A normie goes "Oh, what's this?"
An otaku goes "UwU, what's this?"
A furry goes "OwO, what's this?"
A werewolf goes "Awoo, what's this?"
"It's nothing personal, I just don't feel like I've gotten to know a person until I've sniffed their crotch." "We said 'no' to Mr. Curiosity. We're not home. Curiosity is not welcome, it is not to be invited in. Curiosity...is bad. It gets you in trouble, it gets you killed, and more importantly...it makes you poor!"
Passion and Serenity are one.
I gain power by understanding both.
In the chaos of their battle, I bring order.
I am a shadow, darkness born from light.
The Force is united within me.
LOVE the Enterprise - familiar yet different; a real work of art!
(Sadly I suspect it will cause rage on some fronts)
Idk, I think it was done well enough that any rage will be minimal, especially when the most hardcore of TOS fans stop to
compare it to the JJPrise or even the wireframe we saw of the Terran modified USS Defiant
It could have been an abomination, but instead they gave us a real beauty!
Yes...I was REALLY nervous about what they MIGHT have done the connie prior to this.
What's wrong with Ryan Church's take on the original design though?
Matt Jeffries' work is an iconic piece of art, but as all iconic art, people later re-imagine and re-invent it. It doesn't take the original away or make it void.
Dr. Miranda Jones: I understand, Mr. Spock. The glory of creation is in its infinite diversity.
Mr. Spock: And the ways our differences combine, to create meaning and beauty.
Watched it again and I'm just flabbergasted how lazy the writing was when it comes to ending the Klingon war. Just why? Why would they follow L'Rell? They can kill her in her sleep, they can shoot down her shuttle, blow up her ship when she leaves Qo'noS and the whole struggle will start again. And just how could Starfleet be certain she wouldn't unite the houses and then continue the war against the Federation? There was no guaratee whatsoever that she would. This plot is so full of holes you might as well call it inverse Swiss cheese.
Watched it again and I'm just flabbergasted how lazy the writing was when it comes to ending the Klingon war. Just why? Why would they follow L'Rell? They can kill her in her sleep, they can shoot down her shuttle, blow up her ship when she leaves Qo'noS and the whole struggle will start again. And just how could Starfleet be certain she wouldn't unite the houses and then continue the war against the Federation? There was no guaratee whatsoever that she would. This plot is so full of holes you might as well call it inverse Swiss cheese.
Just... why?
Just the Klingon War arc? Everything in this series is rushed. A problem or potentially interesting new arc just appeared! The stakes are high and may take time to be solved! Writer used rushed and lazy writing! Arc is over in 1 or 2 episodes! On to the next arc!
Solving a war when the heroes are badly on the losing side in 2 episodes was only the logical next step.
Wanna bet that the next episode will be mostly about THE legendary ship and it'll never be heard of or seen again afterwards?
For me, this series' writing is on par with many other things nowadays: for people they think (rightfully or not) have the attention span of a goldfish. So everything has to be fast and change constantly so they don't lose even the slightest bit of interest, even if it makes most of the script look incredibly weak and rushed. I am pretty sure there is a chart that says they have to do this for hellload of money.
Even Voyager was better paced than this... Heck even Enterprise and that's saying something!
Could you imagine Enterprise using Discovery's pacing?
-ending of the last episode of the previous arc: "Hey, this mysterious race, the Sulibans are attacking us, 2 minutes before the credits!"
-1st episode: "So, thanks to Memory Alpha, we've learned the Sulibans actually follow a Future Guy, also Sphere Builders are trying to open an Expanse and destroy our space and are manipulating the Xindi using time travel, also said Xindi have a bit of infighting and some might be more reasonable than others! Off we go into this arc! Oh wait, just before the credits, Tucker is revealed to be a Suliban!"
-2nd episode: "Hey, I have this technobabble that could solve everything! Let's do it! Yay, Most Xindi are good guys now, the bad ones are killed, the Expanse is destroyed, the Sphere Builders are pushed back and forget about Future Guy and the Sulibans! And Tucker likes being human now!"
Watched it again and I'm just flabbergasted how lazy the writing was when it comes to ending the Klingon war. Just why? Why would they follow L'Rell? They can kill her in her sleep, they can shoot down her shuttle, blow up her ship when she leaves Qo'noS and the whole struggle will start again. And just how could Starfleet be certain she wouldn't unite the houses and then continue the war against the Federation? There was no guaratee whatsoever that she would. This plot is so full of holes you might as well call it inverse Swiss cheese.
