The trope is possibly one of the most ancient in literature. Heck, just in reference to its use in Trek, it was deconstructed in "Charlie X"! (Charlie wanted to make a friend, but really didn't understand how it worked...)
Discovery may tailspin at some point, but a random video by an anonymous guy who is disguising his voice while citing anonymous industry sources is sort of beyond dubious, in every way imaginable.
Never allow facts and logic interfere with a good conspiracy theory. Or a bad one.
I can accept the alteration of art even if I don't like the style they chose. The TOS Klingons were a product of their era as much as Worf was a product of his. That's okay.
One thing I do dislike is the constant revisionism, and by far lesser talents who are clueless about their subject. There is ample room in the Trekverse for new stories, but it seems everyone wants to rewrite what other, greater, minds before them wrote, and at each stage of revision the storyline becomes less coherent.
Khan can transport to Klingon space from Earth? Umm, why do they need a starship? And why haven't the Klingons transported to Earth and killed everyone who tried to fight back?
My favorite revision is the erasure of the Sublight Colonial era from the Trekverse. Not only did it kill hundreds of potential stories, including canon details described by Kirk, Spock, and Lt.Kyle on screen, the supposed war shown in the revision did absolutely nothing better than the original, and indeed introduced issues of its own which remain unexplained as of the last aired episode of the TNG era stories.
I haven't seen enough of Discovery to go pointing out its revisions of canon, but I don't count art changes as a revision. I count them as a style choice. After all, none of us has ever seen a Klingon. Who's to say, (other than the latest producer,) what they really look like?
But we do know the Trek story. And it looks like Daniels is the only one with a coherent explanation for it: they all happened, even the ones which contradict each other, in their own time lines
STID mentions that the transwarp beaming tech was confiscated by Starfleet. I imagine that tech wasn’t readily available to the Klingons. I also imagine that since the equipment doesn’t transwarp with the person many of the galactic governments would be reluctant to send troops on a one way trip
Your pain runs deep.
Let us explore it... together. Each man hides a secret pain. It must be exposed and reckoned with. It must be dragged from the darkness and forced into the light. Share your pain. Share your pain with me... and gain strength from the sharing.
STID mentions that the transwarp beaming tech was confiscated by Starfleet. I imagine that tech wasn’t readily available to the Klingons.
Yeah, see, here's the thing: the Klingons had transporters hundreds of years before humans and never developed it? That's akin to saying that without Newton we'd never have had calculus.
Anything one mind can conceive another can as well.
The only thing that's been "contradicted" so far is Spock's claim to Chekov, in "The Tholian Web" that there had never been a mutiny in Starfleet's history - but considering that this is also contradicted by two earlier TOS episodes ("The Menagerie", in which Spock commandeers the Enterprise against orders for the express purpose of violating "the only remaining death-penalty crime", and "The Paradise Syndrome", in which the entire crew rebelled against Kirk due to the influence of the spores)...
True but according to the movies transwarp beaming was developed by Scotty
> @brian334 said: > khan5000 wrote: » > > STID mentions that the transwarp beaming tech was confiscated by Starfleet. I imagine that tech wasn’t readily available to the Klingons. > > > > > Yeah, see, here's the thing: the Klingons had transporters hundreds of years before humans and never developed it? That's akin to saying that without Newton we'd never have had calculus. > > Anything one mind can conceive another can as well.
True but it doesn’t mean they conceive it at the same time. Enterprise is an example of this as humans discovered warp but hadn’t figured out how to go past warp 5. As the movie states Scotty was experimenting with it before the movie started but didn’t perfect it until the post TNG era
Your pain runs deep.
Let us explore it... together. Each man hides a secret pain. It must be exposed and reckoned with. It must be dragged from the darkness and forced into the light. Share your pain. Share your pain with me... and gain strength from the sharing.
The only thing that's been "contradicted" so far is Spock's claim to Chekov, in "The Tholian Web" that there had never been a mutiny in Starfleet's history - but considering that this is also contradicted by two earlier TOS episodes ("The Menagerie", in which Spock commandeers the Enterprise against orders for the express purpose of violating "the only remaining death-penalty crime", and "The Paradise Syndrome", in which the entire crew rebelled against Kirk due to the influence of the spores)...
