Alrighty... time for a very small modification/update on this thing.
Nothing major, but I did some secondary hull changes as well as the underside of the saucer and modified the aft shuttlebay somewhat.
I've been working on a temp job and have other things to pay attention to, so 3d work was sporadic at best.
Hope you like the proposed idea for how the Warp core should be placed on the ship.
I figured I can retain the half-vertical position while extending the core to a higher level.
Larger core could conceivably provide more power... though its not a guarantee. I guess the notion of technical efficiency can produce small but monstrously powerful warp core... we'll see... its initial theory on how I thought about Warp core placement for this particular design.
Btw I toyed with the shield effect for a bit because I didn't want to mess with the modeling for tonight.
I keep fiddling with the hull a bit, making changes, etc. so I'm fearful to actually go ahead and do the windows.
Meh... I guess the hull is really done now, and windows should be next along with the hull grids.
The first two shots are essentially a camera with a very skewed perception inside the shield - kinda produces an interesting effect similar to Slipstream.
It does share similarities with the Intrepid class, but relatively few and it has some of Prometheus, Sovereign and Galaxy in it as well.
I guess I wanted to find a way to merge multiple design choices into one... the nacelles however are highly distinctive in shape... though the Bussard collectors do emulate the Galaxy class.
If the Prometheus and Sovereign class are any indication, its possible that Starfleet is donning the more circular saucer for the arrowhead one when it comes to newer ships (we do have an indication that hull geometry could play a certain part when traveling at FTL speeds - same applies to vessel's mass).
Because Prometheus shares more in common with the Dauntless, it's my theory that the arrow head is better for piercing slip stream velocities. While Voyager and Sovereign shapes are better for high end warp speeds. (even if Sovereign shows little indication of Voyager like speeds.
Even though Prometheus Computer didn't reveal Quantum slip stream, The MK two might have given that away since clearly Voyager is faster than 9.9.
Unlikely...
The fake-Fed USS Dauntless was encountered on Stardate 51978, in mid-2374.
The Prometheus-prototype to which the EMH of Voyager to transferred to was hijacked somewhere around 51462, also in 2374, but even earlier than the encounter with the Dauntless. Since building a starship already takes several years, and designing around equally much, I'd wager that the Prometheus-concepts were started somewhere around 2365, give or take 2 years. And when Voyager encountered the vessel and it's slipstream-engine, everyone was going "hey wow, that's new!" (Chakotay was amazed by the new hull geometry, Tuvok pointed in his typically Vulcan dryness out that the ship was launched around 3 months prior to them meeting it, Paris doesn't recognise the engine configuration, and when they are down in engineering, Paris refers to the weird power core by this line: "I don't know what it is.." and after he reads out that it's a QSD, Chakotay and Tuvok are surprised - to say the least...)
Even the alledged memo from Starfleet Command said it's experimental and high-risk...
So there's no way the Prometheus could have QSD. Firstly because by the time the ship was designed, something should've leaked out so that at some point in time, the Voyager crew would've pondered about building a QSD themselves. And yet, later when they run across the Equinox in 2376, after telling them about that, even they seem surprised about such a technology...
According to some official and semi-official books and booklets, the arrowhead design is really partially as a result of the efficienty of engines (every official Trek-sheet dealing with subspace calls it a medium with rather liquid attributes, so a streamlined vessel is more likely to travel through it better), but also as a result of the frequent battles, and the Dominion War in paticular causing such agressive lines like the Sovereign and the Prometheus... (meh...)
Uhm.... I don't agree it takes years to build a starship.
If you were doing it manually, yes... with automation? Hardly.
I would imagine that using fully automated work-bees, shuttles, transporters, robotic arms and other types of machines that the Federation probably has at their disposal, it would take several days, maybe a week or so to build a full-fledged starship.
Automation is hundreds/thousands of times faster and more efficient than Humans or Humanoids in general.
To build massive structures in space such as the large starbase or star-ships any other way would be plain and simple: impractical and stupid.
