History Headscratchers / StarTrek2009

5th Aug '16 6:08:41 PM Ferot_Dreadnaught
Is there an issue? Send a Message


** I think TheyJustDidntCare.



** Doesn't excuse this. Building a starship on the surface is beyond stupid. In the entire pre-2009 canon, the Intrepid-class (e.g. ''Voyager'') is the first Federation starship of any reasonable size able to land on a planet. That's 100+ years more technology than ST:2009, and in a ship maybe a quarter the size of the ST:2009 Enterprise. There are hundreds of good reasons why building a starship on a planet surface is ludicrously inefficient, and also why any design which allows for planet-side construction results in a noticeably sub-par startship (i.e. design compromises to allow for building/flight deep in a gravity well are severely non-optimal for space travel). It's a gratuitous break from canon (and logic), all for the sake of a single shot, not even plot-relevant. Yeah, it's not even CriticalResearchFailure, it's TheyJustDidntCare.

to:

** Doesn't excuse this. Building a starship on the surface is beyond stupid. In the entire pre-2009 canon, the Intrepid-class (e.g. ''Voyager'') is the first Federation starship of any reasonable size able to land on a planet. That's 100+ years more technology than ST:2009, and in a ship maybe a quarter the size of the ST:2009 Enterprise. There are hundreds of good reasons why building a starship on a planet surface is ludicrously inefficient, and also why any design which allows for planet-side construction results in a noticeably sub-par startship (i.e. design compromises to allow for building/flight deep in a gravity well are severely non-optimal for space travel). It's a gratuitous break from canon (and logic), all for the sake of a single shot, not even plot-relevant. Yeah, it's not even CriticalResearchFailure, it's TheyJustDidntCare.
1st Aug '16 3:35:51 PM Bense
Is there an issue? Send a Message


How about the fact that those Starships are really, really heavy? The Enterprise, at least from the specs this troper could find on beta memory wiki, weights 190,000 metric tons. Can Starfleet tech accelerate that much mass to the 11 kilometers per second required to escape Earth's gravity without damaging the surrounding area as that would require a lot of force? Second observation, their tech also needs to be able to compensate for stuff like drag if it spends any time going through atmosphere since that ship might not be the most aerodynamic thing ever constructed.

to:

* How about the fact that those Starships are really, really heavy? The Enterprise, at least from the specs this troper could find on beta memory wiki, weights 190,000 metric tons. Can Starfleet tech accelerate that much mass to the 11 kilometers per second required to escape Earth's gravity without damaging the surrounding area as that would require a lot of force? Second observation, their tech also needs to be able to compensate for stuff like drag if it spends any time going through atmosphere since that ship might not be the most aerodynamic thing ever constructed.constructed.
* Starfleet has anti-gravity technology. So yes, it can indeed accelerate that much mass into orbit. Quite easily, in fact. The next movie features the ''Enterprise'' launching directly into space from underneath a planet's oceans, adding the weight of all the water that clings to it as well with no problem.
30th Jul '16 3:58:52 PM LongLiveHumour
Is there an issue? Send a Message

Added DiffLines:

* By [[http://www.iucnredlist.org/static/categories_criteria_3_1 IUCN Red List criteria]], Vulcans are endangered. Any one of five criteria is enough to class a species as endangered; Vulcans meet the first, and possibly also the fifth.
** '''A) Population reduction.''' On the reasonable assumption that most of the population lived on Vulcan, the species has been reduced by over 70%.
** '''E)''' "Quantitative analysis showing the '''probability of extinction in the wild''' is at least 20% within 20 years or five generations, whichever is the longer (up to a maximum of 100 years)." This one's a bit of a leap, but there's a genocidal maniac with a super-powerful spaceship on Vulcan's doorstep, and none of the 10,000 refugees have made it to safety. Unscientifically vague, but Mr "7,824.7 to 1" Spock may well have performed the quantitative analysis himself. Finally, consider that Vulcans have very long lifespans, which usually means slow reproduction and a higher risk of extinction (since the populations take longer to replenish themselves). The remaining population is fragmented in colonies: less at risk from a single catastrophe ''*coughNerocough*'' but more vulnerable to small-scale catastrophes that could wipe out a small population.
** Note that a species is still endangered even if we anticipate a rescue attempt. If 80% of Earth's cows were to be abducted overnight by aliens, there'd be a massive effort to restore the population, but until the numbers bounce back they'd still be listed under E.
24th Jul '16 6:10:12 AM Sphynxsys
Is there an issue? Send a Message