Just... why?
Just the Klingon War arc? Everything in this series is rushed. A problem or potentially interesting new arc just appeared! The stakes are high and may take time to be solved! Writer used rushed and lazy writing! Arc is over in 1 or 2 episodes! On to the next arc!
Solving a war when the heroes are badly on the losing side in 2 episodes was only the logical next step.
I had the same feeling.
- Commander Landry is a badass and conflict between her and Burnham is almost guaranteed. I'm curious to see more about her. Boom she's dead.
- Oh, Culber and Stamets are in a relationship. This could make for some interesting character development in the future. Boom, Culber is dead.
- Lorca is from the Mirror Universe and he might become the next Emperor. This could lead to some interesting stories in the next season. Boom, dead as well.
- Big reveal, Tyler is in fact Voq in a human body. I wonder how this is gonna play out. Boom, Voq is dead.
And who are we left with? Burnham, Saru, Stamets, Tilly and a bunch of cardboard cutouts on the bridge. Seriously, so far they got as much character development and face time as the fish in Picard's ready room.
The TNG viewscreen was a window???? The TMP viewscreen was a window? Oh...okay then.
Well, TNG literally had a window on the ceiling, so...
Aside from that, I actually think this modern interpretation is more practical. It's NOT merely a window. It's NOT merely a viewscreen. It's both. It's a large piece of transparent aluminum, augmented by a sophisticated HUD system. And the reason why this wasn't explicitly stated in canon before is because the writers/producers couldn't conceive of it like that, or because they couldn't afford to make it look like that.
If it's just a big flat screen monitor built into a wall... that's not much different from what we have available in today's world.
thing is, a big, flat-screen monitor built into a wall doesn't create a big weak spot in your forward structure open to radiation, lethal levels of visible light, etc. etc. etc.
a "Monitor bridge' can be set deep inside the hull and thus, not be the first thing that gets smashed by incoming asteroids, particles, torpedoes, explosives, weapons fire, etc. etc. etc.
Yeah, because this "deep into the hull" and "not-a-weak-spot" worked very well on ships in previous canon. Like when the Enterprise-E's bridge was shot at... The no-window-viewscreen was totally not the first thing to go in the first direct hit.
Here. Totally not a weakspot, and that crewman agrees.
Starfleet bridges are the safest bridges ever and the helmsmen love them.
Regarding the window/view screen discussion, is it not possible that there's both? As rightly stated, glass (or whatever other material that's used here) would seemingly be fragile for the command centre of a starship, even if a ship has shields and deflector arrays or emitters to pave away space dust and the like (unless you're a Miranda Class - they don't come with shields)
But yeah, couldn't a bridge (especially TNG era) not have a window, but rather a wall with sensors or cameras (or something similar) that are capable of projecting the outside to a view screen? That way, bridge officers can literally see where they're going and can bring someone up on the view screen if it's required.
All that said, in the grand scheme of things, if a ship is that messed up that a window can be blown through, the ship in question is going to be in pretty bad shape anyway, and if it's a case of a one hit wonder, one would think forcefields would be in place.
thing is, a big, flat-screen monitor built into a wall doesn't create a big weak spot in your forward structure open to radiation, lethal levels of visible light, etc. etc. etc.
a "Monitor bridge' can be set deep inside the hull and thus, not be the first thing that gets smashed by incoming asteroids, particles, torpedoes, explosives, weapons fire, etc. etc. etc.
Yeah, because this "deep into the hull" and "not-a-weak-spot" worked very well on ships in previous canon. Like when the Enterprise-E's bridge was shot at... The no-window-viewscreen was totally not the first thing to go in the first direct hit.
Here. Totally not a weakspot, and that crewman agrees.
Starfleet bridges are the safest bridges ever and the helmsmen love them.
However, Starfleet bridges are a perfect example of how a "monitor bridge" can still be placed on the outside, where it is vulnerable to being smashed by incoming asteroids, particles, torpedoes, explosives, weapons fire, etc., etc., etc..
That being said, Starfleet implementations of the "monitor bridge" concept are still a lot better insulated against the radiation and lethal levels of visible light Patrick initially mentioned.