Besides, the Federation emphasizes technical efficiency. Automation IS one aspect of technical efficiency, and the Nightfire is supposed to reflect that.
Also, there is no job that cannot be automated. Anything that Humans (or Humanoids) do is quantifiable and either: repetitive or highly specialized (in real life, computers surpassed Humans in those tasks over 10 years ago - in Star Trek, the notion of 'manual labor' really shouldn't exist unless there's an emergency and automation repair systems are out).
Think of it as a 'kick in the rear end' because the writers over the years have progressively dumbed down Federation capabilities because they had 0 clue on how to portray things realistically within the scope of the time frame and universe in question (besides, most writers were stuck in the current day mindset and couldn't imagine a potential economy that doesn't run without money in any shape or form because such concepts were alien to them [what with being brought up in an environment where the monetary system is 'still' in place).
The Nightfire simply speaking takes place in the Trek universe as it was meant to be - more or less - doing away with writer stupidity and bringing back the premise of what Trek was supposed to be about in TNG and beyond - cultural progress and indication of hope.
As for the arrowhead design... there were a few indications that ship's hull geometry can be beneficial for certain FTL speeds... but I don't think design plays that much of a crucial role once you understand the technology better.
Indeed, the first version of Slipstream didn't allow Voyager to use it for about an hour and 15 to 30 mins, if we include the chase for the Dauntless and then back again) and that one was explained as a problem of hull geometry inherent in the Intrepid class.
The second version of the Slipstream drive was extensively modified - and as a result, design issue wasn't the problem... but rather it was the inability of the computer to calculate the phase variance in the Slipstream threshold formulation (which seemed a bit far fetched, considering the computer operated at FTL - then again, it wasn't specifically designed to accommodate Slipstream technology from the get go, which points into the direction the crew did extensive modifications to both the computer and the main deflector dish to do this properly - and it was indicated the drive was extensively tested, so for the life of me, I don't understand how they could have missed the phase variance issue, especially after testing the engine molecule by molecule - yet another intentional writer messup - will probably need to write in conceivable error of some kind to explain that tidbit away)
Strangely black holes have been found more than 4 million solar masses. Blackholes form at around 3.2 solar masses so that means what ever quantum limit might exist on space traveling faster than light in the case of Sag A it's warping space at a rate of 1,250,000 x light speed, it's a non factor limit.
Since Trek has refined how warp works it's implied that speed is either defined by efficient shapes or powerful energy cores to compensate. You note that the first attempt had hull design limits but that was before they retrofitted the warp core so arguably the type 9 core was outputting substantially more to overcome design limitations. The variance problem is difficult to justify scientifically . Warp drive already manipuates space on the quantum level. To be honest...the whole.."projecting a quantum field" is horse hockey. Technobable run amok.
P.S I just finished watching most of Blake's 7.
I am astounded how a show this old got all the terminology right. They dealt with Blackholes and Neutron stars, Time distortion and kept the abilities of their ship and tech amazing consistent. It puts Trek to shame.
13 years is excessive to be the third incarnation of the design. Granted they were likely building them simultaneously but the Registry shows a number of ships, New Orleans, Akira, Ambassador and Nebula were precursors to the Galaxy with similar size structure and tech as Galaxy. So this wasn't a ship designed in a vacuum. They knew how to do it.
Numbers on Registry confirmed Star Fleet Constructed on average 357 ships a year during peace time. To put out that many ships a year you'd have to have 2000+ construction facilities.
Note too that to Deks Point. The ISS Defiant was constructed in just a years time. Construction at a non Ship yard and improvised facilities. OF course production in Trek couldn't show us automation but it had to have been done and if we disregard the 80's mentality to construction show in the Tech manual then likely every ship is constructed just so.
What the... why did my post materialize as if 'Aresius' had posted it?
Something wrong with the forums?