In the TOS pilot, redone as a regular part of the series in Season 1 The Menagerie, the helmsman tells the crew of an 18 year old wreck that "We've broken the time barrier," which is what Warp Drive, (called Time Warp in that episode,) does in allowing FTL travel. This indicated that Warp Drive was less than 18 years old at the time of The Cage. The comic retconed this and that retcon runs through the entire rest of the series.
In the very first TOS encounter with the Romulans, the ship was operating on "Impulse Drive alone," and had no warp capability. This was a major plot point. The Romulan ship was even described as the newest ship in the fleet. In Enterprise, long before the TOS era, the Romulans are remote piloting warp capable vessels which outclass anything Starfleet has. In this same episode we hear Spock conjecture that Romulans may indeed be an offshoot of his Vulcan family tree, which he should have known because Romulans were walking around Vulcan in the Ent era, and the opposing faction from the one they were in cahoots with were the ones who came to power and exposed all their deep dark secrets.
In the episode where Kirk meets Dr. Cochrane, he was Zefram Cochrane of Alpha Centauri, but in the movie and later in Enterprise, Earth had no colonies off Earth when the warp drive was first built, over a century before the Time Warp was developed in TOS, and Zefram Cochrane was from Montana, apparently.
There are more, but these stand out. The thing is that every single one of these revisions was unnecessary, and by retconning them huge chunks of story potential were eliminated. The period between the launch of Botany Bay and the invention of Warp Drive was reduced from centuries to months, eliminating the potential for an Age of Sail era of colonization, expansion, and all the fun that goes with it.
It happened. It is what it is. But it's just a pet peeve of mine that the effort to retcon could have been put into original stories that didn't conflict with and contradict what came before.
I can’t speak on the inconsistency with Enterprise but I will say that during TOS Roddenberry and crew were just making it up as they go and it never was consistent within itself.
Your pain runs deep.
Let us explore it... together. Each man hides a secret pain. It must be exposed and reckoned with. It must be dragged from the darkness and forced into the light. Share your pain. Share your pain with me... and gain strength from the sharing.
I can’t speak on the inconsistency with Enterprise but I will say that during TOS Roddenberry and crew were just making it up as they go and it never was consistent within itself.
This is an important consideration. Back then, "canon" for a TV show was about fairly consistent characterization, not trivial details of background history. Shows could be aired in any order at all, so it was important at the time not to have a heavy mytharc, and worrying too much about what an earlier script said about what was where slowed down production (as you couldn't just look it up on the internet...). That's where my question on another "canon" thread came from - "Does Vulcan have a moon?" The answer is, it depends.
On reflection, and after typing the above, I'm reminded of a story that Robert Heinlein once told, about attending a Worldcon in the '70s and speaking with a younger engineer about the work he put into things people scarcely noticed. The particular example was an orbital maneuver in The Rolling Stones; he and his wife Virginia worked through the ballistics calculations separately on two rolls of butcher paper, then swapped and double-checked each others' work.
The engineer asked him why he hadn't just run the problem through a computer.
"'My dear boy,' I said (I don't usually refer to Ph.D.s as 'my dear boy', they impress me too much, but this was a special occasion), 'my dear boy - this was 1947.'"
The engineer had the grace to blush.
I think something similar might be going on here, though - people forgetting about the advance of technology, and romanticizing the "continuity" of a show that never had it, not because no one cared, but because the ability to research such things quickly did not exist. Dorothy Fontana did her best, but she was just one woman, and home videorecording equipment was expensive and finicky at the time.
I quite agree, but by the time of TNG the TOS and TAS episodes were all readily available to the VHS/Beta enabled producer. TNG was the least of the offenders before the movies.
But later shows appeared to set out to 'correct' what had come before. These were intentional revisions, not accidental slips or oversights. The only time in TOS that Mr. Cochrane is mentioned, for example, he is called Zefram Cochrane of Alpha Centauri. It couldn't have been an oversight when they turned him into Zefram Cohrane of Montana. It was an unnecessary correction that required ignorance on the part of the writers and producers about the time it takes to get from Earth to its nearest neighbors.
(At 1G acceleration that's about 5 years. Plenty of time to build a pre-warp colonial civilization.)
I believe I have hijacked this thread, and I apologize to the OP. If anyone wants to continue this part of the discussion, message me or start a thread about it and I will happily contribute the dissenter's opinion.
(At 1G acceleration that's about 5 years. Plenty of time to build a pre-warp colonial civilization.)
