TNG Child Endangerment?

[Makarov]

In TNG's most morally despicable episode, "Where Silence Has Lease" PIcard and Riker's stompy-foot, hissy fit solution was to destroy the entire ship because that entity said that 1/3 of the crew may die from his experimentation. So they decided to kill 3/3 of everyone, including countless families with small children. Again, there is no logical reason to have small children on risky deep space missions. Even though it worked in that episode, I still found everyone's motives vile and stupid.

I think they made the right call there. Otherwise they are sentencing them to painful bizarre experiments by that creature like they just saw when it killed the other crew member and with no reason to believe it would stop at 1/3rd. Plus just by being on the ship they probably make you sign a waiver allowing the Captain to decide whether or not to self destruct the ship

 

[Arpy]

I just watched “Where Silence Has Lease,” and I was wondering about the logic of the 1/3-3/3 thing.

Consider also that Nagilum didn’t know death and chose a very painful one for the helmsman, then felt like exploring all forms of death...well, there are more than 300-500 ways to die, and most are hideous. And wouldn’t it be interesting to see if it effects kids the same way as Starfleeters? And what else can we explore with the rest of the crew while they wait to be killed?

 

[USS Triumphant]

That and the saucer lacked warp engines. It would be a sitting duck, a fish in a barrel, a "50% SALE OFF ALL TOPS!" advert, etc.

And if separation occurs at any significant distance from a star system, you're basically saying, welp, we'll come back to get you, unless we die from the thing we're leaving you here to keep you safe from, in which case, we're leaving you to die a horrible eventual death out in deep space, unless you can successfully get help to come from somewhere else - oh, but remember, the thing that will have killed us is probably closer...

In Generations, if young Rene had been living with uncle Jean-Luc he would have been exposed to the battle with the Klingons, the explosion of the warp core, and the hard landing on the surface, but he would have lived.

He didn't survive living on Earth.

Fire alarms and fire suppression systems should be old tech in the 24th century, if Robert Picard was that old fashioned was he still using horse and buggy? That plotline in Generations was ridiculous.

I've always thought so, too. I mean, forget Robert's personal safety equipment: by the 24th century, how is the tech not in place where if there's a fire detected at a habitation, living creatures that show up in danger from it on sensors are beamed out - followed by beaming the oxygen out or fire suppressant in, putting the fire out? I mean, the ever-present sensors would have to have some *advantage*, right? Or do we think Robert was enough of a paranoid Luddite jerk to have put his family in danger by demanding not to even be monitored for that purpose?

In fairness the Enterprise rarely does either.

ZING.

I think that when a person enters Starfleet, they should have their sexual organs removed so they can not have children and lose any sexual desires.

Good grief! Glad you haven't been in charge - you'd have probably been for the same thing for Naval personnel in the submarine service, and then I wouldn't be here to post this.

"My body, my choice." - Capt. James T. Kirk

Part of Gene's utopia of the Federation was...

...to create a show that would get to showcase a bunch of his pipedream political and social ideas for a small handful of episodes before getting cancelled for being too sedate to be watchable television. It really seems like the ship was just supposed to go for a nice, long, calm deep space exploration cruise, in his mind, safe enough to take the kids along and with the whole crew of "evolved" humans having no place for internal conflicts, either. It's a very admirable wish for the future. And pretty terrible from a storytelling perspective.

Real space is empty and boring, and if we could explore it for decades on end on mobile cities like the E-D, we’ll do so with families with us. That was the high promise of the idea, I think.

Whenever danger was an issue, they’d separate saucer and address it. Most aliens of the time were nowhere near the Federation’s level of development - ie The Outrageous Okona. There were no Borg, and there was peace with QonoS.

Yep. Like I said, I'd love to go on this ride and take my family, in the real world. But very few want to watch it on TV.

 

[Lance]

And let us never forget, Commodore Decker thought offloading personnel to a planet was safer than taking on the Doomsday Machine on his starship. How wrong can you be.