Btw... dreamwalker... you are quite correct on that... but while replicators are exceedingly fast at manufacturing things, my point is that on an industrial level even without replicators, you'd still be able to churn out ships extremely fast - much less than a year, and that you DON'T need replicators to achieve abundance (not by a long shot) even though they DO simplify the process considerably by converting energy into matter (literally their own words - not manipulating matter and transforming it from one form into another [which is something they CAN do btw], but actual energy into matter conversion) and you basically need to ensure you have ample energy to work with (and seeing how they can also convert energy from one form into another form of energy... you get the point).
Fully automate the process (eliminate any and all process of manual labor) and you end up with extremely fast production that no manual labor could possibly match (Replicators or no replicators).
Btw... anyone remember that fully automated repair station from Enterprise series (in the 22nd century that was taking live specimens of Humanoids to boost its own computational capabilities)?
THAT is what Federation construction facilities would be capable of (except of course snatching people).
The medical drone that repaired Reeds leg? It would be child's play to create in the mid to late 24th century with what the Federation has. Build a basic antigrav unit, put a medical or all purpose-grade tricorder inside with several or just one slot which is modular and can accommodate a vast array of medical equipment and heal away.
Seriously... do you have any idea how many issues could be avoided in medical emergencies?
Just beam specialized medical drones to reported areas where injuries are, or have major designated areas have them in storage on standby if internal transporters aren't available (which is practically impossible considering you also have shuttles and their transporters to work with)...
How the heck did I manage to do that?
On second thought... it would appear that my Sensei status allows me to do this.
And due to Human error, it seems I pressed 'edit post' instead of 'reply with quote'.
My apologies Areius.
The Ent-D was comissioned in 2363, Season 1 takes place in 2364. BUT, according to Booby Trap, Leah Brahms worked on the propulsion system a year prior. And the Tech-Manual (yeah, so much loved, I know....) says that the USS Galaxy took 13 years (from the green-lights in 2343 to its launch in 2356) to be built. Now I know, the Ent-D was the third in line and was thus likely far faster built, but still definitely longer than 6-7 years. Size matters!
Sisko was assigned to Utopia Planitia for 3 years just for the design process of the Defiant class (between the Battle of Wolf 359 and his starting service on DS9), which was stated to have begun in 2366 (The Search), but was commissioned in late 2370, 4 years later!
There is a difference between designing a starship on the drawing board (which probably does take some time) compared to actual construction times of the ship.
Also, the crew of Voyager didn't really take that long of a time to design the Delta Flyer because they were working on the holodeck to begin with.
Actual construction time for the Flyer was up to what... 6 days with some incompletions... but as we saw, this was done via manual labor and not automation (thank you writer stupidity - where you conveniently forgot you had other shuttles, tractor beams, transporters, probably a highly advanced version of robotic arms and a computer that can be programmed through simple voice commands to replace the entire crew and done things with speeds that no ordinary mortal in Trek could possibly match).
Also, have we forgotten about self-repair systems Federation ships should have?
Riker plainly stated in TNG that the ship can clean itself and repair itself.
Oh right... one more thing out the window for the sake of 'drama'.
Leah may have worked on the propulsion system for the Galaxy class for a full year, but this doesn't mean she was building it from scratch with her bare hands.
She was probably doing it on the drawing board. The actual construction would come out later after all simulations and computer models passed the testing phase to her satisfaction.
With transporters and replicators (or just highly specialized machines that are used for industrial manufacturing) it would literally be assembled by the computer (not by manual labor) and done in a fraction of the time it takes Humanoids.
Sisko being assigned to Utopia Planitia for 3 years accounts for the design process, the actual commission of the Defiant being 4 years after this assignment was completed doesn't mean it took SF 4 years to build the thing, because even the dialogue does NOT correspond with that.
Sisko clearly stated that he worked on the Defiant design for 3 years... but that would be on the drawing board.
He also stated in 'The Search' that SF already previously tested the ship in full but had problems at high warp speeds which is why the ship was never commissioned sooner and the project scrapped (until the Dominion entered the picture).
