Oh, sure, the stars are all in odd places and I yell at the bad physics onscreen a LOT.
Oh, no, I'm not talking about bad astronomy - given how little we knew about anything more than a dozen LY or so away back then, it's understandable.
Okay, here's the wormhole thing - "wormhole" is a popular name for a hypothetical structure called an "Einstein-Rosen bridge". It's hypothetically possible that there are such shortcuts tunneling "under" (for lack of a better word) normal space-time; the problem with using them as shortcuts is the fact that the theory which predicts them also predicts that they will only form between black holes. There must be a gravitational singularity at each end of such a thing. (When asked to provide an FTL drive for Jerry Pournelle's CoDominium stories, Dr. Dan Alderson seized on this theory, hypothesizing further a sort of "tramline" that might form between certain stars.)
(Note further the use of the word "hypothesis" - the math works, but there is exactly no empirical data to raise this to the level of "theory".)
So you can't just have a wormhole "open up", jump into it, and slide safely out the other end - there's going to be some pretty serious masses saying "no" at each end.
Obviously, astrophysics functions differently in Trek, because they patently do have wormholes sans singularities.
Join us next time on "IT DOES NOT WORK THAT WAY!!", when we'll be covering the idea of sensors detecting something light-years away in real time.
7of9s catsuit was clearly meant to be a sexualised point as well before it was tuned down a little, and at one point you had 7 naked in the cargo bay when the bored young adolesent Q wanted to have some fun, so that part to an extent about 7of9 is somewhat, cliche like "covered".
Yes, but Seven wasn't showing her TRIBBLE crack to prove she was naked.
I don't know if your trying to defend Enterprise, or purposely splitting hairs for the sake of splitting hairs... but, I've made my point. Star Trek has had a long history of oversexualizing women, and Enterprise continued that sad tradition by pushing the envelope even further, instead of breaking away from it. The point is it's unnecessary.
Keep splitting hairs and making excuses, but I'm done beating this dead horse.
Oh, no, I'm not talking about bad astronomy - given how little we knew about anything more than a dozen LY or so away back then, it's understandable.
Okay, here's the wormhole thing - "wormhole" is a popular name for a hypothetical structure called an "Einstein-Rosen bridge". It's hypothetically possible that there are such shortcuts tunneling "under" (for lack of a better word) normal space-time; the problem with using them as shortcuts is the fact that the theory which predicts them also predicts that they will only form between black holes. There must be a gravitational singularity at each end of such a thing. (When asked to provide an FTL drive for Jerry Pournelle's CoDominium stories, Dr. Dan Alderson seized on this theory, hypothesizing further a sort of "tramline" that might form between certain stars.)
(Note further the use of the word "hypothesis" - the math works, but there is exactly no empirical data to raise this to the level of "theory".)
So you can't just have a wormhole "open up", jump into it, and slide safely out the other end - there's going to be some pretty serious masses saying "no" at each end.
Obviously, astrophysics functions differently in Trek, because they patently do have wormholes sans singularities.
Join us next time on "IT DOES NOT WORK THAT WAY!!", when we'll be covering the idea of sensors detecting something light-years away in real time.
Well, the sensors I put up to subspace (AKA technobabble BS/tacked-on physics). When you tack on subspace to everything else...eh, it's a convenient excuse that's vague enough to slide in under my suspension of disbelief. Barely.
As for the Einstein-Rosen Bridge thing...true. The Bajoran Wormhole I let go because physical gods inside it, but...eh, I LOVE the idea of wormholes, but Trek tends to handle them...poorly. Sometimes well, but often poorly.
Oh, no, I'm not talking about bad astronomy - given how little we knew about anything more than a dozen LY or so away back then, it's understandable.