Infinite possibilities have implications that could not be completely understood if you turned this entire universe into a giant supercomputer.
thing is, a big, flat-screen monitor built into a wall doesn't create a big weak spot in your forward structure open to radiation, lethal levels of visible light, etc. etc. etc.
a "Monitor bridge' can be set deep inside the hull and thus, not be the first thing that gets smashed by incoming asteroids, particles, torpedoes, explosives, weapons fire, etc. etc. etc.
Yeah, because this "deep into the hull" and "not-a-weak-spot" worked very well on ships in previous canon. Like when the Enterprise-E's bridge was shot at... The no-window-viewscreen was totally not the first thing to go in the first direct hit.
Here. Totally not a weakspot, and that crewman agrees.
Starfleet bridges are the safest bridges ever and the helmsmen love them.
However, Starfleet bridges are a perfect example of how a "monitor bridge" can still be placed on the outside, where it is vulnerable to being smashed by incoming asteroids, particles, torpedoes, explosives, weapons fire, etc., etc., etc..
That being said, Starfleet implementations of the "monitor bridge" concept are still a lot better insulated against the radiation and lethal levels of visible light Patrick initially mentioned.
Are you kidding? The viewscreens are built so close to the main hull around the bridge, they could just as well be windows made of aluminium-alloy. Kirk would have *loved* one of those in the Mutara-nebula, I bet on that. If radiation would be such a problem, hulls would be thicker and bridges would not be in little domes on top or below saucer-sections... Star Trek is not "HARD-Sci-fi" (if it were, places like ten-forward would have had no aluminium-alloy windows at all for example, but an extra layer of lead).
thing is, a big, flat-screen monitor built into a wall doesn't create a big weak spot in your forward structure open to radiation, lethal levels of visible light, etc. etc. etc.
a "Monitor bridge' can be set deep inside the hull and thus, not be the first thing that gets smashed by incoming asteroids, particles, torpedoes, explosives, weapons fire, etc. etc. etc.
Yeah, because this "deep into the hull" and "not-a-weak-spot" worked very well on ships in previous canon. Like when the Enterprise-E's bridge was shot at... The no-window-viewscreen was totally not the first thing to go in the first direct hit.
Here. Totally not a weakspot, and that crewman agrees.
Starfleet bridges are the safest bridges ever and the helmsmen love them.
However, Starfleet bridges are a perfect example of how a "monitor bridge" can still be placed on the outside, where it is vulnerable to being smashed by incoming asteroids, particles, torpedoes, explosives, weapons fire, etc., etc., etc..
That being said, Starfleet implementations of the "monitor bridge" concept are still a lot better insulated against the radiation and lethal levels of visible light Patrick initially mentioned.
Are you kidding? The viewscreens are built so close to the main hull around the bridge, they could just as well be windows made of aluminium-alloy. Kirk would have *loved* one of those in the Mutara-nebula, I bet on that. If radiation would be such a problem, hulls would be thicker and bridges would not be in little domes on top or below saucer-sections...
Regardless, ten inches of duranium, tritanium or whatever new alloy Starfleet comes up is a hell of a lot stronger than ten inches of transparent aluminum. (You're also still ignoring the increased difficulty of filtering overwhelming amounts of light in time to protect the crew from potentially blinding or fatal effects.)
Infinite possibilities have implications that could not be completely understood if you turned this entire universe into a giant supercomputer.
However, Starfleet bridges are a perfect example of how a "monitor bridge" can still be placed on the outside, where it is vulnerable to being smashed by incoming asteroids, particles, torpedoes, explosives, weapons fire, etc., etc., etc..
The likes of asteroids, space dust and particles are deflected away from the ship(s) by their deflector arrays and/or emitters.
Regardless, ten inches of duranium, tritanium or whatever new alloy Starfleet comes up is a hell of a lot stronger than ten inches of transparent aluminum. (You're also still ignoring the increased difficulty of filtering overwhelming amounts of light in time to protect the crew from potentially blinding or fatal effects.)
They can filter light. In the pilot of DIS they mentioned that the filter is "at maximum" when the beacon was lit.
The TNG viewscreen was a window???? The TMP viewscreen was a window? Oh...okay then.
Well, TNG literally had a window on the ceiling, so...
Aside from that, I actually think this modern interpretation is more practical. It's NOT merely a window. It's NOT merely a viewscreen. It's both. It's a large piece of transparent aluminum, augmented by a sophisticated HUD system. And the reason why this wasn't explicitly stated in canon before is because the writers/producers couldn't conceive of it like that, or because they couldn't afford to make it look like that.