It is not possible without some exotic technology since acceleration will slow down the closer you get to light speed. To accelerate to light speed at 1G acceleration would require an infinite amount of energy or use some exotic technology that keeps the mass of the ship at rest mass and not relativistic mass.
TOS contradicted itself every other episode. In one episode the Enterprise could hit Warp 14. In another she can't. The only thing that was consistant was the characters. The tech was not. I mean have we seen ship based phasers set to stun since TOS?
Starting in TNG we got more and more consistancy with the technology than we ever did in TOS. Cochrane still made the first Warp Drive, but the timing and location was altered to better fit a narrative that actually makes technological sense. The Romulan BoP in Balance of Terror had to have had a Warp Drive of some kind, but... it is possible that they were using a power core that Scotty didn't recognize, and thus theorized that they only had Impulse. IF it only had sublight capability... then how did it take out so many outposts before Enterprise caught her?
You have to remember that TOS was a product of the 60s. Many of the things they came up with made for good story, but technologically made no sense, even to itself. Saying that the Earth-Romulan War was fought with Nuclear weapons made sense in the 60s because those were the most devastating weapons known at the time it was written. Now... its possible that there were some use of nuclear tech, but when Enterprise was on the air, it clearly showed that Starfleet had access to the precursor to Phasers and Photon Torpedos. Starfleet's old Spacial Torps may have been nuclear based, and some old mining platforms may have had fusion power cores, but the starships had more advanced gear, which to a modern audience makes more sense.
Today people are relatively smarter about tech, so how things were done back in TOS would be a LOT more noticable. I mean my smart phone probably has more processing capability than a TOS PADD.
See, I'm not trying to say TOS was internally consistent. That is actually irrelevant to my point. My point is, later writers tried to retcon what came before into something that makes sense as we know it, and they didn't really understand the subject matter well enough to make such revisions.
Let's take Balance of Terror as an example. Sublight does not mean slow. With antimatter fuel and near 100% conversion there is a very long operating range available to a starship. It is certainly years between planets, but that is only an obstacle, not a prohibition, to space travel. The BoT writers certainly sent their little pride of the Romulan Fleet farther and faster than could have been achieved with our current technology, but as Patrick said, there's no reason we can't have a precursor technology to warp which allows very slow, by Trek standards, FTL.
The word impulse implies a reaction drive, but with inertial dampening technologies, which we can't do with our current understanding of physics, it might be possible that the local speed of light can be bent a bit. Stars do it, so it's physically possible even if we don't now how. Thus practical FTL without violating Einstein's concepts. I'm not saying that's how it worked, I'm saying there is a way it could have worked. Other possibilities are out there.
Instead, the modern writer is not a sci-fi nerd. He's a Goth kid who grew up believing everything is impossible. And because he lacks an imagination of his own, rather than create new stories he copies what has gone before, smugly certain that he is smarter than Harlan Ellison and Robert Heinlein, with a determination to prove it by 'fixing' their mistakes.
The issue is you are trying to work them into a coherent universe, and it just does not work that way. Heck, I don't think any series of Star Trek finished in the same timeline it started... TOS had several timeloops, and the only one that is for sure stable that I can remember right now is Star Trek Save The Whales, TNG totally reset the timeline with First Contact, Voyager, well, whatever timeline the show took place was irrevocably changed with the final episode, DS9 had several temporal incidents, ENT, well a major theme was the Temporal Cold War, which was all about changing the past to effect (note effect, not affect) the future...
Only STO actually tries to have stable timeloops, and even then the timeline actually changes in realtime...
It is a rumor. However it is a fact DSC is hysterically over budget and since CBS is footing the bill instead of NETFLIX, things could get dicy.
Is DSC going to cancel before the 2nd season airs? No. But if DSC doesn't really start bringing home the bacon, possibly.
Just the way I see it.
But! Before anyone else thinks it's doom and gloom, same circumstances for any show on the airwaves that gets into a situation like DSC is in now. So if DSC really doesn't bring it in, yes white knights, it could more than likely be canceled.
It is a possibility. But no more than any other show. Don't keep the blinders on with "everything is ok in Trekville."
Things are in a wait and see pattern with some real doubt out there.
At least acknowledge it.
Star Trek Battles member. Want to roll with a good group of people regardless of fleets and not have to worry about DPS while doing STFs? Come join the channel and join in the fun!