Okay, here's the wormhole thing - "wormhole" is a popular name for a hypothetical structure called an "Einstein-Rosen bridge". It's hypothetically possible that there are such shortcuts tunneling "under" (for lack of a better word) normal space-time; the problem with using them as shortcuts is the fact that the theory which predicts them also predicts that they will only form between black holes. There must be a gravitational singularity at each end of such a thing. (When asked to provide an FTL drive for Jerry Pournelle's CoDominium stories, Dr. Dan Alderson seized on this theory, hypothesizing further a sort of "tramline" that might form between certain stars.)
(Note further the use of the word "hypothesis" - the math works, but there is exactly no empirical data to raise this to the level of "theory".)
So you can't just have a wormhole "open up", jump into it, and slide safely out the other end - there's going to be some pretty serious masses saying "no" at each end.
Obviously, astrophysics functions differently in Trek, because they patently do have wormholes sans singularities.
Join us next time on "IT DOES NOT WORK THAT WAY!!", when we'll be covering the idea of sensors detecting something light-years away in real time.
Oh, no, I'm not talking about bad astronomy - given how little we knew about anything more than a dozen LY or so away back then, it's understandable.
Okay, here's the wormhole thing - "wormhole" is a popular name for a hypothetical structure called an "Einstein-Rosen bridge". It's hypothetically possible that there are such shortcuts tunneling "under" (for lack of a better word) normal space-time; the problem with using them as shortcuts is the fact that the theory which predicts them also predicts that they will only form between black holes. There must be a gravitational singularity at each end of such a thing. (When asked to provide an FTL drive for Jerry Pournelle's CoDominium stories, Dr. Dan Alderson seized on this theory, hypothesizing further a sort of "tramline" that might form between certain stars.)
(Note further the use of the word "hypothesis" - the math works, but there is exactly no empirical data to raise this to the level of "theory".)
So you can't just have a wormhole "open up", jump into it, and slide safely out the other end - there's going to be some pretty serious masses saying "no" at each end.
Obviously, astrophysics functions differently in Trek, because they patently do have wormholes sans singularities.
Join us next time on "IT DOES NOT WORK THAT WAY!!", when we'll be covering the idea of sensors detecting something light-years away in real time.
I would point out that Kip Thorne has done a lot of research on how to make a wormhole safely traversable. It involves "exotic matter" holding open the "throat" of the wormhole so you don't get crushed by the singularity.
The first 3 season were filled with crazy, stupid and TRIBBLE.
But man, season 4 DID hit out out of the park.
Its like stargate universe. Up until the timesplit it was utter unmitigated shiite. But after that episode: WHAM: quality sci fi and then the network murdered it.
You say that they should make a good show right out of the starting gate, well...Go back and watch the first season of any show you like. I mean REALLY watch it. Look it over carefully and see, is it really as good as you think it might've been?
Practically every show I can think of tended to flounder at least a BIT early in it's run, not doing quite as well as it would later on. As a couple examples, I recently re-watched Firefly just cuz, and I still enjoyed it all, but since it is the first and only season of the show, I found myself wishing it had continued because I felt it needed to do 'more'. Or another show I like: Warehouse 13, which after re-looking over it's first season, was a bit on the boring side as well compared to when it got going in later seasons.
All five ST series feel the same way in their first season. Some even spreading further into the second or nearly to their third before they got on their feet.
I remain empathetic to the concerns of my community, but do me a favor and lay off the god damn name calling and petty remarks. It will get you nowhere.
I must admit, respect points to Trendy for laying down the law like that.
The first 3 season were filled with crazy, stupid and TRIBBLE.
But man, season 4 DID hit out out of the park.
Its like stargate universe. Up until the timesplit it was utter unmitigated shiite. But after that episode: WHAM: quality sci fi and then the network murdered it.
That teaches one lesson though:
MAKE A GOOD SHOW RIGHT FROM THE START!
Chief difference though, SGU was getting very good in the second season whereas ENT, as reported, only had that upswing in season 4. Meaning, SGU wasn't actually given much of a chance at all (especially with SyFylis switching around the night) while ENT had used up all of its good will.
You say that they should make a good show right out of the starting gate, well...Go back and watch the first season of any show you like. I mean REALLY watch it. Look it over carefully and see, is it really as good as you think it might've been?
