What is sci fi's most beautiful spaceship?

[Mr. Laser Beam]

And I don't buy the argument that unmanned missiles would make crewed fighters obsolete. A missile must be controlled by some kind of AI, guiding it to its target. AIs, like any computer, can be hacked. They also must, by definition, be less intuitive than a living pilot. It would be much easier to shoot down a missile than a fighter, since a missile (having no pilot) would have a harder time dodging enemy fire.

 

[darkwing_duck1]

Carriers in space are illogical.

Why?

Space fighters are impractical. This guys explains it better than I ever could:

http://www.projectrho.com/rocket/rocket3x.html#fighters

(Doesn't stop me, though - I love Wing Commander! )

I don't entirely agree with his reasoning...he has a point, but even he admits that fighters make sense for "brown water" ops (ie in and around planets).

 

[JuanBolio]

AIs, like any computer, can be hacked.

Only if a hacker has a means of getting into the software and doing so. I doubt anything will be docking with the missile, so as long as you don't use a wireless signal you should be okay.

I don't entirely agree with his reasoning...he has a point, but even he admits that fighters make sense for "brown water" ops (ie in and around planets).

Yep, for "brown space" operations, they'd make some sense. Deep space, though? Probably not.

 

[tomalak301]

Moya and Talyn.

 

[Zachary Smith]

This one:

"We're going back to Earth!
To wonderful, WONDERFUL Earth!
Of all I recall, it's the best spot of all
In All the Universe!"

 

[Flying Spaghetti Monster]

 

[kv1at3485]

They also must, by definition, be less intuitive than a living pilot. It would be much easier to shoot down a missile than a fighter, since a missile (having no pilot) would have a harder time dodging enemy fire.

Missiles would be harder to shoot down. Pilots have gee-limits that are extremely restrictive to the sort of manoeuvres a manned-vehicle can pull. Not to mention it is easier for a computer to constantly be calculating and executing those manoeuvres.

The big assumption you're making is that it is not possible to either create the hardware or program an expert system that can, in a niche, be as good or better than a human.

In any case, even if a small recoverable craft was needed, with the technology thrown around by so many tech-fantasies and scifi universes they'd be better off automated anyway.

 

[Admiral2]

Wish I'd seen this sooner. Probably could have saved everybody the argument.

Battlestar Galactica. Either version.

My defintion of beauty in this case has nothing to do with looks and everything to do with function. Galactica is the only ship in sci-fi that's a pure carrier, the main reason I've always been fascinated with it.

Carriers in space are illogical.

I never said they were logical. I just think they're cooooll. Coolness is my only criteria.

This is a thread about aesthetics. The OP just asks which ships we think are purty. I think carriers in space are purty. Do they make sense? I'd like to think so, but I don't actually care either way. I just want to see more of them.

My defintion of beauty in this case has nothing to do with looks and everything to do with function. Galactica is the only ship in sci-fi that's a pure carrier, the main reason I've always been fascinated with it.

Wrong.

There's more to sci-fi beyond books, movies, and television.

True. I exaggerate. I completely forgot about the carrier in Wing Commander - though everything about the movie is completely forgettable, and I haven't actually played the game in ages. And I also forgot about David Weber and Steven White's interstellar war series. Plenty of carriers there.

But of all the ones actually visualized on any screen, the Galacticas rule.

 

[Neroon]

I never said they were logical. I just think they're cooooll. Coolness is my only criteria.

This is a thread about aesthetics. The OP just asks which ships we think are purty.

Well, technically the OP only asked which ones we thought were "beautiful". There is a little bit of difference in what constitutes "beauty" for folks in here. Most probably agree that it's about aesthetics, but a few have mentioned functionality or purpose or just plain what happened on the ship in question.

Another one I just thought of, which follows along with your definition comes from Farscape: Aeryn's Prowler fighter. Sleek, sharply pointed lines that evoke a dagger.

 

[Admiral2]

I never said they were logical. I just think they're cooooll. Coolness is my only criteria.

This is a thread about aesthetics. The OP just asks which ships we think are purty.

Well, technically the OP only asked which ones we thought were "beautiful". There is a little bit of difference in what constitutes "beauty" for folks in here. Most probably agree that it's about aesthetics, but a few have mentioned functionality or purpose or just plain what happened on the ship in question.

Another one I just thought of, which follows along with your definition comes from Farscape: Aeryn's Prowler fighter. Sleek, sharply pointed lines that evoke a dagger.

Actually, if you think about it, the Prowler is beautiful both in the classical sense and in functionality.

 

[Neroon]

True, that. It's similar in principle to Vader's command ship I mentioned earlier (I forget the nomenclature). Both ships look sleekly beautiful, and that evokes a sense power and ability in deadly form.

 

[Sakrysta]

^I don't think it's named in the movies, but don't the novels call it the Executor?

 

[Skywalker]

My defintion of beauty in this case has nothing to do with looks and everything to do with function. Galactica is the only ship in sci-fi that's a pure carrier, the main reason I've always been fascinated with it.

Wrong.

There's more to sci-fi beyond books, movies, and television.

True. I exaggerate. I completely forgot about the carrier in Wing Commander - though everything about the movie is completely forgettable, and I haven't actually played the game in ages. And I also forgot about David Weber and Steven White's interstellar war series. Plenty of carriers there.

But of all the ones actually visualized on any screen, the Galacticas rule.

Ah, cool. Sorry if I came off a little defensive, I used to be a huge Wing Commander nerd.

 

[Gertch]

I've liked many ships and most have been mentioned. But when I was watching Enterprise, and they showed the Defiant, my heart lept, a tear came to my eye and I realized my one true love - TOS Enterprise.

 

[JuanBolio]

I never said they were logical. I just think they're cooooll. Coolness is my only criteria.

Oh, sure, they're cool. I love BSG and Wing Commander. The TCS Tiger's Claw has always been my favorite carrier:

 

[Skywalker]

Aye, 'tis a thing of beauty, she is.

 

[Mr. Laser Beam]

AIs, like any computer, can be hacked.

Only if a hacker has a means of getting into the software and doing so. I doubt anything will be docking with the missile, so as long as you don't use a wireless signal you should be okay.

How else would the missile be controlled?

I mean, if nothing else, there would have to be a failsafe device to detonate it by remote if it goes offcourse or malfunctions. And when there's that, there's wireless, and therefore a possibility of interception.

 

[JuanBolio]

How else would the missile be controlled?

Onboard AI.

 

[DaleC76]

^^

Hey Darkwing duck

When is volume 3 coming out?

I think he's referring to the next volume of Darkwing Duck DVDs.

 

[Admiral2]

Does anaybody remember the old cartoon Starcom?

If not, check this out:

http://www.truveo.com/Starcom-Ep-5AVI/id/4186245701

This used to be one of my favorite cartoons when I was a kid, mainly because of the Starmax and Starwolf spaceships. So if I had to pick second favorites, these would be them.