That's two articles that have budget concerns. And I can't find the one, but 1 I read said that the first 5 episdoes were WAY past budget.
That's a problem.
Star Trek Battles member. Want to roll with a good group of people regardless of fleets and not have to worry about DPS while doing STFs? Come join the channel and join in the fun!
Running over budget isn't a problem (long term) if it generates a return - look at The Motion Picture, original budget of $15m, nearing twice over budget before the Hollywood fudge-accounting, return of over $200 million worldwide.
> @cbrjwrr said: > Running over budget isn't a problem (long term) if it generates a return - look at The Motion Picture, original budget of $15m, nearing twice over budget before the Hollywood fudge-accounting, return of over $200 million worldwide.
Hence the reason why I said if this second season doesn't bring home the bacon, DSC could be in serious trouble.
Is it in trouble now? Hard to say, but my personal 2 cents, not firing on all cylinders. And if the situation gets worse, especially since this was a former CEO project, new one could TRIBBLE can it.
We'll have to see.
Star Trek Battles member. Want to roll with a good group of people regardless of fleets and not have to worry about DPS while doing STFs? Come join the channel and join in the fun!
The only thing that's been "contradicted" so far is Spock's claim to Chekov, in "The Tholian Web" that there had never been a mutiny in Starfleet's history - but considering that this is also contradicted by two earlier TOS episodes ("The Menagerie", in which Spock commandeers the Enterprise against orders for the express purpose of violating "the only remaining death-penalty crime", and "The Paradise Syndrome", in which the entire crew rebelled against Kirk due to the influence of the spores)...
You'd think he would have remembered his own sister being the first mutineer in Starfleet history, in the process triggering a brutal war with the Klingons that the Federation nearly lost and that resulted in the deaths of billions and the decimation of Starfleet just a few years earlier. Evidently Vulcans have truly awful memories.
Yes, Trek continuity has always been a bit wobbly, but Discovery seems to actively take joy in trampling all over established Trek lore while insisting it's part of the Prime timeline.
IT's clearly a prequel only for the purposes of being able to occasionally drag out a CHARACTER OR THING THAT YOU REMEMBER! to pimp for subs, not because they wanted to tell a unique story in that era or had any respect or affection for TOS itself.
Except it wasn't the mutiny that started the war. Burnham was arrested before she could attack. The Klingons engaged, because that's [i]what they set out to do in the first place[/i]. From the moment Shenzhou stumbled across the beacon, T'Kuvma was dead-set on starting a war.
Except it wasn't the mutiny that started the war. Burnham was arrested before she could attack. The Klingons engaged, because that's what they set out to do in the first place. From the moment Shenzhou stumbled across the beacon, T'Kuvma was dead-set on starting a war.
But why let facts get in the way of a good rant.
The audience knows that, the characters don't. It was literally the second episode where some random prisoners on a transport not only recognized Burnham, but also immediately blamed her for starting the war.
Though I'm not really sure why you think that makes it better that Spock apparently totally forgot about his sister being the first mutineer in Starfleet history just a few years prior.
T'Kuvma started the war because he WANTED a war. Burnham is innocent of this. The only reason she gets the publicity she does is because of the mutiny. Its also apparently on her record that her parents were killed by Klingons, which made her motivations suspect because of potential emotional trauma.
Frankly there's nothing that could have prevented the war other than not even being there in the first place. But T'Kuvma would have found another way to start it anyways.
Also... the reason we never heard of Burnham before is the SAME reason we never heard of Sybok before ST5. Pretty much "You never asked".
Don't forget how Spock talked about Sybok. He can be rather precise compared to us humans generalizing things. He said he didn't have a brother. He had a Half-Brother. Same argument can be made about Burnham. "I don't have a sister. I have an adopted sister."
And Spock, being a logical individual, is likely to have at least read the Court Martial files (unlike a con). As for your second point? It's established in canon that Spock [i]does not[/i] reveal anything about his family without a good, immediate, cause. He never mentioned Sarek until Journey to Babel. He never mentioned being part of T'Pau's family until Amok Time. He never mentioned Sybok until The Final Frontier. Why is it so surprising he wouldn't mention his father's [i]ward[/i]?
EDIT: And Rattler beat me to it, though it is worth noting it isn't just Burnham and Sybok.
Hell, as I noted above, Spock conveniently forgot his own two mutinies. His memory was nothing if not selective.
