History Headscratchers / StarTrek

26th Sep '16 5:31:17 AM thespecialneedsgroup
Is there an issue? Send a Message

Added DiffLines:

** There was also a Starship ''Chekov'' which was destroyed at Wolf 359 (the ship's name was on the filming model that appeared in starship graveyard scene, so it's canon). We can't say for certain that this ship was named for Pavel A. Chekov, but it's a pretty safe bet that it was. In fact, the ''Trek'' reference book authored by production designers Mike and Denise Okuda--"The Star Trek Encyclopedia"--notes that the ship was "Named for the noted Russian space explorer."
26th Sep '16 4:57:20 AM thespecialneedsgroup
Is there an issue? Send a Message


[[//folder]]

to:

[[//folder]]
[[/folder]]



We've seen quite a few ships named after historic figures, but they're all historic to ''us.'' ''Hood, Farragut, Zhukov, Grissom, Pasteur'' - all of these names were famous in the 20th Century or earlier. (I seem to remember there being a ''Cochrane'' at some point, too, so let's extend it into the mid-21st.) So at what point did Starfleet stop naming its ships after its heroes? Wouldn't it make sense for there to be an ''Archer'' by the TOS era, or a ''Decker'' or ''Kirk'' or ''Pike'' by TNG? Especially the latter two - they can name ship after ship for the one they commanded, but not for the men themselves?
* It's a good point, but there are a few exceptions. There is a U.S.S. ''Gorkon'' in TNG, for example, and a U.S.S. ''Archer'' in a graphic in Nemesis. There's a shuttlecraft ''Pike'' in "The Most Toys." There are also plenty of ships with names like ''Lantree'' or ''Frederickson'' or ''Curry'' or ''Donovan'' or ''G'Mat'' that might well be named for future historical figures that we just don't know about.

to:

* We've seen quite a few ships named after historic figures, but they're all historic to ''us.'' ''Hood, Farragut, Zhukov, Grissom, Pasteur'' - all of these names were famous in the 20th Century or earlier. (I seem to remember there being a ''Cochrane'' at some point, too, so let's extend it into the mid-21st.) So at what point did Starfleet stop naming its ships after its heroes? Wouldn't it make sense for there to be an ''Archer'' by the TOS era, or a ''Decker'' or ''Kirk'' or ''Pike'' by TNG? Especially the latter two - they can name ship after ship for the one they commanded, but not for the men themselves?
* ** It's a good point, but there are a few exceptions. There is a U.S.S. ''Gorkon'' in TNG, for example, and a U.S.S. ''Archer'' in a graphic in Nemesis. There's a shuttlecraft ''Pike'' in "The Most Toys." There are also plenty of ships with names like ''Lantree'' or ''Frederickson'' or ''Curry'' or ''Donovan'' or ''G'Mat'' that might well be named for future historical figures that we just don't know about.
25th Sep '16 1:32:46 PM NewVirginiaCreeper
Is there an issue? Send a Message

Added DiffLines:

* It's a good point, but there are a few exceptions. There is a U.S.S. ''Gorkon'' in TNG, for example, and a U.S.S. ''Archer'' in a graphic in Nemesis. There's a shuttlecraft ''Pike'' in "The Most Toys." There are also plenty of ships with names like ''Lantree'' or ''Frederickson'' or ''Curry'' or ''Donovan'' or ''G'Mat'' that might well be named for future historical figures that we just don't know about.
25th Sep '16 12:18:44 PM dannybeans
Is there an issue? Send a Message


We've seen quite a few ships named after historic figures, but they're all historic to ''us.'' ''Hood, Farragut, Zhukov, Grissom, Pasteur'' - all of these names were famous in the 20th Century or earlier. (I seem to remember there being a ''Cochrane'' at some point, too, so let's extend it into the mid-21st.) So at what point did Starfleet stop naming its ships after its heroes? Wouldn't it make sense for there to be an ''Archer'' by the TOS era, or a ''Decker'' or ''Kirk'' or ''Pike'' by TNG? Especially the latter two - they can name ship after ship for the one they commanded, but not for the men themselves?

to:

We've seen quite a few ships named after historic figures, but they're all historic to ''us.'' '' ''Hood, Farragut, Zhukov, Grissom, Pasteur'' - all of these names were famous in the 20th Century or earlier. earlier. (I seem to remember there being a ''Cochrane'' at some point, too, so let's extend it into the mid-21st.) ) So at what point did Starfleet stop naming its ships after its heroes? heroes? Wouldn't it make sense for there to be an ''Archer'' by the TOS era, or a ''Decker'' or ''Kirk'' or ''Pike'' by TNG? TNG? Especially the latter two - they can name ship after ship for the one they commanded, but not for the men themselves? themselves?
25th Sep '16 12:15:39 PM dannybeans
Is there an issue? Send a Message