The Borg specifically had scooped up surface colonies. That's how "The Best of Both Worlds" started. Those people had no chance. I'm not saying the non-crew personnel aboard the Enterprise are definitely safer. I'm saying that people are unsafe regardless. Life is dangerous.

 

[Nakita Akita]

I just watched “Where Silence Has Lease,” and I was wondering about the logic of the 1/3-3/3 thing.

Consider also that Nagilum didn’t know death and chose a very painful one for the helmsman, then felt like exploring all forms of death...well, there are more than 300-500 ways to die, and most are hideous. And wouldn’t it be interesting to see if it effects kids the same way as Starfleeters? And what else can we explore with the rest of the crew while they wait to be killed?

Sometimes I wanted my super power to be mind reading, but, um, I think I'll take invisibility instead.

 

[Paul Weaver]

Space is disease and danger wrapped in darkness and silence. Why not send robot probes to explore? Why not have automated ships for defence like in Guardians of the Galaxy 2? There are certain things men must do to remain men.

The Federation is trillions of people, to find that a few hundred families are willing to boldly go isn't hard. The first families to colonise the moon, or mars, or oregon, were risking a lot. It's a good job that they did.

When the pilgrims boarded the Mayflower, they weren't setting off for a lovely safe existence across the sea. Roanoke was proof of that. They put something as silly as superstition ahead of the safety of their families. The chance to explore the cosmos (or ferry diplomats around)


The Enterprise was very safe - how many children died? How many civilians? Compare that to various attacks on planets and starbases. Perhaps after the failure of the Galaxy program, and civilians reduced on board starships (remember there were kids on the Saratoga too, wasn't just a Galaxy Class thing), civilians were sent to Betazed, a nice safe planet at the core of the Federation. Until the Dominon took over. Perhaps they lived in San Francisco and were blasted to bits by the Breen.

 

[Arpy]

The Enterprise was very safe - how many children died? How many civilians? Compare that to various attacks on planets and starbases. Perhaps after the failure of the Galaxy program, and civilians reduced on board starships (remember there were kids on the Saratoga too, wasn't just a Galaxy Class thing), civilians were sent to Betazed, a nice safe planet at the core of the Federation. Until the Dominon took over. Perhaps they lived in San Francisco and were blasted to bits by the Breen.

There was no failure of the galaxy program. That’s fan service I think. By the numbers, the galaxy class is a very safe ship to serve on.

It also doesn’t make sense that the Saratoga carried families. It’s a much smaller ship with limited facilities. And even the galaxy was design to separate when going into battle, let alone with the Borg. I just watched “The Child” I think and they had a line about non-essential personal to the saucer to prepare for saucer sep. Realistically, that makes sense and the rest is television convention when you know they’re not going to lose the ship.

I like to think the Saratoga was either transporting Sisko’s family or there wasn’t enough time to evacuate them when it was called into battle and they were stuck there.

 

[BillJ]

Why not send robot probes to explore?

M-5 put the kibosh on that idea.

 

[mos6507]

The obvious flip side of this being that Earth can't dodge when death comes. Starships can. Really, whenever there's one of these mankind-threatening crises in TNG, about once every two years, a starship is by far the safest place to be.

Sure, if it's fleeing instead of trying to defend earth.

"Wagon Train to the Stars".

American families travelled together through dangerous parts of the USA, too.

They had to. They were moving. Conestoga wagons != warships. And Gene may have tried to downplay the military aspect of Starfleet but one of the first actual TOS episodes was Balance of Terror, so on total the team behind Star Trek definitely saw starships as fully military vessels, just one with a defensive rather than offensive stance.

 

[valkyrie013]

Well, with more ships, families were being seperated for long periods of time, its not like now where they go out for 6 months and then come back for at year or 2 to be with there familes, Starfleet is get on the ship and go away for years.
So, to me, families on ships depends on what kind of ship it is, and what its duty is.
The Ent D wasn't some far off, edge of known space ship, it was well in the federation. That coupled by the fact of a period of peace for awhile, no romulans, Klingons are freinds, others are just skermishes and ships that patrol the border wouldn't have familes on the ship, maybe there home base though.