And "running over budget on a few episodes" =/= "hilariously over budget for entire series". If that were the case, CSI would never have cleared its first season, and any series with a "special guest star" episode would be doomed (as "special guest stars" generally demand a bit more than guild scale to appear).
T'Kuvma started the war because he WANTED a war. Burnham is innocent of this. The only reason she gets the publicity she does is because of the mutiny. Its also apparently on her record that her parents were killed by Klingons, which made her motivations suspect because of potential emotional trauma.
Frankly there's nothing that could have prevented the war other than not even being there in the first place. But T'Kuvma would have found another way to start it anyways.
Again, the actual reasons for the war are not relevant. What matters is that people blamed Burnham for it.
Also... the reason we never heard of Burnham before is the SAME reason we never heard of Sybok before ST5. Pretty much "You never asked".
Don't forget how Spock talked about Sybok. He can be rather precise compared to us humans generalizing things. He said he didn't have a brother. He had a Half-Brother. Same argument can be made about Burnham. "I don't have a sister. I have an adopted sister."
Not comparable. Sybok was a nobody. He went off and founded some random cult on Vulcan that nobody except some vulcans cared about, he didn't become relevant to anyone or anything else until he went full coco puffs and took a bunch of diplomats hostage.(Let me clarify, before everyone thought he took a bunch of diplomats hostage, before everyone starts crying about how they weren't actually hostages and somehow that changes anything).
Burnham was the first mutineer in Starfleet history, who was BLAMED for starting a brutal war with the Klingons that resulted in billions of people dying, large swathes of the Federation being conquered, and the destruction of a third of Starfleet. And all of this just a few years prior to TOS, meaning all the TOS characters are very much alive and aware of what is happening.
Spock being tight-lipped is irrelevant, damn near everyone would know who Burnham is, and all of her super special snowflake background about being raised on Vulcan in the family of a powerful and influential Vulcan ambassador should be well known.
Only thing I can say about the Burnham mutiny is the fact I never would of had the mutiny.
Here's what I would of done. Vulcan Hello. Burnham gets the info goes to talk to her captain. Doesn't recommend a first stoke but instead recommends a defensive stance. Geogeriou does it and the attack happens.
Burnham and Georgiou leave to go get T'Kuvma and same break down happens. Georgiou is killed, and Burnham snaps and kills T'Kuvma. And then the attack gets white washed by Starfleet and Burnham gets blamed and hung out to dry because she killed T'Kuvma.
To sum it up, Burnham's mutiny served no purpose to the overall story.
Star Trek Battles member. Want to roll with a good group of people regardless of fleets and not have to worry about DPS while doing STFs? Come join the channel and join in the fun!
Comments
I can accept the alteration of art even if I don't like the style they chose. The TOS Klingons were a product of their era as much as Worf was a product of his. That's okay.
One thing I do dislike is the constant revisionism, and by far lesser talents who are clueless about their subject. There is ample room in the Trekverse for new stories, but it seems everyone wants to rewrite what other, greater, minds before them wrote, and at each stage of revision the storyline becomes less coherent.
Khan can transport to Klingon space from Earth? Umm, why do they need a starship? And why haven't the Klingons transported to Earth and killed everyone who tried to fight back?
My favorite revision is the erasure of the Sublight Colonial era from the Trekverse. Not only did it kill hundreds of potential stories, including canon details described by Kirk, Spock, and Lt.Kyle on screen, the supposed war shown in the revision did absolutely nothing better than the original, and indeed introduced issues of its own which remain unexplained as of the last aired episode of the TNG era stories.
I haven't seen enough of Discovery to go pointing out its revisions of canon, but I don't count art changes as a revision. I count them as a style choice. After all, none of us has ever seen a Klingon. Who's to say, (other than the latest producer,) what they really look like?
But we do know the Trek story. And it looks like Daniels is the only one with a coherent explanation for it: they all happened, even the ones which contradict each other, in their own time lines
I also imagine that since the equipment doesn’t transwarp with the person many of the galactic governments would be reluctant to send troops on a one way trip
Let us explore it... together. Each man hides a secret pain. It must be exposed and reckoned with. It must be dragged from the darkness and forced into the light. Share your pain. Share your pain with me... and gain strength from the sharing.
Yeah, see, here's the thing: the Klingons had transporters hundreds of years before humans and never developed it? That's akin to saying that without Newton we'd never have had calculus.