Practically every show I can think of tended to flounder at least a BIT early in it's run, not doing quite as well as it would later on. As a couple examples, I recently re-watched Firefly just cuz, and I still enjoyed it all, but since it is the first and only season of the show, I found myself wishing it had continued because I felt it needed to do 'more'. Or another show I like: Warehouse 13, which after re-looking over it's first season, was a bit on the boring side as well compared to when it got going in later seasons.
All five ST series feel the same way in their first season. Some even spreading further into the second or nearly to their third before they got on their feet.
Heroes had the opposite effect. First season was good, then it degraded from there. It is as if the creator only designed the show for one season and had to rush out new seasons because they didn't think Heroes would be that successful.
Someone redid the opening credits using the closing music, "Archer's Theme". IMO, it's about a 10,000% improvement. I'd pay actual cash money for a DVD set with this version of the opening.
i actually get jazzed up when i hear the intro music of 'in a mirror darkly'
btw my fav of what little of enterprise that i've seen
initially the faith of the heart song was a bit off putting, but it did grow on me over the first season. the version they replaced it with in season 3 was far worse.
and OP, i hate to break it to you, but ent is and always will be canon, no matter how badly you wish it werent.
initially the faith of the heart song was a bit off putting, but it did grow on me over the first season. the version they replaced it with in season 3 was far worse.
The lyrics to Faith of the Heart does fit people involved in Space Exploration which is why I don't have a problem with it, but Star Trek has always used instrumental music with voiceovers in TOS and TNG or without voiceovers in DS9 and Voyager.
Heroes had the opposite effect. First season was good, then it degraded from there. It is as if the creator only designed the show for one season and had to rush out new seasons because they didn't think Heroes would be that successful.
Oh yeah, forgot about that. Remember enjoying the first season and that whole 'save the cheerleader, save the world' thing got seriously stuck in my head, even now, years later.
and OP, i hate to break it to you, but ent is and always will be canon, no matter how badly you wish it werent.
Never said that I wished Ent was non-canon. Merely proposing a hypothesis that maybe, just maybe what we instead saw was...historical revision from Archer that made him look better, at the cost of everyone else. Doesn't it kind of fill in some of the more annoying holes of the show, at least in regards to the first couple seasons?
There's plenty of Ent I like. Season 3 I will gladly sit and watch or put on in the backround, same for a majority of season 4. There's a...few, bits out of season 1 and 2 I even like. I don't despise the whole show. If anything, I more am disappointed by it looking back, now that it's been a decade since it's cancellation.
I remain empathetic to the concerns of my community, but do me a favor and lay off the god damn name calling and petty remarks. It will get you nowhere.
I must admit, respect points to Trendy for laying down the law like that.
We got to remember the culture surrounding the creation of Enterprise. It was one that loved prequels and a more Non-Trek Sci Fi (that is why it was called just Enterprise) with pop music being added into montages. Best example, Smallville. But B&B took the easy route, they wanted a cool-Trek ship with a saucer. Doug Drexler talked about the first incarnations of the NX-01 as Daedalus-like with submarine interiors. B&B decided to just have 24th-Century counterpart technology to make it easier, like phase pistols and photonic torpedoes. The first two seasons were trying to re-capture the spirit of TNG/VOY rather than actually keeping to their initial prequel theme.
The thing about Enterprise's demise is coupled with failing channel (UPN) that turned into a mess of talk shows and WWE shows with Enterprise being given bad timeslots, to the greater availability of the intenet to the show actually going to be cancelled in the second season and then the third season.
If Enterprise was released in the 90s, it would have went a full seven seasons, because there was really nothing different from the other Trek series if you actually look at it, but twenty plus years of the same old against the likes of SG1, BSG, and Farscape killed it.