Added DiffLines:

[[//folder]]

[[folder: How Long Before They Name a Ship After You?]]
We've seen quite a few ships named after historic figures, but they're all historic to ''us.'' ''Hood, Farragut, Zhukov, Grissom, Pasteur'' - all of these names were famous in the 20th Century or earlier. (I seem to remember there being a ''Cochrane'' at some point, too, so let's extend it into the mid-21st.) So at what point did Starfleet stop naming its ships after its heroes? Wouldn't it make sense for there to be an ''Archer'' by the TOS era, or a ''Decker'' or ''Kirk'' or ''Pike'' by TNG? Especially the latter two - they can name ship after ship for the one they commanded, but not for the men themselves?
24th Sep '16 11:03:26 AM NewVirginiaCreeper
Is there an issue? Send a Message


*** The canonical basis for the Vulcan/Rigelian link is the reference in "Journey to Babel" that they have similar blood chemistries. It's not clear if that makes them an offshoot like the Romulans or some case of covergent evolution like the Mintakans. But the other 'Rigelians', the ones from "The Cage," seem to be native to Rigel in any event.

to:

*** The canonical basis for the Vulcan/Rigelian link is the reference in "Journey to Babel" that they have similar blood chemistries. It's not clear if that makes them an offshoot like the Romulans or some case of covergent evolution like the Mintakans.Mintakans seem to be. But the other 'Rigelians', the ones from "The Cage," seem to be native to Rigel in any event.
1st Sep '16 11:29:40 PM tropeminer
Is there an issue? Send a Message


[[folder: Is there some "3 Movie ''Enterprise'' Rule"?]]

* Totally trivial, but it seems kind of funny how no iteration of the U.S.S. ''Enterprise'' in the ''StarTrek'' film series seems able to make it past 3 films. The refitted classic ''Enterprise'' was first unveiled in ''StarTrekTheMotionPicture'' and was destroyed in ''[[StarTrekIIITheSearchForSpock The Search for Spock]]''. The ''Enterprise''-A is presented at the end of ''[[StarTrekIVTheVoyageHome Star Trek IV]]'' but is then decommissioned at the end of ''[[StarTrekVITheUndiscoveredCountry Star Trek VI]]''. [[StarTrekTheNextGeneration TNG's]] ''Enterprise''-D didn't make it past [[StarTrekGenerations its film debut]], but we're then introduced to the ''Enterprise''-E in ''[[StarTrekFirstContact First Contact]]''. Coincidentally, it never got a fourth film outing due to critical and financial failure of ''[[StarTrekNemesis Nemesis]]'', even though it wasn't destroyed. Now the same has happened to the [[AlternateTimeline Alternate Reality]] ''Enterprise'' making its intro [[Film/StarTrek in 2009]] and is destroyed in the first act of ''[[StarTrekBeyond Beyond]]''.

[[/folder]]
31st Aug '16 3:27:42 AM thespecialneedsgroup
Is there an issue? Send a Message

Added DiffLines:

*** It's actually fairly easy to use a transponder to broadcast a distress signal--in fact, it's something we do today. In civil aviation, there are three transponder codes that flight crews can use to indicate an emergency situation--even when the aircraft's other communication equipment has failed. By squawking a specific code, a pilot can tell anyone who's paying attention--especially air traffic control and other aircraft--that they've been hijacked, that their radio has failed, or that there's an unspecified general emergency that threatens the safe operation of the aircraft (mechanical failure, medical emergency, etc.). As long as a member of an away team has a way of altering the signal their transponder is broadcasting, he or she ''could'' use it to send a discreet mayday or indicate that they need to be beamed out.
27th Aug '16 4:03:46 PM NewVirginiaCreeper
Is there an issue? Send a Message

Added DiffLines:

*** That's somewhat overstating the case, especially when TOS fans like Ron Moore are writing (note Kasidy Yates's lines about Tholians and punctuality in "For the Cause," an allusion to "The Tholian Web."
24th Aug '16 5:37:25 PM Luppercus
Is there an issue? Send a Message

Added DiffLines:

**All shows after TNG tried hard to distance themselves as much as possible from TOS, only ENT and the new movies which were trying to catch heavely on nostalgia.
This list shows the last 10 events of 448. Show all.
http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/article_history.php?article=Headscratchers.StarTrek