Anything one mind can conceive another can as well.
> @brian334 said:
> khan5000 wrote: »
>
> STID mentions that the transwarp beaming tech was confiscated by Starfleet. I imagine that tech wasn’t readily available to the Klingons.
>
>
>
>
> Yeah, see, here's the thing: the Klingons had transporters hundreds of years before humans and never developed it? That's akin to saying that without Newton we'd never have had calculus.
>
> Anything one mind can conceive another can as well.
True but it doesn’t mean they conceive it at the same time. Enterprise is an example of this as humans discovered warp but hadn’t figured out how to go past warp 5.
As the movie states Scotty was experimenting with it before the movie started but didn’t perfect it until the post TNG era
Let us explore it... together. Each man hides a secret pain. It must be exposed and reckoned with. It must be dragged from the darkness and forced into the light. Share your pain. Share your pain with me... and gain strength from the sharing.
In the TOS pilot, redone as a regular part of the series in Season 1 The Menagerie, the helmsman tells the crew of an 18 year old wreck that "We've broken the time barrier," which is what Warp Drive, (called Time Warp in that episode,) does in allowing FTL travel. This indicated that Warp Drive was less than 18 years old at the time of The Cage. The comic retconed this and that retcon runs through the entire rest of the series.
In the very first TOS encounter with the Romulans, the ship was operating on "Impulse Drive alone," and had no warp capability. This was a major plot point. The Romulan ship was even described as the newest ship in the fleet. In Enterprise, long before the TOS era, the Romulans are remote piloting warp capable vessels which outclass anything Starfleet has. In this same episode we hear Spock conjecture that Romulans may indeed be an offshoot of his Vulcan family tree, which he should have known because Romulans were walking around Vulcan in the Ent era, and the opposing faction from the one they were in cahoots with were the ones who came to power and exposed all their deep dark secrets.
In the episode where Kirk meets Dr. Cochrane, he was Zefram Cochrane of Alpha Centauri, but in the movie and later in Enterprise, Earth had no colonies off Earth when the warp drive was first built, over a century before the Time Warp was developed in TOS, and Zefram Cochrane was from Montana, apparently.
There are more, but these stand out. The thing is that every single one of these revisions was unnecessary, and by retconning them huge chunks of story potential were eliminated. The period between the launch of Botany Bay and the invention of Warp Drive was reduced from centuries to months, eliminating the potential for an Age of Sail era of colonization, expansion, and all the fun that goes with it.
It happened. It is what it is. But it's just a pet peeve of mine that the effort to retcon could have been put into original stories that didn't conflict with and contradict what came before.
Let us explore it... together. Each man hides a secret pain. It must be exposed and reckoned with. It must be dragged from the darkness and forced into the light. Share your pain. Share your pain with me... and gain strength from the sharing.
On reflection, and after typing the above, I'm reminded of a story that Robert Heinlein once told, about attending a Worldcon in the '70s and speaking with a younger engineer about the work he put into things people scarcely noticed. The particular example was an orbital maneuver in The Rolling Stones; he and his wife Virginia worked through the ballistics calculations separately on two rolls of butcher paper, then swapped and double-checked each others' work.
The engineer asked him why he hadn't just run the problem through a computer.
"'My dear boy,' I said (I don't usually refer to Ph.D.s as 'my dear boy', they impress me too much, but this was a special occasion), 'my dear boy - this was 1947.'"
The engineer had the grace to blush.
I think something similar might be going on here, though - people forgetting about the advance of technology, and romanticizing the "continuity" of a show that never had it, not because no one cared, but because the ability to research such things quickly did not exist. Dorothy Fontana did her best, but she was just one woman, and home videorecording equipment was expensive and finicky at the time.
But later shows appeared to set out to 'correct' what had come before. These were intentional revisions, not accidental slips or oversights. The only time in TOS that Mr. Cochrane is mentioned, for example, he is called Zefram Cochrane of Alpha Centauri. It couldn't have been an oversight when they turned him into Zefram Cohrane of Montana. It was an unnecessary correction that required ignorance on the part of the writers and producers about the time it takes to get from Earth to its nearest neighbors.
(At 1G acceleration that's about 5 years. Plenty of time to build a pre-warp colonial civilization.)
I believe I have hijacked this thread, and I apologize to the OP. If anyone wants to continue this part of the discussion, message me or start a thread about it and I will happily contribute the dissenter's opinion.