The design of the NX-01 was a good idea, anyway; however much it would have been in continuity to make it Daedalus-like in appearance, the Daedalus-class is an ugly, ugly starship that wouldn't have gone over well with a broad audience. The NX-class, on the other hand, beyond not being ugly, is also instantly recognizable as being a Starfleet-type vessel, and is everything about Starfleet design philosophy boiled down to its most basic elements: outrigger nacelles and a saucer.
but, I've made my point. Star Trek has had a long history of oversexualizing women, and Enterprise continued that sad tradition by pushing the envelope even further, instead of breaking away from it. The point is it's unnecessary.
Keep splitting hairs and making excuses, but I'm done beating this dead horse.
uhh yeah. i already buried your point before you decided to dump half the quote down the toilet, so whatever the hell you are going on about, dont let me stop you.
T6 Miranda Hero Ship FTW. Been around since Dec 2010 on STO and bought LTS in Apr 2013 for STO.
I for one like that ENT takes place on the holodeck of the Enterprise D. I'm not sure where Riker got the time to watch all of that, but I'd sure like to know the secret so I have more STO play time. Though I also like the idea that the OP put forth. It fits nicely with my idea that Voyager is really an elaborate holodeck simulation designed to see just how far a Starfleet crew can be pushed before they have a mutiny.
I think ENTs biggest failure was the fact it was a prequel. They almost never do well. The only prequel that I know of that did well was Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom.
Prequels tend to mess with established canon way too much and just makes your head hurt trying to reconcile things, in universe. Like self sealing EVA suits in ENT while Worf in First Contact had to tie off his EVA suit. I mean really? That technology wouldn't be used in the 24th century but is being used in the 22nd?
But what truly turned me against ENT was that episode where the Borg landed on Earth. My mind. Oh my mind. It hurts to much on so many levels.
Okay maybe for some unbelievable reason this was covered up and no one ever gets told about it. Wouldn't you think, whatever that reason was, it might have been important to bring up the fact that proto-Star fleet had encountered the BORG before? Okay, yeah it's 200 years later by the time we get to Encounter at Far Point, but we know that ship captains know all sorts of classified things. Like Omega Particles. Or randomly having the defense grid codes to a planetary system they aren't even stationed at. (Chains of Command. Really Picard, why do you know those codes if you aren't an active part of the defense force stationed there?)
Right point being that prequels tend to murder continuity something fierce which is part of why they tend to do poorly. As fun as it might be to see a hero on his path to being a hero, sometimes it's just better to leave it up to the imagination or be told only small bits of it.
Cheers from Antonio Valerio Cortez III, Half-Celestial Archduke of the Free Marches Confederacy.
TBH I wouldn't have been able to GIVE it a second chance without the ability to mute the theme.
I'm sorry, it's like fingernails on chalkboard to me-everything I hate in 'Arena Pop' music-the pretentious instrumental arrangement, borderline-can't-sing-singer, sappy lyrics that sound like the efforts of a sixteen year old trying to impress theiir English teacher...everything, just...ugh.
I guess it's safe to say I've never been a Rod Stewart fan.
I for one like that ENT takes place on the holodeck of the Enterprise D. I'm not sure where Riker got the time to watch all of that, but I'd sure like to know the secret so I have more STO play time. Though I also like the idea that the OP put forth. It fits nicely with my idea that Voyager is really an elaborate holodeck simulation designed to see just how far a Starfleet crew can be pushed before they have a mutiny.
Actually, it was only the series finale that was on the holodeck. There is far too much in the show that Archer would not reveal to Starfleet because it would either make him look bad or they would force him before a psychologist to determine if he is no longer fit to be a Captain.
The design of the NX-01 was a good idea, anyway; however much it would have been in continuity to make it Daedalus-like in appearance, the Daedalus-class is an ugly, ugly starship that wouldn't have gone over well with a broad audience. The NX-class, on the other hand, beyond not being ugly, is also instantly recognizable as being a Starfleet-type vessel, and is everything about Starfleet design philosophy boiled down to its most basic elements: outrigger nacelles and a saucer.