*** Actually, this Jim's date of birth is January 4th - 2233.04 being the current stardate at the beginning of the movie. Gives more reason why Winona and George were so worried over his birth! He would have possibly been premature!

to:

*** **** Actually, this Jim's date of birth is January 4th - 2233.04 being the current stardate at the beginning of the movie. Gives more reason why Winona and George were so worried over his birth! He would have possibly been premature!
24th Jul '16 6:09:43 AM Sphynxsys
Is there an issue? Send a Message

Added DiffLines:

*** Actually, this Jim's date of birth is January 4th - 2233.04 being the current stardate at the beginning of the movie. Gives more reason why Winona and George were so worried over his birth! He would have possibly been premature!
14th Feb '16 2:37:36 PM DoctorpooandtheTURDIS
Is there an issue? Send a Message

Added DiffLines:

***Chris Hemsworth (The actor that played Kirk's dad) DOES play Thor in the Marvel Cinematic Universe.
18th Dec '15 9:12:45 PM nombretomado
Is there an issue? Send a Message


**** According to the supplementary materials, sure. But to paraphrase SFDebris "You don't get credit for what you don't put in the movie because, and I'll try to explain this carefully, ''you didn't put it in the movie''". Even if you didn't have time/the budget to show Nero's capture, you could have the crew talk about how the Klingons had cost them all that time they could have used to save Romulus.

to:

**** According to the supplementary materials, sure. But to paraphrase SFDebris WebSite/SFDebris: "You don't get credit for what you don't put in the movie because, and I'll try to explain this carefully, ''you didn't put it in the movie''". Even if you didn't have time/the budget to show Nero's capture, you could have the crew talk about how the Klingons had cost them all that time they could have used to save Romulus.
5th Sep '15 1:23:27 AM Tuckerscreator
Is there an issue? Send a Message


* It's a funny line, but does it make any sense? As pointed out on the TechnoBabble page, "external inertial dampener" is just a fancy way of saying "parking brake", but wouldn't that be pointless in space? There's no such thing as external inertia in a vacuum; one brakes in zero-g by applying thrust in the opposite momentum. It would make more sense if the parking brake were a safety preventing them from activating the warp drive, but that's not what Spock says. What would an external inertial dampener on a starship be used for?

to:

* It's a funny line, but does it make any sense? As pointed out on the TechnoBabble page, "external inertial dampener" is just a fancy way of saying "parking brake", but wouldn't that be pointless in space? There's no such thing as external inertia in a vacuum; one brakes in zero-g by applying thrust in the opposite momentum.direction. It would make more sense if the parking brake were a safety preventing them from activating the warp drive, but that's not what Spock says. What would an external inertial dampener on a starship be used for?
4th Sep '15 11:02:37 PM shiori_makiba
Is there an issue? Send a Message

Added DiffLines:

How about the fact that those Starships are really, really heavy? The Enterprise, at least from the specs this troper could find on beta memory wiki, weights 190,000 metric tons. Can Starfleet tech accelerate that much mass to the 11 kilometers per second required to escape Earth's gravity without damaging the surrounding area as that would require a lot of force? Second observation, their tech also needs to be able to compensate for stuff like drag if it spends any time going through atmosphere since that ship might not be the most aerodynamic thing ever constructed.
24th Aug '15 9:47:31 AM Bense
Is there an issue? Send a Message

Added DiffLines:

** In the original timeline, Spock would have been serving with Pike on the ''Enterprise'' at the time this movie is set, and in ''The Cage'' Spock does appear more emotional than he would later on - he smiles when they discover a plant causing the "alien noise" on the planet, for instance. Maybe young Spock was more emotional while serving under Pike and became more "Vulcan" later.


Added DiffLines:

** It's probably there to allow the ''Enterprise'' to safely dock with that big space station. Presumably having the "external inertial dampener" on reduces the forces on the physical docking points between the ship and the station, but it also prevents the warp drive from working if it's left on.
This list shows the last 10 events of 357. Show all.
http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/article_history.php?article=Headscratchers.StarTrek2009