And I'm sorry, but scrapping a fully operational starship simply because you had issues at higher warp speeds (which O'Brien was able to iron out more or less when Sisko brought the Defiant to Ds9 and later on as time went by even more) seems quite frankly... stupid.
You cannot reflect what simply is impossible. Especially in just weeks. Keep in mind the lines from Martok and Sisko when they were discussing how fast the Dominion reinforces its fleets. If the Federation could build entire ships in just weeks, they'd almost be as efficient as the Dominion...
Per the dialogue, the Federation WAS able to keep up with the Dominion... just barely (they apparently had to put in some effort).
As for automation not possibly being thousands of times faster/efficient compared to manual labor... do some research on automation in real life and then come back and tell me a Human can work 24/7 without breaks while assembling a car at speeds comparable to basic robotic arms as its being done in factories.
Or better yet, creating electronic components at the size of microns (which you cannot do through manual labor, but instead require specialized machines which quite literally churn them out in large numbers extremely fast).
Problem with Trek as it went on: the writers completely missed the mark with technological automation and downplayed it for the sake of 'drama'.
Why?
Because often enough writers have a very limited understanding of science and technology, resulting in grasping onto things they barely understand from the real world (which is very little).
Yet, we still have many aspects, where humans NEED to do manual labour even though it's one of those repetitive tasks that a machine could. Why? Because in some aspects, the human mind needs to evaluate the situation at hand, and a computer cannot do that. I doubt that this would be different in any future.
Incorrect. The only reason we still have manual labor is because we live in a monetary based economy which focuses on 'cost efficiency' (what is monetarily AFFORDABLE to achieve) as opposed to 'technical efficiency (focusing purely on available resources to create more by using less with the latest science at our disposal), so the rate of automation being incorporated today is accelerating because the cost of technology is coming down faster... that's the only limitation in monetary based economy 'cost' (not actual resources).
We have the ability to design things that will not break down (the only reason they do so now is because they are made from monetarily cheap materials, not superior synthetic materials that can be synthesized in sustainable abundance - and because its more profitable for computers and electronics to break down after a specific period of time because that forces people to 'upgrade' after a relatively short amount of time and spend money - instead of say upgrading existing technology by making it completely modular, and harvesting raw materials from existing technologies to manufacture new ones - the process of technical efficiency allows us to create more with less, so we can easily create for example 2 smartphones using raw materials from just 1 older one because we learned to make better materials that are thinner, lighter and much more stronger/flexible).
We also already have machines capable of self-maintenance and machines that build other machines.
The only conceivable reason you might need Humans is the prospect to very rarely check if the the machinery works properly (which it does if its DESIGNED properly - in a monetary system where everything is based around 'cost efficiency', you end up cutting corners and going for the FINANCIALLY CHEAP ENOUGH design where you spend less money - not the most TECHNICALLY EFFICIENT design that uses the BEST possible combination of materials with least amount of used power and expended resources) which would maybe require of a person that loves doing these types of things to set aside say 30 mins or 1 hour per WEEK to do that (while the machinery would actually beep a technician automatically if something goes wrong - incidentally, this is already being done in case you didn't know - technicians are mainly on standby and only go to the factory to do repair work when the machinery beeps them - but that machinery can be designed to be self-maintaining).
And so you claim that superhuman construction (Dominion again!) would be more humanely? Yeah, reeeeeally great...
No... I'm saying that utilizing technology to its fullest potential is something the writers completely missed as the show progressed (they even tried to create certain phobias around various technologies).
And there's nothing 'superhuman' about it.
Roddenberry understood this to a degree. His whole concept of a moneyless society stemmed from Jacque Fresco idea called 'cybernation' at the time which later on was renamed as 'resource based economy' (which heavily relies on automation).
Trek was a TV show and numerous other writers took part in the process. Roddenberry had to make numerous compromises from the original TNG ideas he had because the station at the time thought the concept was too 'out there' (that people wouldn't be able to connect with it at all).
I'm sorry, but if you want encourage people to THINK, you don't cater to existing notions. You CHALLENGE the very foundations and think critically. That's how science is supposed to operate.