I would disagree. While I love the NX design, a Daedalus-like ship would have fit the premise of the show while the NX fits into the let's do everything the same motif that the show became. The pilot was a mixture of this is a prequel but its still the same pretty much making Enterprise a confused identity right off the start.
a Daedalus-like ship would have fit the premise of the show
I touched on that: however much it might have fit, the Daedalus is an ugly, ugly ship design. Whatever the premise of the show, it's not gonna succeed if it's being frontlined by something that practically begs for Lance Armstrong jokes to be made, if you know what I mean.
Similarly, trying to make the ship seem more primitive than the NCC-1701 would have been ridiculous. Keep in mind that this is the series that posited that viewscreen technology didn't exist in the 2160s according to canon, despite the fact that we have viewscreen technology right now, and actually have had it since the 30s - the TRIBBLE had a primitive video telephone system, for cryin' out loud.
Again, how a technology looks has nothing to do with how advanced it is, and TOS suffers from immense zeerust as it is without deliberately invoking it. Hell, in Babylon 5 there's two entire species (the Narn and the Brakiri) who base their ship designs around the idea that if they look advanced then people will think they are advanced.
Since the last episode was done on the holodeck, they could always say that the simulation was wrong and continue the series afterwards, I read what they had planned for series 5 on memory alpha and I am annoyed Enterprise did not continue. I hope there will be another series set in the prime universe, not set century or centuries after VOY/NEM but years or a decade after VOY/NEM.
You can't really continue on with ENT, though, not without a 10-year time jump - none of the actors are as young as they used to be. (Of course, since Bakula's currently tied up with NCIS: New Orleans, they could always take this opportunity to have all the people get promotions, so that, say, Captain Reed is in command now, with his first officer Commander Mayweather, and maybe occasional cameos from Admiral Archer or Ambassador T'Pol...)
You can't really continue on with ENT, though, not without a 10-year time jump - none of the actors are as young as they used to be. (Of course, since Bakula's currently tied up with NCIS: New Orleans, they could always take this opportunity to have all the people get promotions, so that, say, Captain Reed is in command now, with his first officer Commander Mayweather, and maybe occasional cameos from Admiral Archer or Ambassador T'Pol...)
you wouldnt have to counter the entire 10 years. in any case, 10 years was exactly the time depicted in the finale, so it would be too difficult to simply pick up there.
i would be over the moon if ENT made a return! reed was only a lt though. its more likely t'pol or trip would take the captains chair ten years after. most likely trip as hes the human.
you wouldnt have to counter the entire 10 years. in any case, 10 years was exactly the time depicted in the finale, so it would be too difficult to simply pick up there.
Don't you remember from the previous posts? We're assuming that "finale" was a flawed holodeck simulation, and disregarding it!
And if we do take it into account, Trip can't command the ship, as he's suffering from a chronic case of death.
According to the novels though, that's a Section 31 coverup.
Specifically he went undercover in the Romulan Empire to sabotage their Warp-7 project for reasons that the latest Enterprise novel specifically point out don't really make sense - but, on the plus side, he's alive. I'll take any contrived circumstances needed to undo "These Are the Voyages."
Comments
Okay, here's the wormhole thing - "wormhole" is a popular name for a hypothetical structure called an "Einstein-Rosen bridge". It's hypothetically possible that there are such shortcuts tunneling "under" (for lack of a better word) normal space-time; the problem with using them as shortcuts is the fact that the theory which predicts them also predicts that they will only form between black holes. There must be a gravitational singularity at each end of such a thing. (When asked to provide an FTL drive for Jerry Pournelle's CoDominium stories, Dr. Dan Alderson seized on this theory, hypothesizing further a sort of "tramline" that might form between certain stars.)
(Note further the use of the word "hypothesis" - the math works, but there is exactly no empirical data to raise this to the level of "theory".)
So you can't just have a wormhole "open up", jump into it, and slide safely out the other end - there's going to be some pretty serious masses saying "no" at each end.
Obviously, astrophysics functions differently in Trek, because they patently do have wormholes sans singularities.
