Was Earth defenseless?

[Tarek71]

Or you could just have the vessel itself armed and use the warships for military operations.

Or you could use warships as escorts, just like the real world. And you could have drilling ships that are built for drilling, not combat with dozens of warships, 23rd century or not.

A modern drilling ship wouldnt last 5 minutes with a single 100 year old dreadnought, let alone a fleet of them.

No I think the writers wanted something powerful, alien and threatening. Im sure Star Wars was an influence here. And they apparently thought it was necessary to have the drilling. Spocks ship doesnt need to do that, but it is necessary for the Narada. In fact it wouldnt be necessary for the Narada either. If it can swallow up a whole planet Im not sure why drilling a hole first is necessary. It shouldnt be. But lets not even bother with the faux physics of red goo.

The drilling idea was just assinine. But since they also wanted it to take out whole fleets of ships, which is an absurdity, they made it very heavily armed. Just make the thing a bloody Warbird and then taking out as many 23rd Century Klingon and Starfleet ships is a bit more believable.

It launched the Red Matter into the nova.

Sucking it up even though it had spread for light years by then, right? At warp speed. Sucking what up? For light years in all directions?

The Narada chased after Spock after Romulus was destroyed.

Because a miner knew all about the plan, the ship, the pilot and for reasons unknown thought Spock was to blame for this. Indeed, even today, the Pentagon normally calls up random miners in West Virginia or drill ship captains, to give them updates on all the important operations.

Just in case they wanted to destroy any experimental craft they might encounter with the bristling armament that is so typical of drilling ships.

I never thought it was B.S. You said that, but if you're going to be fair about it...

No you said that. You said "People disappearing from one place and appearing in others isn't [believable] either. Oh well, what can you do?"

Were you not talking about the transporter there? "What you can do" is not write BS. Even keeping the transporter doesnt mean its BS time for Red Star Sucking Goo or warp speed supernovas.

 

[Crazy Eddie]

Could a mining vessel of 2011 defeat a battleship of 1940? No. The battleship would obliterate it. Once 14" or 16" shells started crashing into a drilling or mining vessel it would be torn to shreds and tatters.

On the other hand, a mining vessel from 1987, if it carried contemporary mining explosives used on land (oceanic mining doesn't typically use explosives), would probably defeat the warships of 1833 and 1858. The same is probably true of a hypothetical mining vessel from 1887 (mining ships were invented in the late 20th Century) versus warships from 1733 and 1758.

I dont think so. There is no reason to believe that in a few decades, drilling ships will be able to shrug off 16" shells or would be able to engage in a duel with an Iowa class battleship, let alone with a fleet of such warships.

Did they have Iowa class battleships in 1858?

I've thought about this before and reached the conclusion it is reasonable. Imagine a modern supertanker armed with Harpoon and Tomahawk missiles.

Hell, imagine a supertanker armed with a black market TOW missiles and some 60mm mortars. That ship would be more than a match for anything short of an ironclad.

Of course, an ironclad like the Virginia or even the Monitor could probably take it on (not EASILY, exactly, but it's doable).

 

[Devon]

Or you could just have the vessel itself armed and use the warships for military operations.

Or you could use warships as escorts, just like the real world.

You keep going back to the warship thing. You're also comparing a Romulan mining vessel from Star Trek to the "real world"... because that works.

And you could have drilling ships that are built for drilling, not combat with dozens of warships, 23rd century or not.

You're not stating why it's wrong that the Narada is capable of defending itself or why it shouldn't. It clearly can, and it didn't require multiple "warships" to defend it. So whats the problem?

No I think the writers wanted something powerful, alien and threatening. Im sure Star Wars was an influence here.

Yeah, a lot of things 1979+ Star Trek and film making in general undoubtedly is.

And they apparently thought it was necessary to have the drilling. Spocks ship doesnt need to do that, but it is necessary for the Narada. In fact it wouldnt be necessary for the Narada either. If it can swallow up a whole planet Im not sure why drilling a hole first is necessary. It shouldnt be. But lets not even bother with the faux physics of red goo.

I do sincerely hope you are as critical of most of other Trek which use "faux physics" or "asinine" details to be fair?

The drilling idea was just assinine. But since they also wanted it to take out whole fleets of ships, which is an absurdity, they made it very heavily armed. Just make the thing a bloody Warbird and then taking out as many 23rd Century Klingon and Starfleet ships is a bit more believable.

For whom?

Sucking it up even though it had spread for light years by then, right? At warp speed. Sucking what up? For light years in all directions?

I even brought this up before.

Because a miner knew all about the plan, the ship, the pilot and for reasons unknown thought Spock was to blame for this.

Yes, why not? You're now criticizing the film on what I'm saying which is why I question when or if you've seen the film.