It is not possible without some exotic technology since acceleration will slow down the closer you get to light speed. To accelerate to light speed at 1G acceleration would require an infinite amount of energy or use some exotic technology that keeps the mass of the ship at rest mass and not relativistic mass.
Starting in TNG we got more and more consistancy with the technology than we ever did in TOS. Cochrane still made the first Warp Drive, but the timing and location was altered to better fit a narrative that actually makes technological sense. The Romulan BoP in Balance of Terror had to have had a Warp Drive of some kind, but... it is possible that they were using a power core that Scotty didn't recognize, and thus theorized that they only had Impulse. IF it only had sublight capability... then how did it take out so many outposts before Enterprise caught her?
You have to remember that TOS was a product of the 60s. Many of the things they came up with made for good story, but technologically made no sense, even to itself. Saying that the Earth-Romulan War was fought with Nuclear weapons made sense in the 60s because those were the most devastating weapons known at the time it was written. Now... its possible that there were some use of nuclear tech, but when Enterprise was on the air, it clearly showed that Starfleet had access to the precursor to Phasers and Photon Torpedos. Starfleet's old Spacial Torps may have been nuclear based, and some old mining platforms may have had fusion power cores, but the starships had more advanced gear, which to a modern audience makes more sense.
Today people are relatively smarter about tech, so how things were done back in TOS would be a LOT more noticable. I mean my smart phone probably has more processing capability than a TOS PADD.
Let's take Balance of Terror as an example. Sublight does not mean slow. With antimatter fuel and near 100% conversion there is a very long operating range available to a starship. It is certainly years between planets, but that is only an obstacle, not a prohibition, to space travel. The BoT writers certainly sent their little pride of the Romulan Fleet farther and faster than could have been achieved with our current technology, but as Patrick said, there's no reason we can't have a precursor technology to warp which allows very slow, by Trek standards, FTL.
The word impulse implies a reaction drive, but with inertial dampening technologies, which we can't do with our current understanding of physics, it might be possible that the local speed of light can be bent a bit. Stars do it, so it's physically possible even if we don't now how. Thus practical FTL without violating Einstein's concepts. I'm not saying that's how it worked, I'm saying there is a way it could have worked. Other possibilities are out there.
Instead, the modern writer is not a sci-fi nerd. He's a Goth kid who grew up believing everything is impossible. And because he lacks an imagination of his own, rather than create new stories he copies what has gone before, smugly certain that he is smarter than Harlan Ellison and Robert Heinlein, with a determination to prove it by 'fixing' their mistakes.
Only STO actually tries to have stable timeloops, and even then the timeline actually changes in realtime...
Is DSC going to cancel before the 2nd season airs? No. But if DSC doesn't really start bringing home the bacon, possibly.
Just the way I see it.
But! Before anyone else thinks it's doom and gloom, same circumstances for any show on the airwaves that gets into a situation like DSC is in now. So if DSC really doesn't bring it in, yes white knights, it could more than likely be canceled.
It is a possibility. But no more than any other show. Don't keep the blinders on with "everything is ok in Trekville."
Things are in a wait and see pattern with some real doubt out there.
At least acknowledge it.
Star Trek Battles member. Want to roll with a good group of people regardless of fleets and not have to worry about DPS while doing STFs? Come join the channel and join in the fun!
http://forum.arcgames.com/startrekonline/discussion/1145998/star-trek-battles-channel-got-canon/p1
> "It is a fact"? Sources?
Well this goes back to June 20th, and only confirms that the first 5 episodes were over budget and that's why the first two show runners were fired.
But that's not even half way into shooting the whole season and you're over budget already? That's not a good sign.
https://www.digitaltrends.com/movies/star-trek-discovery-season-2-news-cast-trailer-premiere/amp/
https://amp.dailydot.com/parsec/star-trek-discovery-season-2-trailer-cast-date/
That's two articles that have budget concerns. And I can't find the one, but 1 I read said that the first 5 episdoes were WAY past budget.
That's a problem.
Star Trek Battles member. Want to roll with a good group of people regardless of fleets and not have to worry about DPS while doing STFs? Come join the channel and join in the fun!
http://forum.arcgames.com/startrekonline/discussion/1145998/star-trek-battles-channel-got-canon/p1
> Running over budget isn't a problem (long term) if it generates a return - look at The Motion Picture, original budget of $15m, nearing twice over budget before the Hollywood fudge-accounting, return of over $200 million worldwide.