Sisko's ship was a miranda, so not top of the line, and probably just traveling base to base well within the federation, although, with the Wolf 359, they had time to assemble, one would thing, hey, take one of the small ships and offload all the not needed personel and familes, and boogie away.. so Siskos' family still being there was piss poor planning..

So, example, if 2 officers on the same ship get together, have a mini me, do you ship the kid to grandma? or an orphanage?? does one of them transfer to a planet or starbase to raise the kid? both? If the ship was a ship that would likely see combat, then no, you can't stay, get off, but if its a peacefull one, then they might be able to stay, but understand that you put the kid in the same danger as you are.

Example 2, your on an exploritory mission, Waaaay far away, 6 months at high warp in the boonies.. same as above, they have a rugrat.. no where for him/her/it to go, so there's kids on the ship..

To me it just depends on the indvidual ship, and if so there probably asked/presured abit for one of them to take a planet side posting.

 

[Timo]

Sure, if it's fleeing instead of trying to defend earth.

Well, not really. Most of Kirk's or Picard's triumphs against insurmountable odds involved no casualties aboard their respective ships. And we never ever heard of one of the kids under Picard's nominal command biting it FWIW.

And if separation occurs at any significant distance from a star system, you're basically saying, welp, we'll come back to get you, unless we die from the thing we're leaving you here to keep you safe from, in which case, we're leaving you to die a horrible eventual death out in deep space, unless you can successfully get help to come from somewhere else - oh, but remember, the thing that will have killed us is probably closer...

Again, not really. The saucer section as shown had no problem flying from star to star at relatively high warp. Indeed, the very pilot episode showed it doing pretty well there, and "Arsenal of Freedom" then confirmed that the separated saucer was a valid interstellar getaway vehicle on its own. The lack of warp drive is but an urban myth, a bit like the no-phasers-at-warp nonsense in that both were perpetrated in the TNG Tech Manual against show reality.

And let us never forget, Commodore Decker thought offloading personnel to a planet was safer than taking on the Doomsday Machine on his starship. How wrong can you be.

It was probably a both-and situation: at one point Matt Decker wanted to ram the DDM, and this may have been his plan all along. Beam the crew down and then ram -> only one life lost. But beam the crew down and then lose propulsion to a DDM attack -> 400 lives lost. Tough call, but probably a risk not only he but everybody aboard was willing to take; it would have been impossible to beam out 400 resisting or panicking crew.

Timo Saloniemi

 

[saladdays]

Again, not really. The saucer section as shown had no problem flying from star to star at relatively high warp. Indeed, the very pilot episode showed it doing pretty well there, and "Arsenal of Freedom" then confirmed that the separated saucer was a valid interstellar getaway vehicle on its own. The lack of warp drive is but an urban myth, a bit like the no-phasers-at-warp nonsense in that both were perpetrated in the TNG Tech Manual against show reality.

How is the saucer going at warp when it has no warp core or nacelles when separated?

 

[NewHeavensNewEarth]

How is the saucer going at warp when it has no warp core or nacelles when separated?

Momentum?

 

[Timo]

Most warpships in Star Trek lack nacelles. Some Starfleet ones do as well. The saucer has those blue-glowing things on the aft trailing edge, good candidates for warp engines if need be. Or then the engines might be wholly internal or otherwise unrecognizable, take your pick.

Momentum isn't our solution, though: LaForge specifically denied the saucer of that when launching it towards a distant starbase in "Arsenal of Freedom", first separating at sublight and then telling Lt Logan to start his interstellar journey. The saucer can go to warp from a standing start. Or then keep going after warp separation, as in the pilot. Or then be forced out of warp by the best efforts of our resourceful heroes, as in "Brothers".

Timo Saloniemi

 

[BillJ]

And we never ever heard of one of the kids under Picard's nominal command biting it FWIW.