Evidence is not proof and correlation is not proof of causation.
As such, science is based on the guideline that everything and anything is subject to change at any given time, regardless of how much evidence you may have (in essence, there is no 'belief' or fixation on anything - you may follow certain paths that you arrive at using the scientific method, but as a scientist you have to keep an open mind to the possibility that this could be incorrect and could change... and actually, you TRY to continuously falsify it by looking for other options).
Automation is nothing to be feared btw. It can liberate Humans from the notion of having to work for a living.
Instead, people will dedicate themselves to do other things.
We had the technology in the 1970-ies already to reduce the working day to 15 hours per week, but this didn't materialize due to the outdated concept of working 40 hours per day.
Today, we have the technology to automate well over 75% of the global workforce tomorrow, and the rest in under 5 years.
But bear in mind that Capitalism WILL inevitably automate one way or the other because automation is financially cheaper, easier and faster than manual labor - except that if you keep Capitalism or any monetary based system where you have to have a job to earn money and gain access to basic necessities and everything else (which Humanity in real life has been producing in absurd abundance for over 100 years using science and technology), then you end up with problems.
Roddenberry realized that a moneyless economy CAN work... but it has nothing to do with communism, socialism, capitalism or fascism.
Also, he had numerous restrictions in place so he couldn't have eliminated the notion of 'governments' from the show either (even though he wanted to).
Because, when you have a general population exposed to relevant general education, critical thinking and problem solving along with massive technology (even ours from current day), you realize that governments as such are completely ridiculous concept that do not apply anymore.
There's a difference between "doing away writers stupidity" and creating an "ubership", something that's too powerful, too fast, too [enter superlative] to be true...
Whoever said this was an uber-ship?
I didn't say this, and certainly wasn't suggesting that.
However... to put things into perspective... if we were to drop monetary constraints today and focus exclusively on available resources and designing things with modularity in mind that actually LAST, self-maintain and are as automated as our current scientific knowledge allows, we would literally improve efficiencies by ORDERS OF MAGNITUDE compared to what we do under 'monetary constraints'.
I'm basically doing away with writer constraints and inability to think within the scope of the time frame and universe in question.
Nothing 'uber' about it to be honest. That would be akin to creating computers today which are thousands of times faster and more efficient but would be at the atomic level - all of which is possible of course... just not very 'cost effective' (monetarily speaking) within the constraints of current outdated economic model.
Well do you?
Clarify exactly what do you mean by that?
I stated that initially, when you do not understand the technology somewhat, you end up being limited by existing designs you are using (talking about Slipstream version no. 1 which did not allow Voyager to use it more than an hour and a half perhaps in total - and the crew did very quick modifications to the core and deflector to achieve initial Slipstream).
However, when the crew DID study the technology in detail (which they obviously did 'behind the scenes' before 'Timeless' episode took place), they not only INCREASED the speed at which the ship went through in Slipstream, but also they negated the issue of hull design being the problem (because it was never stated to be a problem in this version).
To my recollection, Voyager stayed for approximately 1 minute in Slipstream before future Harry dispersed the Slipstream (it was stated by dialogue that the phase variance did not present problems until 17 seconds into the flight), and the ship travelled through 10 000 Ly's in the process - so taking into account that Voyager couldn't have stayed in Slipstream for very long before being forced out (which was displayed through their icy demise in an alternate timeline), it stands to reason the maximum amount of time the ship could have stayed in Slipstream (v2) before the Phase variance forced it out would be around 1 minute mark.
Phase variance was obviously the issue of the computers inability to properly calculate phase changes as the Slipstream was being created (their own words). This is why they sent the Delta Flyer ahead. It is likely the modifications Harry inputted were effective for the Flyer to a point, but not good enough for Voyager (different size, etc. or quite possibly Human error).
Wait, you want to explain everything that you perceive as inconsistency with your own ideas? Messing around with the messups of others doesn't make them better, it worsens them!
As if the pocket books didn't do this (and done a pretty good job at it I might add).