If it's just a big flat screen monitor built into a wall... that's not much different from what we have available in today's world.
thing is, a big, flat-screen monitor built into a wall doesn't create a big weak spot in your forward structure open to radiation, lethal levels of visible light, etc. etc. etc.
a "Monitor bridge' can be set deep inside the hull and thus, not be the first thing that gets smashed by incoming asteroids, particles, torpedoes, explosives, weapons fire, etc. etc. etc.
a really good display is sensorily indistinguishable from a window, especially when you can't roll it down and let th e wind blow through your hair because Hey, we're in vacuum and opening the window is a BAD IDEA.
so is having ten square meters of weak point right in the middle of your command and control hub.
Except that "windows" in Trek are NOT MADE OF GLASS.
Transparent Aluminum is a thing. You only assume it's a weak point, because of your current context as a 21st-century human that doesn't know what Transparent Aluminum really is.
The TNG viewscreen was a window???? The TMP viewscreen was a window? Oh...okay then.
Well, TNG literally had a window on the ceiling, so...
Aside from that, I actually think this modern interpretation is more practical. It's NOT merely a window. It's NOT merely a viewscreen. It's both. It's a large piece of transparent aluminum, augmented by a sophisticated HUD system. And the reason why this wasn't explicitly stated in canon before is because the writers/producers couldn't conceive of it like that, or because they couldn't afford to make it look like that.
If it's just a big flat screen monitor built into a wall... that's not much different from what we have available in today's world.
thing is, a big, flat-screen monitor built into a wall doesn't create a big weak spot in your forward structure open to radiation, lethal levels of visible light, etc. etc. etc.
a "Monitor bridge' can be set deep inside the hull and thus, not be the first thing that gets smashed by incoming asteroids, particles, torpedoes, explosives, weapons fire, etc. etc. etc.
a really good display is sensorily indistinguishable from a window, especially when you can't roll it down and let th e wind blow through your hair because Hey, we're in vacuum and opening the window is a BAD IDEA.
so is having ten square meters of weak point right in the middle of your command and control hub.
Except that "windows" in Trek are NOT MADE OF GLASS.
Transparent Aluminum is a thing. You only assume it's a weak point, because of your current context as a 21st-century human that doesn't know what Transparent Aluminum really is.
It's even funnier if you consider that thanks to Scotty, transparent aluminium already existed in the late 1980's :P
personally I'd also bet that especially for the alloy that is the bridge-viewer/window, the material is augmented with whatever other elements reinforce it, plus it seems like it's very thick. Also, Starfleet-ships ALWAYS have the SIF (structural integrity-field) active when not docked. Voyager's 'Year of hell' shows you what happens if they don't.
Regardless, ten inches of duranium, tritanium or whatever new alloy Starfleet comes up is a hell of a lot stronger than ten inches of transparent aluminum. (You're also still ignoring the increased difficulty of filtering overwhelming amounts of light in time to protect the crew from potentially blinding or fatal effects.)
They can filter light. In the pilot of DIS they mentioned that the filter is "at maximum" when the beacon was lit.
They also do it on the Kelvin in 09. Polarise viewscreen.
Regardless, ten inches of duranium, tritanium or whatever new alloy Starfleet comes up is a hell of a lot stronger than ten inches of transparent aluminum.
You're gonna have to provide a citation for that. Half a metre of cotton wool is still softer than a centimetre of steal. Unless you have some relative figures for the toughness of duranium vs. transparent aluminium then you're just making that up.
Norway and Yeager dammit... I still want my Typhoon and Jupiter though. JJ Trek The Kelvin Timeline is just Trek and it's fully canon... get over it. But I still prefer TAR.
#TASforSTO
'...I can tell you that we're not in the military and that we intend no harm to the whales.' Kirk: The Voyage Home
'Starfleet is not a military organisation. Its purpose is exploration.' Picard: Peak Performance
'This is clearly a military operation. Is that what we are now? Because I thought we were explorers!' Scotty: Into Darkness
'...The Federation. Starfleet. We're not a military agency.' Scotty: Beyond
'I'm not a soldier anymore. I'm an engineer.' Miles O'Brien: Empok Nor
'...Starfleet could use you... It's a peacekeeping and humanitarian armada...' Admiral Pike: Star Trek
We don't even know if the windows are made of transparent aluminium . We just know they're transparent.