No you said that. You said "People disappearing from one place and appearing in others isn't [believable] either. Oh well, what can you do?"

Just bringing fairness to your point.

 

[Tarek71]

Granting a mining ship modern terrestrial mining explosives, it should be capable of defeating a squadron of Dreadnoughts (a more accurate comparison would be against a squadron consisting of one Dreadnought and seven pre-Dreadnoughts). The decisive factor is not the power of 12" broadsides - which no modern surface warship could withstand, let alone a civilian ship - but the offensive range of the two ships. A single 1980s Ticonderoga-class cruiser, despite its real but irrelevant vulnerability to battleship guns, could probably sink the entire line of battle of the Grand Fleet.

The range of the missiles is decisive there. But in the two battles we saw (we didnt see the presumed engagement with the Klingons) were at close to point blank range. Kelvin was able to hit with its weapons. I do recall the Enterprise destroying a fairly significant number of the obviously generous missile supply that this drilling ship mysteriously has. So lets give the Ent credit for that. But I dont think the range issue was a problem here.

And thats what both the missile and aircraft attack scenarios are based upon. (Putting aside various issues about the likely capability and effectiveness or civilian helos carrying out bombing runs they werent designed for, the types of explosives involved, crew not trained for it, etc). They oldsters dont even have Radar, so if the modern drilling ship is over the horizon and not even visible, they wouldnt even know where it was.

 

[Tarek71]

You keep going back to the warship thing. You're also comparing a Romulan mining vessel from Star Trek to the "real world"... because that works.

Yes, why wouldnt you go back to the "warship thing"? It blows away dozens of warships. Its armed like a warship.

You're not stating why it's wrong that the Narada is capable of defending itself or why it shouldn't.

Because its a drilling ship. Why would it be armed at all? It might be attacked? A cruise ship might be attacked. Any ship might be attacked. They arent normally armed though. Could they make a warship that can drill? I suppose they could.

For whom?

For anyone. Myself to start with. Why is a drilling ship armed? Why not armed cruise ships? We could have a Romulan remake of the Love Boat: the Death Boat. Oh its all smiles in sunny Puerta Vallarta until the Death Boats' 25 disruptor banks are unleashed!

Yes, why not?

Because random miners would have absolutely no need to be clued into operations like that? Why would he have any idea what was going on? Or blame Spock even if he did know?

Just bringing fairness to your point.

The point was fair. But your saying well, why not put in alot of nonsense since they already have some nonsense in there?

 

[Crazy Eddie]

Because its a drilling ship. Why would it be armed at all?

Because Romulans are fucking crazy.

For anyone. Myself to start with.

I suppose we should all be angry and frustrated that this particular movie was not written and produced with your specific sensibilities in mind.

Why not armed cruise ships?

Because Nero could not get access to a Galaxy class starship.

Yes, why not?

Because random miners would have absolutely no need to be clued into operations like that?

Actually there's the anthropic principle at work here. IF any "random miners" knew anything about the operation, and IF their captain was slightly out of his mind and willing to blame Spock for the whole affair, they would have become involved just as Nero did.

If there are a thousand mining vessels in the empire, chances are that ONE of them would have found out, by some means or another (prime time news? Who knows?) and come to the wrong conclusion.

And one of them did.

Just bringing fairness to your point.

The point was fair. But your saying well, why not put in alot of nonsense since they already have some nonsense in there?

Because Star Trek is space opera, not simple science fiction. As such, 90% of its science is idealized nonsense with more flash than function; there's alot more "cool" than there is "sense."

 

[Tarek71]

Because Romulans are fucking crazy.

Or JJ&Co are. Or both.

I suppose we should all be angry and frustrated that this particular movie was not written and produced with your specific sensibilities in mind.

You should be! I have magnificent sensibilities!

Because Nero could not get access to a Galaxy class starship.

Who needs a sissy boat like the Galaxy Class? He's got a mining ship! Now thats real firepower!

If there are a thousand mining vessels in the empire,

A thousand?! They could overrun the whole Alpha Quadrant with a 1000 of those. I sure hope not!

chances are that ONE of them would have found out, by some means or another (prime time news? Who knows?) and come to the wrong conclusion.

RNN? Romulan News Network? Nah, theyd have Fox.

The conclusion that the Vulcans should be exterminated? Okie doke.

Because Star Trek is space opera, not simple science fiction. As such, 90% of its science is idealized nonsense with more flash than function; there's alot more "cool" than there is "sense."

Very true, but I think superfluous BS should be avoided as much as possible. They could have written any script they wanted, none of this was forced on them. But since I watched Earth actually "stolen" on Doctor Who, dont think I cant go with the flow. I can and do.

 

[Devon]

You keep going back to the warship thing. You're also comparing a Romulan mining vessel from Star Trek to the "real world"... because that works.