How the heck did I manage to do that?
On second thought... it would appear that my Sensei status allows me to do this.
And due to Human error, it seems I pressed 'edit post' instead of 'reply with quote'.
My apologies Areius.
That's okay, at least my answers weren't gone completely...
There is a difference between designing a starship on the drawing board (which probably does take some time) compared to actual construction times of the ship.
Also, the crew of Voyager didn't really take that long of a time to design the Delta Flyer because they were working on the holodeck to begin with.
Actual construction time for the Flyer was up to what... 6 days with some incompletions... but as we saw, this was done via manual labor and not automation (thank you writer stupidity - where you conveniently forgot you had other shuttles, tractor beams, transporters, probably a highly advanced version of robotic arms and a computer that can be programmed through simple voice commands to replace the entire crew and done things with speeds that no ordinary mortal in Trek could possibly match).
There is a difference between a smaller-than-1-deck shuttle/runabout, and a ship that's more than 50meters long and broad...
Also, have we forgotten about self-repair systems Federation ships should have?
Riker plainly stated in TNG that the ship can clean itself and repair itself.
Yeah... One thing we heard once and never again. Much like many things from TOS. Let's be honest here, many things simply don't match up anyway. Eugenic Wars <-> Third World War, warpless Romulan Vessels <-> Interstellar War with the Romulans, and so forth. It was bad research/track of things in TOS, didn't improve in TNG, and got worse from DS9 onwards. Instead, we hear about damage-repair crews being distributed to damaged sections all the time. where's the self-repair then?
Besides, keep in mind the characters. He was talking to a woman (Riker being the ever-smooth womaniser who want's to impress) that is essentially a farmer-girl - read: a woman used (and by her actions obviously upset) to dirt and filth, and she being responsible to clean it. So, since we never saw these self-repair powers actually IN ACTION, he might as well have boasted/bragged...
Oh right... one more thing out the window for the sake of 'drama'.
Leah may have worked on the propulsion system for the Galaxy class for a full year, but this doesn't mean she was building it from scratch with her bare hands.
She was probably doing it on the drawing board. The actual construction would come out later after all simulations and computer models passed the testing phase to her satisfaction.
With transporters and replicators (or just highly specialized machines that are used for industrial manufacturing) it would literally be assembled by the computer (not by manual labor) and done in a fraction of the time it takes Humanoids.
Sisko being assigned to Utopia Planitia for 3 years accounts for the design process, the actual commission of the Defiant being 4 years after this assignment was completed doesn't mean it took SF 4 years to build the thing, because even the dialogue does NOT correspond with that.
I don't think it's stated that she was working on it FOR a year, only a year BEFORE launch.... Of course she was a mere design expert, as her office (or the holographic recreation thereof) perfectly well shows. I remember a game (I believe it was Birth of the Federation) that "introduced" industrial replicators, replicator-units that were about twice as big as a regular transport pad. Still.
Sisko clearly stated that he worked on the Defiant design for 3 years... but that would be on the drawing board.
He also stated in 'The Search' that SF already previously tested the ship in full but had problems at high warp speeds which is why the ship was never commissioned sooner and the project scrapped (until the Dominion entered the picture).
And I'm sorry, but scrapping a fully operational starship simply because you had issues at higher warp speeds (which O'Brien was able to iron out more or less when Sisko brought the Defiant to Ds9 and later on as time went by even more) seems quite frankly... stupid.
True. but then again, miracle worker.... As certain engineers seem to be always....
Per the dialogue, the Federation WAS able to keep up with the Dominion... just barely (they apparently had to put in some effort).
As for automation not possibly being thousands of times faster/efficient compared to manual labor... do some research on automation in real life and then come back and tell me a Human can work 24/7 without breaks while assembling a car at speeds comparable to basic robotic arms as its being done in factories.
Or better yet, creating electronic components at the size of microns (which you cannot do through manual labor, but instead require specialized machines which quite literally churn them out in large numbers extremely fast).