Transparent Aluminium was strong enough for the whales. That doesn't mean it's the material they used for their ship windows. For all we know, all those windows are made from a material 5 times tougher than the standard hull material, but also 50 times more resource-intensive to make, and thus still not standard ship building material.
If the people in Star Trek thing windows and bridges on the outside or paper-thin pylons leading to warp nacelles are a good idea, we can either assume that they are completely incompetent and don't know what they are doing, or that they know stuff we don't and they have reasons for thinking while this can work.
Star Trek Online Advancement: You start with lowbie gear, you end with Lobi gear.
We don't even know if the windows are made of transparent aluminium . We just know they're transparent.
Transparent Aluminium was strong enough for the whales. That doesn't mean it's the material they used for their ship windows. For all we know, all those windows are made from a material 5 times tougher than the standard hull material, but also 50 times more resource-intensive to make, and thus still not standard ship building material.
If the people in Star Trek thing windows and bridges on the outside or paper-thin pylons leading to warp nacelles are a good idea, we can either assume that they are completely incompetent and don't know what they are doing, or that they know stuff we don't and they have reasons for thinking while this can work.
for pylons, as Matt Jefferies and Doug Drexler spoke of that a highly advanced society would have building materials and techniques that are so far beyond OURS that they could make structures, and ships, in shape they like, including ships like the TOS connie, the Enterprise J and so on. That's another reason I love TOS so much.....smooth, sleek and showing off their 'UUMPH!" I mean the TOS Enterprise took a nuclear bomb at close range, and barely a scratch. |^_^\
We don't even know if the windows are made of transparent aluminium . We just know they're transparent.
Data, in "In Theory," states that the 1701-D's viewports were made of transparent aluminum.
Now, while that covers later Trek, we don't have directly-stated proof of its use for this purpose in the 23rd century... however, Scotty's reaction to the idea of using transparent aluminum in The Voyage Home strongly implies it's widely available in the 23rd century.
This also doesn't take into account the possibilities of differing "grades" of transparent aluminum. We just don't know.
A normie goes "Oh, what's this?"
An otaku goes "UwU, what's this?"
A furry goes "OwO, what's this?"
A werewolf goes "Awoo, what's this?"
"It's nothing personal, I just don't feel like I've gotten to know a person until I've sniffed their crotch." "We said 'no' to Mr. Curiosity. We're not home. Curiosity is not welcome, it is not to be invited in. Curiosity...is bad. It gets you in trouble, it gets you killed, and more importantly...it makes you poor!"
Passion and Serenity are one.
I gain power by understanding both.
In the chaos of their battle, I bring order.
I am a shadow, darkness born from light.
The Force is united within me.
Agreed! I like the way all the Discovery ships look.
While I personally feel that they have remained relatively faithful to the original design (certainly much more so than the non-Prime Connies we've seen over the past decade), and it is a pretty nice look... He's still wrong.
There's a distinction between "major in-universe overhaul" and "major out-of-universe overhaul" - the TMP Connie was portrayed as the former, the DSC Connie is portrayed as the latter.
Infinite possibilities have implications that could not be completely understood if you turned this entire universe into a giant supercomputer.
Comments
Ya know what? You're right! Too bad i was talking about the bridge.
original join date 2010
Member: Team Trekyards. Visit Trekyards today!
#LegalizeAwoo
A normie goes "Oh, what's this?"
An otaku goes "UwU, what's this?"
A furry goes "OwO, what's this?"
A werewolf goes "Awoo, what's this?"
"It's nothing personal, I just don't feel like I've gotten to know a person until I've sniffed their crotch."
"We said 'no' to Mr. Curiosity. We're not home. Curiosity is not welcome, it is not to be invited in. Curiosity...is bad. It gets you in trouble, it gets you killed, and more importantly...it makes you poor!"
original join date 2010
Member: Team Trekyards. Visit Trekyards today!
What's wrong with Ryan Church's take on the original design though?
Matt Jeffries' work is an iconic piece of art, but as all iconic art, people later re-imagine and re-invent it. It doesn't take the original away or make it void.
We meet again
Mr. Spock: And the ways our differences combine, to create meaning and beauty.
-Star Trek: Is There in Truth No Beauty? (1968)
Just... why?
Solving a war when the heroes are badly on the losing side in 2 episodes was only the logical next step.