I think the only child death we saw in TNG was the little girl at a colony world in "Hide and Q".

The lack of warp drive is but an urban myth, a bit like the no-phasers-at-warp nonsense in that both were perpetrated in the TNG Tech Manual against show reality.

I think @Rick Sternbach has confirmed over the years that the saucer had no warp drive. It coasts for a while then falls out of warp. Pretty sure it is mentioned in "Brothers".

PICARD: I am aware of the risks, Ensign. When the umbilical splits, we should regain primary control, do you agree?
LAFORGE: Yes, sir.
PICARD: The saucer module should fall out of warp in two minutes. Be prepared to sweep back. Pull it in with a tractor beam.
WORF: Aye, sir.

If the saucer has its own warp drive, then there's no reason it should fall out of warp.

 

[saladdays]

Most warpships in Star Trek lack nacelles. Some Starfleet ones do as well. The saucer has those blue-glowing things on the aft trailing edge, good candidates for warp engines if need be. Or then the engines might be wholly internal or otherwise unrecognizable, take your pick.

Which warp-capable Starfleet ships do not have nacelles of some kind?

 

[DonIago]

I believe Timo is exploiting the fact that what we're shown in EaF and perhaps other episodes doesn't make sense when compared against our understanding of the technical specifications of the saucer.

To wit, AFAIK there's no way the saucer should be able to beat the stardrive to Farpoint...yet it does. The simplest explanation would be that it has warp drive, but evidence strongly indicates that it does not.

 

[BillJ]

To wit, AFAIK there's no way the saucer should be able to beat the stardrive to Farpoint...yet it does. The simplest explanation would be that it has warp drive, but evidence strongly indicates that it does not.

Could've been towed in by another ship? Could've already been extremely close to Farpoint?

Though I thought the Stardrive did beat the saucer to Farpoint?

DATA: Message from the saucer module, sir. It will arrive here in fifty one minutes.
PICARD: Inform them we'll connect as soon as they arrive. And sent the Commander to me when he's finished.
TASHA: Yes, sir.

 

[Timo]

Nothing Sternbach said on the matter ever really made it into Star Trek, so why press on with a contradiction when there's no need to?

"Farpoint" is pretty unambigous in the heroes first flying towards their destination; then getting blocked by Q and turning 180 degrees; then flying at extreme warp away from their destination for several minutesand then separating; and then the stardrive reaching the original destination mere hours before the saucer anyway.

So either the saucer did pretty good FTL, or then the stardrive for some reason did not travel at FTL after separation. When the heroes return from being accosted by Judge Q, O'Brien thinks the ship has been traveling towards her destination without incident (the saucer somehow having been lost in the way, but never mind). He doesn't comment on dropping to impulse.

So the options for "no FTL" are that the heroes were already almost within the Deneb system when Q intervened, and dropping to impulse was a thing at that point - or that the heroes were already well within the Deneb system, and warp in there was slow as molasses (as it so often is close to stars), allowing an impulse-only saucer to compete evenly with a warping stardrive section.

Or then the saucer simply traveled at warp, which is a capacity it is never said to lack. Just as it is never said to be incapable of taking the children to safety - whilst it is specifically tasked with just that on most of the separation occasions, two of which involve fleeing from an adversary that the stardrive section wants to engage.

Why would the saucer need a "reason" to fall out of warp in "Brothers"? Forcing the saucer to fall out of warp is the point of the entire exercise - it's a bit of sabotage our heroes want to inflict on Data. It really need not be a standard feature of the design, and is not stated to be.

Timo Saloniemi

 

[DonIago]

Could've been towed in by another ship? Could've already been extremely close to Farpoint?

Though I thought the Stardrive did beat the saucer to Farpoint?

Oops.

Though 51 minutes is almost an insignificant amount of time given what must have been interstellar distances...

I guess one of the other options is possible, though I thought Farpoint was supposed to be a bit out of the way?

Yeah, it's been awhile since I rewatched this one...