That's why we have shifts. Now don't get me wrong, I hate shiftwork, I tried it once and I hate, hate, hate it. I know that machines don't require sleep, food, or demand pay (yet...), but why do we have human (!!) quality control? Because machines may be more effective, but not perfect.
Incorrect. The only reason we still have manual labor is because we live in a monetary based economy which focuses on 'cost efficiency' (what is monetarily AFFORDABLE to achieve) as opposed to 'technical efficiency (focusing purely on available resources to create more by using less with the latest science at our disposal), so the rate of automation being incorporated today is accelerating because the cost of technology is coming down faster... that's the only limitation in monetary based economy 'cost' (not actual resources).
Really? What's more cost efficient? Replacing all workers with machines yet still have human quality controllers (which require nourishment and thus cannot work all the time, have mood swings which can affect their critical perception, and so forth), or replacing all workers with machines and have a computer as a quality controller? We have machines that can automatically detect errors down to the molecular level. Why don't we use them? Because they're cold machines. Not because it's "cost (in)efficient"
We also already have machines capable of self-maintenance and machines that build other machines.
The only conceivable reason you might need Humans is the prospect to very rarely check if the the machinery works properly (which it does if its DESIGNED properly - in a monetary system where everything is based around 'cost efficiency', you end up cutting corners and going for the FINANCIALLY CHEAP ENOUGH design where you spend less money - not the most TECHNICALLY EFFICIENT design that uses the BEST possible combination of materials with least amount of used power and expended resources) which would maybe require of a person that loves doing these types of things to set aside say 30 mins or 1 hour per WEEK to do that (while the machinery would actually beep a technician automatically if something goes wrong - incidentally, this is already being done in case you didn't know - technicians are mainly on standby and only go to the factory to do repair work when the machinery beeps them - but that machinery can be designed to be self-maintaining).
Maybe I'm not from the world, or maybe my definitions are too different, but for me, cost efficient means spending more money on a good and sound system that works for years or even decades with little maintenance, instead of buying the cheaper version, which requires more maintenance. But that's just me, thinking our whole economy is based on waste-production, waste-consumation, and waste-recycling, instead of efficiency and longevity...
Something that Trek allegedly made away with. I say allegedly, because the shows with Miles infiltrating the Orion Syndicate showed a rather different perspective...
No... I'm saying that utilizing technology to its fullest potential is something the writers completely missed as the show progressed (they even tried to create certain phobias around various technologies).
Yeah, so? New things can scare some people. Now at first, I thought about Barklays transporter-phobia as a over-exxagerated idea of McCoys dislike for transporters, but they played the card pretty well, albeit a bit quirky with the idea of incorporating an entire alien species in the process.
And there's nothing 'superhuman' about it.
Roddenberry understood this to a degree. His whole concept of a moneyless society stemmed from Jacque Fresco idea called 'cybernation' at the time which later on was renamed as 'resource based economy' (which heavily relies on automation).
Trek was a TV show and numerous other writers took part in the process. Roddenberry had to make numerous compromises from the original TNG ideas he had because the station at the time thought the concept was too 'out there' (that people wouldn't be able to connect with it at all).
Cybernation? Reminds me to a disco-even nearby. Same name...
Anyway, essentially, the Federation follows in large parts more the socialist concept of moneyfree economy.
I'm sorry, but if you want encourage people to THINK, you don't cater to existing notions. You CHALLENGE the very foundations and think critically. That's how science is supposed to operate.
Evidence is not proof and correlation is not proof of causation.
As such, science is based on the guideline that everything and anything is subject to change at any given time, regardless of how much evidence you may have (in essence, there is no 'belief' or fixation on anything - you may follow certain paths that you arrive at using the scientific method, but as a scientist you have to keep an open mind to the possibility that this could be incorrect and could change... and actually, you TRY to continuously falsify it by looking for other options).