Wanna bet that the next episode will be mostly about THE legendary ship and it'll never be heard of or seen again afterwards?
For me, this series' writing is on par with many other things nowadays: for people they think (rightfully or not) have the attention span of a goldfish. So everything has to be fast and change constantly so they don't lose even the slightest bit of interest, even if it makes most of the script look incredibly weak and rushed. I am pretty sure there is a chart that says they have to do this for hellload of money.
Even Voyager was better paced than this... Heck even Enterprise and that's saying something!
Could you imagine Enterprise using Discovery's pacing?
-ending of the last episode of the previous arc: "Hey, this mysterious race, the Sulibans are attacking us, 2 minutes before the credits!"
-1st episode: "So, thanks to Memory Alpha, we've learned the Sulibans actually follow a Future Guy, also Sphere Builders are trying to open an Expanse and destroy our space and are manipulating the Xindi using time travel, also said Xindi have a bit of infighting and some might be more reasonable than others! Off we go into this arc! Oh wait, just before the credits, Tucker is revealed to be a Suliban!"
-2nd episode: "Hey, I have this technobabble that could solve everything! Let's do it! Yay, Most Xindi are good guys now, the bad ones are killed, the Expanse is destroyed, the Sphere Builders are pushed back and forget about Future Guy and the Sulibans! And Tucker likes being human now!"
I had the same feeling.
- Commander Landry is a badass and conflict between her and Burnham is almost guaranteed. I'm curious to see more about her. Boom she's dead.
- Oh, Culber and Stamets are in a relationship. This could make for some interesting character development in the future. Boom, Culber is dead.
- Lorca is from the Mirror Universe and he might become the next Emperor. This could lead to some interesting stories in the next season. Boom, dead as well.
- Big reveal, Tyler is in fact Voq in a human body. I wonder how this is gonna play out. Boom, Voq is dead.
And who are we left with? Burnham, Saru, Stamets, Tilly and a bunch of cardboard cutouts on the bridge. Seriously, so far they got as much character development and face time as the fish in Picard's ready room.
Well, TNG literally had a window on the ceiling, so...
Aside from that, I actually think this modern interpretation is more practical. It's NOT merely a window. It's NOT merely a viewscreen. It's both. It's a large piece of transparent aluminum, augmented by a sophisticated HUD system. And the reason why this wasn't explicitly stated in canon before is because the writers/producers couldn't conceive of it like that, or because they couldn't afford to make it look like that.
If it's just a big flat screen monitor built into a wall... that's not much different from what we have available in today's world.
Yeah, because this "deep into the hull" and "not-a-weak-spot" worked very well on ships in previous canon. Like when the Enterprise-E's bridge was shot at... The no-window-viewscreen was totally not the first thing to go in the first direct hit.
Here. Totally not a weakspot, and that crewman agrees.
Starfleet bridges are the safest bridges ever and the helmsmen love them.
But yeah, couldn't a bridge (especially TNG era) not have a window, but rather a wall with sensors or cameras (or something similar) that are capable of projecting the outside to a view screen? That way, bridge officers can literally see where they're going and can bring someone up on the view screen if it's required.
All that said, in the grand scheme of things, if a ship is that messed up that a window can be blown through, the ship in question is going to be in pretty bad shape anyway, and if it's a case of a one hit wonder, one would think forcefields would be in place.
However, Starfleet bridges are a perfect example of how a "monitor bridge" can still be placed on the outside, where it is vulnerable to being smashed by incoming asteroids, particles, torpedoes, explosives, weapons fire, etc., etc., etc..
That being said, Starfleet implementations of the "monitor bridge" concept are still a lot better insulated against the radiation and lethal levels of visible light Patrick initially mentioned.
Infinite possibilities have implications that could not be completely understood if you turned this entire universe into a giant supercomputer.
Are you kidding? The viewscreens are built so close to the main hull around the bridge, they could just as well be windows made of aluminium-alloy. Kirk would have *loved* one of those in the Mutara-nebula, I bet on that. If radiation would be such a problem, hulls would be thicker and bridges would not be in little domes on top or below saucer-sections... Star Trek is not "HARD-Sci-fi" (if it were, places like ten-forward would have had no aluminium-alloy windows at all for example, but an extra layer of lead).