Join us next time on "IT DOES NOT WORK THAT WAY!!", when we'll be covering the idea of sensors detecting something light-years away in real time.
Yes, but Seven wasn't showing her TRIBBLE crack to prove she was naked.
I don't know if your trying to defend Enterprise, or purposely splitting hairs for the sake of splitting hairs... but, I've made my point. Star Trek has had a long history of oversexualizing women, and Enterprise continued that sad tradition by pushing the envelope even further, instead of breaking away from it. The point is it's unnecessary.
Keep splitting hairs and making excuses, but I'm done beating this dead horse.
Well, the sensors I put up to subspace (AKA technobabble BS/tacked-on physics). When you tack on subspace to everything else...eh, it's a convenient excuse that's vague enough to slide in under my suspension of disbelief. Barely.
As for the Einstein-Rosen Bridge thing...true. The Bajoran Wormhole I let go because physical gods inside it, but...eh, I LOVE the idea of wormholes, but Trek tends to handle them...poorly. Sometimes well, but often poorly.
You're breaking my immersion. :P
I would point out that Kip Thorne has done a lot of research on how to make a wormhole safely traversable. It involves "exotic matter" holding open the "throat" of the wormhole so you don't get crushed by the singularity.
The first 3 season were filled with crazy, stupid and TRIBBLE.
But man, season 4 DID hit out out of the park.
Its like stargate universe. Up until the timesplit it was utter unmitigated shiite. But after that episode: WHAM: quality sci fi and then the network murdered it.
That teaches one lesson though:
MAKE A GOOD SHOW RIGHT FROM THE START!
I feel that's basically impossible.
You say that they should make a good show right out of the starting gate, well...Go back and watch the first season of any show you like. I mean REALLY watch it. Look it over carefully and see, is it really as good as you think it might've been?
Practically every show I can think of tended to flounder at least a BIT early in it's run, not doing quite as well as it would later on. As a couple examples, I recently re-watched Firefly just cuz, and I still enjoyed it all, but since it is the first and only season of the show, I found myself wishing it had continued because I felt it needed to do 'more'. Or another show I like: Warehouse 13, which after re-looking over it's first season, was a bit on the boring side as well compared to when it got going in later seasons.
All five ST series feel the same way in their first season. Some even spreading further into the second or nearly to their third before they got on their feet.
Chief difference though, SGU was getting very good in the second season whereas ENT, as reported, only had that upswing in season 4. Meaning, SGU wasn't actually given much of a chance at all (especially with SyFylis switching around the night) while ENT had used up all of its good will.
Heroes had the opposite effect. First season was good, then it degraded from there. It is as if the creator only designed the show for one season and had to rush out new seasons because they didn't think Heroes would be that successful.
i actually get jazzed up when i hear the intro music of 'in a mirror darkly'
btw my fav of what little of enterprise that i've seen
Yeah, that theme song and Archer's theme are far better songs than Faith of the Heart.
and OP, i hate to break it to you, but ent is and always will be canon, no matter how badly you wish it werent.
free jkname
Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!
The lyrics to Faith of the Heart does fit people involved in Space Exploration which is why I don't have a problem with it, but Star Trek has always used instrumental music with voiceovers in TOS and TNG or without voiceovers in DS9 and Voyager.
Oh yeah, forgot about that. Remember enjoying the first season and that whole 'save the cheerleader, save the world' thing got seriously stuck in my head, even now, years later.
Never said that I wished Ent was non-canon. Merely proposing a hypothesis that maybe, just maybe what we instead saw was...historical revision from Archer that made him look better, at the cost of everyone else. Doesn't it kind of fill in some of the more annoying holes of the show, at least in regards to the first couple seasons?
There's plenty of Ent I like. Season 3 I will gladly sit and watch or put on in the backround, same for a majority of season 4. There's a...few, bits out of season 1 and 2 I even like. I don't despise the whole show. If anything, I more am disappointed by it looking back, now that it's been a decade since it's cancellation.
