated guy but reading Deks' write up made me glaze over and completely disconnected. It's approaching the whole conceit of Trek from this idea that instead of being about the characters it is about the technology and civilization and technical speak for how a civilization should develop based upon specialized knowledge. In other words, it removes the more relatable elements for scientific accuracy.
 
The problem with what you're suggesting is that it would be specifically the same thing that led to the end of the Berman Era fifteen years ago. It sounds new and shiny on paper but it's in effect only superficially different from the previous series. The same old tropes, the same old storylines, the same old dynamic with a cosmopolitan Federation safe heaven in the background and heroic explorers encountering sci-fi high-concepts-of-the week on the dangerous frontier. They'd just have different names and fx, because the high-concept-of-the week from the previous series is not an issue anymore. They'd be capable of hopping between galaxies, but they'd still be hopping from planet to planet every week. The enemy would still pose a threat and be on a comparable technology level to the Federation, so most battles would still be about exchanging fire, only with different names for the weapons and their countermeasures. And so on.

And no matter what, any story you produce needs to stay relatable to the audience. Remove it too far from the present day and it becomes far too esoteric for most people to enjoy.

Then why did the writers push Discovery into the 32nd century?
Its precisely to give way to something new/fresh.
Besides, Trek should be able to prompt people to THINK... meaning, setting things closer to home won't really do that because you end up repeating things ad-nauesum.

Its about broadening people's minds on technology and science as much as it is for changes on a social level and help them to envision a brighter tomorrow, not just far into the future, but also TODAY.

What was it that Carl Sagan said?
"“We have designed our civilization based on science and technology and at the same time arranged things so that almost no one understands anything at all about science and technology. This is a clear prescription for disaster”.

Why not make 32nd century Trek go beyond what current Trek did?
It can still contain usual Scifi stuff people are accustomed to... but done differently... more in line with the Federation actual technical and scientific potential brought forth (as much as its currently possible to stretch our imaginations).

Even what I described would likely be invalidated in a short time from now... but at the very least, I've tried to stretch past what we saw and into something that a combination of societies with the technologies they have could actually accomplish in a small time frame.

Heck, I did mention that a lot of the stuff we saw in terms of technology from the 32nd century should have already been a thing in the 24th and 25th... with the 32nd century being on a whole different playing field.
 
Last edited:
Well, then, we might have to look at Trek from a different framework than what is likely to occur, if it is already invalidated.
 
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top