Regardless, ten inches of duranium, tritanium or whatever new alloy Starfleet comes up is a hell of a lot stronger than ten inches of transparent aluminum. (You're also still ignoring the increased difficulty of filtering overwhelming amounts of light in time to protect the crew from potentially blinding or fatal effects.)
Infinite possibilities have implications that could not be completely understood if you turned this entire universe into a giant supercomputer.
They can filter light. In the pilot of DIS they mentioned that the filter is "at maximum" when the beacon was lit.
Except that "windows" in Trek are NOT MADE OF GLASS.
Transparent Aluminum is a thing. You only assume it's a weak point, because of your current context as a 21st-century human that doesn't know what Transparent Aluminum really is.
It's even funnier if you consider that thanks to Scotty, transparent aluminium already existed in the late 1980's :P
personally I'd also bet that especially for the alloy that is the bridge-viewer/window, the material is augmented with whatever other elements reinforce it, plus it seems like it's very thick. Also, Starfleet-ships ALWAYS have the SIF (structural integrity-field) active when not docked. Voyager's 'Year of hell' shows you what happens if they don't.
They also do it on the Kelvin in 09. Polarise viewscreen.
You're gonna have to provide a citation for that. Half a metre of cotton wool is still softer than a centimetre of steal. Unless you have some relative figures for the toughness of duranium vs. transparent aluminium then you're just making that up.
Norway and Yeager dammit... I still want my Typhoon and Jupiter though.
JJ Trek The Kelvin Timeline is just Trek and it's fully canon... get over it. But I still prefer TAR.
#TASforSTO
'...I can tell you that we're not in the military and that we intend no harm to the whales.' Kirk: The Voyage Home
'Starfleet is not a military organisation. Its purpose is exploration.' Picard: Peak Performance
'This is clearly a military operation. Is that what we are now? Because I thought we were explorers!' Scotty: Into Darkness
'...The Federation. Starfleet. We're not a military agency.' Scotty: Beyond
'I'm not a soldier anymore. I'm an engineer.' Miles O'Brien: Empok Nor
'...Starfleet could use you... It's a peacekeeping and humanitarian armada...' Admiral Pike: Star Trek
Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!
Transparent Aluminium was strong enough for the whales. That doesn't mean it's the material they used for their ship windows. For all we know, all those windows are made from a material 5 times tougher than the standard hull material, but also 50 times more resource-intensive to make, and thus still not standard ship building material.
If the people in Star Trek thing windows and bridges on the outside or paper-thin pylons leading to warp nacelles are a good idea, we can either assume that they are completely incompetent and don't know what they are doing, or that they know stuff we don't and they have reasons for thinking while this can work.
for pylons, as Matt Jefferies and Doug Drexler spoke of that a highly advanced society would have building materials and techniques that are so far beyond OURS that they could make structures, and ships, in shape they like, including ships like the TOS connie, the Enterprise J and so on. That's another reason I love TOS so much.....smooth, sleek and showing off their 'UUMPH!" I mean the TOS Enterprise took a nuclear bomb at close range, and barely a scratch. |^_^\
Data, in "In Theory," states that the 1701-D's viewports were made of transparent aluminum.
Now, while that covers later Trek, we don't have directly-stated proof of its use for this purpose in the 23rd century... however, Scotty's reaction to the idea of using transparent aluminum in The Voyage Home strongly implies it's widely available in the 23rd century.
This also doesn't take into account the possibilities of differing "grades" of transparent aluminum. We just don't know.
#LegalizeAwoo
A normie goes "Oh, what's this?"
An otaku goes "UwU, what's this?"
A furry goes "OwO, what's this?"
A werewolf goes "Awoo, what's this?"
"It's nothing personal, I just don't feel like I've gotten to know a person until I've sniffed their crotch."
"We said 'no' to Mr. Curiosity. We're not home. Curiosity is not welcome, it is not to be invited in. Curiosity...is bad. It gets you in trouble, it gets you killed, and more importantly...it makes you poor!"
My character Tsin'xing
While I personally feel that they have remained relatively faithful to the original design (certainly much more so than the non-Prime Connies we've seen over the past decade), and it is a pretty nice look... He's still wrong.
There's a distinction between "major in-universe overhaul" and "major out-of-universe overhaul" - the TMP Connie was portrayed as the former, the DSC Connie is portrayed as the latter.
Infinite possibilities have implications that could not be completely understood if you turned this entire universe into a giant supercomputer.