The thing about Enterprise's demise is coupled with failing channel (UPN) that turned into a mess of talk shows and WWE shows with Enterprise being given bad timeslots, to the greater availability of the intenet to the show actually going to be cancelled in the second season and then the third season.
If Enterprise was released in the 90s, it would have went a full seven seasons, because there was really nothing different from the other Trek series if you actually look at it, but twenty plus years of the same old against the likes of SG1, BSG, and Farscape killed it.
uhh yeah. i already buried your point before you decided to dump half the quote down the toilet, so whatever the hell you are going on about, dont let me stop you.
Been around since Dec 2010 on STO and bought LTS in Apr 2013 for STO.
I think ENTs biggest failure was the fact it was a prequel. They almost never do well. The only prequel that I know of that did well was Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom.
Prequels tend to mess with established canon way too much and just makes your head hurt trying to reconcile things, in universe. Like self sealing EVA suits in ENT while Worf in First Contact had to tie off his EVA suit. I mean really? That technology wouldn't be used in the 24th century but is being used in the 22nd?
But what truly turned me against ENT was that episode where the Borg landed on Earth. My mind. Oh my mind. It hurts to much on so many levels.
Okay maybe for some unbelievable reason this was covered up and no one ever gets told about it. Wouldn't you think, whatever that reason was, it might have been important to bring up the fact that proto-Star fleet had encountered the BORG before? Okay, yeah it's 200 years later by the time we get to Encounter at Far Point, but we know that ship captains know all sorts of classified things. Like Omega Particles. Or randomly having the defense grid codes to a planetary system they aren't even stationed at. (Chains of Command. Really Picard, why do you know those codes if you aren't an active part of the defense force stationed there?)
Right point being that prequels tend to murder continuity something fierce which is part of why they tend to do poorly. As fun as it might be to see a hero on his path to being a hero, sometimes it's just better to leave it up to the imagination or be told only small bits of it.
This. SO much this.
Actually, it was only the series finale that was on the holodeck. There is far too much in the show that Archer would not reveal to Starfleet because it would either make him look bad or they would force him before a psychologist to determine if he is no longer fit to be a Captain.
I would disagree. While I love the NX design, a Daedalus-like ship would have fit the premise of the show while the NX fits into the let's do everything the same motif that the show became. The pilot was a mixture of this is a prequel but its still the same pretty much making Enterprise a confused identity right off the start.
I touched on that: however much it might have fit, the Daedalus is an ugly, ugly ship design. Whatever the premise of the show, it's not gonna succeed if it's being frontlined by something that practically begs for Lance Armstrong jokes to be made, if you know what I mean.
Similarly, trying to make the ship seem more primitive than the NCC-1701 would have been ridiculous. Keep in mind that this is the series that posited that viewscreen technology didn't exist in the 2160s according to canon, despite the fact that we have viewscreen technology right now, and actually have had it since the 30s - the TRIBBLE had a primitive video telephone system, for cryin' out loud.
Again, how a technology looks has nothing to do with how advanced it is, and TOS suffers from immense zeerust as it is without deliberately invoking it. Hell, in Babylon 5 there's two entire species (the Narn and the Brakiri) who base their ship designs around the idea that if they look advanced then people will think they are advanced.
That's what the books have done. And the current "Rise of the Federation" arc is legitimately some of the best science fiction I have read.
you wouldnt have to counter the entire 10 years. in any case, 10 years was exactly the time depicted in the finale, so it would be too difficult to simply pick up there.
i would be over the moon if ENT made a return! reed was only a lt though. its more likely t'pol or trip would take the captains chair ten years after. most likely trip as hes the human.
free jkname
Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!
And if we do take it into account, Trip can't command the ship, as he's suffering from a chronic case of death.
According to the novels though, that's a Section 31 coverup.
Specifically he went undercover in the Romulan Empire to sabotage their Warp-7 project for reasons that the latest Enterprise novel specifically point out don't really make sense - but, on the plus side, he's alive. I'll take any contrived circumstances needed to undo "These Are the Voyages."