Yes, why wouldnt you go back to the "warship thing"? It blows away dozens of warships. Its armed like a warship.

So is the Narada.

Because its a drilling ship. Why would it be armed at all? It might be attacked?

YES. Are you now suggesting it shouldn't have any defense at all???

A cruise ship might be attacked. Any ship might be attacked.

Thus why those ships usually carry a weapons compliment.

Alpha addressed everything else.

 

[Tarek71]

So is the Narada.

I noticed! Pretty damned powerful for a drillship!

One of ours wouldnt last 5 minutes against even a single warship of 100 years ago. But never mind that pesky Reality.

YES. Are you now suggesting it shouldn't have any defense at all???

Against what? Rocks? They normally dont. If they were going into pirate infested waters, they might have some minimal capacity to repel the little speedboats and the armed thugs aboard. But not to fight warships.

But ok, lets say the Dominion war was recent, and so the merchant fleet of Romulus was refitted and given some kind of armaments to at least allow them some minimal added protection, at least long enough to warp away.

Enough to wipe out dozens of 23rd century warships? Not buyin it. You bought it? Great! Its yours, you can keep it!

Alpha addressed everything else.

Yes I saw, the last part was the part that probably nailed it. Its space opera BS, so lets just let them wank. Or as it was once sung..."Its just a show we should really just relax".

Earth stolen and taken to another star system? Warp Speed Supernovas sucked up by Red Goo? The Moon travels the Galaxy in 1999? What the hell! Go Moon Go!

 

[Devon]

So is the Narada.

I noticed! Pretty damned powerful for a drillship!

One of ours wouldnt last 5 minutes against even a single warship of 100 years ago. But never mind that pesky Reality.

This is a fictional piece after all.

Against what? Rocks?

Ss the past 45 years of Star Trek has proven there are many other actually threats out there in which a vessel needs to defend itself. I'll refer you to an earlier post in which this has been discussed too.

They normally dont. If they were going into pirate infested waters, they might have some minimal capacity to repel the little speedboats and the armed thugs aboard. But not to fight warships.

This one does, so what's the problem? You haven't said what the problem is outside of you preferring that they used a warbird.

Not buyin it.

Then don't.

 

[Crazy Eddie]

Earth stolen and taken to another star system? Warp Speed Supernovas sucked up by Red Goo? The Moon travels the Galaxy in 1999? What the hell! Go Moon Go!

We don't have to think that hard to identify similar absurdities even in Star Trek. It's just that, in the scheme of things, I think Red Matter and the hoovering of a supernova explosion are alot easier to swallow than "This planet is an exact duplicate of Earth in every way, except..."

 

[Tarek71]

Earth stolen and taken to another star system? Warp Speed Supernovas sucked up by Red Goo? The Moon travels the Galaxy in 1999? What the hell! Go Moon Go!

We don't have to think that hard to identify similar absurdities even in Star Trek. It's just that, in the scheme of things, I think Red Matter and the hoovering of a supernova explosion are alot easier to swallow than "This planet is an exact duplicate of Earth in every way, except..."

Look, they can have the USS Lollipop in the next movie. It destroys enemy ships with quantum gumdrops and photonic rainbows. They can do whatever they want. They can slap two enterprise sized warp engines on the moon and have some naughty cadets take it for a wild ride through the solar system, and then park it back with no changes in tides, etc.

God bless 'em! They can do it if they want. But is it ok if some people say "That was complete BS!" Or does everyone have to say "Oh well warp is kind of BS anyways, sooo..." or "It is fiction afterall!"

Indeed it is. But I think the wild wanking and technocrapple should be kept to some sort of minimum. I dont think thats asking too much. And yes I do see what I think was a kind of Twilight zone impact on TOS Trek in terms of putting The Moral of the Story so far ahead of the plausibility that you are asked to suspend the latter and appreciate the story on it own terms. Many great TZ episodes ask that of you.

 

[Crazy Eddie]

Indeed it is. But I think the wild wanking and technocrapple should be kept to some sort of minimum. I dont think thats asking too much.

I don't either. What I'm saying is, we've put up with much worse than "red matter" in order to keep on enjoying what Star Trek is. I would be far less happy if they had called it a "baryonic quantum implosive membrane" or something, on the assumption that the complicated definition would mask the bullshit nature of the substance. It's enough that WE don't know what red matter is, but it's a bit refreshing IMO that most of the characters don't know either, and therefore won't be tempted to explain it to us as if it matters.

Because in terms of the plot, it doesn't matter. It doesn't even RED matter.

 

[Tarek71]

I would be far less happy if they had called it a "baryonic quantum implosive membrane" or something, on the assumption that the complicated definition would mask the bullshit nature of the substance. It's enough that WE don't know what red matter is, but it's a bit refreshing IMO that most of the characters don't know either, and therefore won't be tempted to explain it to us as if it matters.