Hence the reason why I said if this second season doesn't bring home the bacon, DSC could be in serious trouble.
Is it in trouble now? Hard to say, but my personal 2 cents, not firing on all cylinders. And if the situation gets worse, especially since this was a former CEO project, new one could TRIBBLE can it.
We'll have to see.
Star Trek Battles member. Want to roll with a good group of people regardless of fleets and not have to worry about DPS while doing STFs? Come join the channel and join in the fun!
http://forum.arcgames.com/startrekonline/discussion/1145998/star-trek-battles-channel-got-canon/p1
You'd think he would have remembered his own sister being the first mutineer in Starfleet history, in the process triggering a brutal war with the Klingons that the Federation nearly lost and that resulted in the deaths of billions and the decimation of Starfleet just a few years earlier. Evidently Vulcans have truly awful memories.
Yes, Trek continuity has always been a bit wobbly, but Discovery seems to actively take joy in trampling all over established Trek lore while insisting it's part of the Prime timeline.
IT's clearly a prequel only for the purposes of being able to occasionally drag out a CHARACTER OR THING THAT YOU REMEMBER! to pimp for subs, not because they wanted to tell a unique story in that era or had any respect or affection for TOS itself.
But why let facts get in the way of a good rant.
Trials of Blood and Fire
Moving On Parts 1-3 - Part 4
In Cold Blood
The audience knows that, the characters don't. It was literally the second episode where some random prisoners on a transport not only recognized Burnham, but also immediately blamed her for starting the war.
Though I'm not really sure why you think that makes it better that Spock apparently totally forgot about his sister being the first mutineer in Starfleet history just a few years prior.
Frankly there's nothing that could have prevented the war other than not even being there in the first place. But T'Kuvma would have found another way to start it anyways.
Also... the reason we never heard of Burnham before is the SAME reason we never heard of Sybok before ST5. Pretty much "You never asked".
Don't forget how Spock talked about Sybok. He can be rather precise compared to us humans generalizing things. He said he didn't have a brother. He had a Half-Brother. Same argument can be made about Burnham. "I don't have a sister. I have an adopted sister."
EDIT: And Rattler beat me to it, though it is worth noting it isn't just Burnham and Sybok.
Trials of Blood and Fire
Moving On Parts 1-3 - Part 4
In Cold Blood
And "running over budget on a few episodes" =/= "hilariously over budget for entire series". If that were the case, CSI would never have cleared its first season, and any series with a "special guest star" episode would be doomed (as "special guest stars" generally demand a bit more than guild scale to appear).
Again, the actual reasons for the war are not relevant. What matters is that people blamed Burnham for it.
Not comparable. Sybok was a nobody. He went off and founded some random cult on Vulcan that nobody except some vulcans cared about, he didn't become relevant to anyone or anything else until he went full coco puffs and took a bunch of diplomats hostage.(Let me clarify, before everyone thought he took a bunch of diplomats hostage, before everyone starts crying about how they weren't actually hostages and somehow that changes anything).
Burnham was the first mutineer in Starfleet history, who was BLAMED for starting a brutal war with the Klingons that resulted in billions of people dying, large swathes of the Federation being conquered, and the destruction of a third of Starfleet. And all of this just a few years prior to TOS, meaning all the TOS characters are very much alive and aware of what is happening.
Spock being tight-lipped is irrelevant, damn near everyone would know who Burnham is, and all of her super special snowflake background about being raised on Vulcan in the family of a powerful and influential Vulcan ambassador should be well known.
Here's what I would of done. Vulcan Hello. Burnham gets the info goes to talk to her captain. Doesn't recommend a first stoke but instead recommends a defensive stance. Geogeriou does it and the attack happens.
Burnham and Georgiou leave to go get T'Kuvma and same break down happens. Georgiou is killed, and Burnham snaps and kills T'Kuvma. And then the attack gets white washed by Starfleet and Burnham gets blamed and hung out to dry because she killed T'Kuvma.
To sum it up, Burnham's mutiny served no purpose to the overall story.
Star Trek Battles member. Want to roll with a good group of people regardless of fleets and not have to worry about DPS while doing STFs? Come join the channel and join in the fun!
http://forum.arcgames.com/startrekonline/discussion/1145998/star-trek-battles-channel-got-canon/p1