So at least they didnt give BS a BS name? That is progress of a sort.

Maybe less BS, by any name, would be even better. But no I dont not watch it for that reason. Its like voting for change, you dont ever really get all that much of it, but hope springs eternal.

 

[Tarek71]

This is a fictional piece after all.

Of course. And in this fictional piece I think they wanted a Luke blows up the death star moment. Some planet busting super weapon and the kid from Iowa takes it out. Something omnious, threatening and extremely powerful. Not terms you often associate with merchant vessels.

But their calling it a mining ship is superfluous to the story. Its a super star destroyer or mini death star. Thats its role in the story. So they ended up with something that looks like it could kick the ass of the Scimitar and yet is built for mining. Nevermind that, its the Death Star. "Mining" is just some silly thing they threw in because for some unknown reason they got the idea of drilling into their head.

I assume several beams coming together to make a big one that just blows up planets would have seemed a bit too much. So they cobbled this together.

You may think its completely crazy that cruise ships are unarmored, have no air defense and no naval armament. But its doesnt seem crazy to anyone involved in it.

We can go into why cruise ships cant be made this way. Look at schematics to show that the full internal volume is needed for cruise ship and not battleship functions. Not only the entire structure built differently but you either use the spaces for restaurants and night clubs or you use it the way a battleship does. The armor would hugely increase cost, make if far heavier and therefore alot more fuel needed for it, etc.

Its nearly as ridiculous as trying to make every car a tank and every commerical truck like an APC. Not only would the f'n thing be fifty times heavier than a car, it would cost millions to drive something that might get 3 mpg. It will only take a couple of hundred gallons of diesel to fill it up. Still want it?

WIth lightly armored, faster cheaper merchant vessels you can supply a far greater volume of supplies to the Front at a faster clip and for far less cost than a military that stupidly tried to make every ship and every vehicle into a battleship and tank.

The 18 wheeler carries a far greater payload, for a tiny fraction the cost. Yes that means no armor and no armament and a box-y shape thats terrible for deflecting projectiles. But it gets far more cargo, far cheaper and alot faster. The shape, materials, engine design, fuel requirements, structure and frame of the vessel/vehicle are changed depending on what sort it is, and what you want to be able to take and to do.

If you want ships that fight warships, build a warship. If want something that can pound with a Tank, build a frakkin Tank! That will always make far more sense. Escorted Convoy system is what makes far more sense if you are really that worried about a massive attack.

But none of this matters. They wanted a Scary, Ominous, Alien, Powerful, Planet-Busting, Uber Somethingorother so James T. Skywalker could blow it up. Applause! The End!

 

[F. King Daniel]

When you're in the future, with all the near-magic technology of Star Trek, the ships can be anything the writers want them to be and easily justify it as "product of an alien mind" - particularly when Trek's human technology is so inconsistant.

 

[Timo]

"Mining" is just some silly thing they threw in because for some unknown reason they got the idea of drilling into their head.

Actually, I'd think it was an important story concept that the movie's villain would be a bluecollar bystander who had a legitimate grievance with our heroes.

Whether that justified making his bluecollar ship so powerful, or whether the grievance was properly legitimized, are points to be argued. But the "mining thing" and the Death Star functionality would probably have evolved from different starting points and then merged into the Narada concept.

Timo Saloniemi

 

[Crazy Eddie]

"Mining" is just some silly thing they threw in because for some unknown reason they got the idea of drilling into their head.

Actually, I'd think it was an important story concept that the movie's villain would be a bluecollar bystander who had a legitimate grievance with our heroes.

But he's not, he's a raving lunatic with an at best tenuous grasp of reality, leading a band of complete fanatics capable of little else but violence and manual labor. Basically, he's Osama bin Laden with a starship.

Whether that justified making his bluecollar ship so powerful, or whether the grievance was properly legitimized, are points to be argued. But the "mining thing" and the Death Star functionality would probably have evolved from different starting points and then merged into the Narada concept.

Except they didn't start with the "bluecollar grievance" concept. It's more of a "pissed off peasant laborer seeks to share his pain wit the world" concept. Basically, he's a terrorist: unintelligent, unsophisticated, depending entirely on surprise and intimidation to manifest a threat. Eliminating him turns out to be not overly difficult... once you stop crapping your pants at the size of his ship and realize that his torpedoes can be intercepted and his shields are far from military grade.

 

[Timo]

I think that's just two different ways of saying the same thing. Bluecollars or lowlife; avengers or fanatics. And we're in agreement about all the specifics anyway.

It was probably dramatically important for Nero's posse not to be a military one, as unpredictable gansta behavior would have been out of place then. And while we've seen impulsive adversaries before, this choice of background gave more complete legitimacy to the ranting and raving than any of the previous ones...

Timo Saloniemi