And where's the science in deducting the USE of a technology that the Federation didn't have yet only from one haphazardly said line (as done on the matter of Slipstream by Saquist) or the EXISTENCE of technology based on facts that are never stated onscreen but only on an (even less correct) "Tech Manual" (as you did with the whole Automation-stuff)?
Automation is nothing to be feared btw. It can liberate Humans from the notion of having to work for a living.
I know, and for that fact, I welcome automation. Yet, as you so clearly stated, we live in a money-based economy, so I wonder, how will they support their living then?
Instead, people will dedicate themselves to do other things.
We had the technology in the 1970-ies already to reduce the working day to 15 hours per week, but this didn't materialize due to the outdated concept of working 40 hours per day.
Today, we have the technology to automate well over 75% of the global workforce tomorrow, and the rest in under 5 years.
Yes, I know, the unemployment-rate is skyrocketing because of that. See, in the 70s, people with a lesser degree of education simply became factory worker. Apart form the fact that 4/5th of these jobs are done by machines now, the few remaining jobs require a higher degree of education and sometimes even a specialised apprenticeship or even more. Because the Automatons are becoming more and more sophisticated. In the 70s, anyone with a good knowledge of mechanics and electronics could work on a robot arm, program it, and stuff. Nowadays, you need to have studied IT, know at least 3 program languages, and a whole cr*pload of other stuff. With few people getting their heads around one thing...
And those who are incapable of adapting to the new requirements are jobless crooks. They could dedicate themselves to .. well, what? They still need to pay their rents and bills... But they can't, because automation made them jobless.
But bear in mind that Capitalism WILL inevitably automate one way or the other because automation is financially cheaper, easier and faster than manual labor - except that if you keep Capitalism or any monetary based system where you have to have a job to earn money and gain access to basic necessities and everything else (which Humanity in real life has been producing in absurd abundance for over 100 years using science and technology), then you end up with problems.
Roddenberry realized that a moneyless economy CAN work... but it has nothing to do with communism, socialism, capitalism or fascism.
Well, fascism is a scourge of mankind in any form. Communism, and capitalism are in essence two extremes which are impossible to work because of the discrepancies between the idealised vision and the reality. But if you look closely, the UFP is essentially a socialist state.
Also, he had numerous restrictions in place so he couldn't have eliminated the notion of 'governments' from the show either (even though he wanted to).
That would've made the Federation a state of anarchy; as per the definition of anarchy is a state with no centralised organs of government, NOT -as it is often falsified- a state where there is no law...
Because, when you have a general population exposed to relevant general education, critical thinking and problem solving along with massive technology (even ours from current day), you realize that governments as such are completely ridiculous concept that do not apply anymore.
True of the most part, and in an idealised way, many of the government concepts are outdated. Yet, people cling to them because they're afraid of new ideas (or because they're afraid to lose their power, if they happen to have it as part of the government), and because mankind as a rather slothful being, when it comes to change...
Whoever said this was an uber-ship?
I didn't say this, and certainly wasn't suggesting that.
[...]
Nothing 'uber' about it to be honest. That would be akin to creating computers today which are thousands of times faster and more efficient but would be at the atomic level - all of which is possible of course... just not very 'cost effective' (monetarily speaking) within the constraints of current outdated economic model.
Not an ubership by its own existence, but an ubership by it's (means of) creation.
However... to put things into perspective... if we were to drop monetary constraints today and focus exclusively on available resources and designing things with modularity in mind that actually LAST, self-maintain and are as automated as our current scientific knowledge allows, we would literally improve efficiencies by ORDERS OF MAGNITUDE compared to what we do under 'monetary constraints'.
I'm basically doing away with writer constraints and inability to think within the scope of the time frame and universe in question.
[...]
As if the pocket books didn't do this (and done a pretty good job at it I might add).
Let me paraphrase that, maybe then you see my problem with this concept. You see an error/mistake/writers messup/whatchamacall. You substitute your ideas to clear up the error you perceived.
Understand now? It's your view of a mistake, but that doesn't mean others see it as a mistake. And it certainly does not mean that your solution will suit all others. Yet you simply assume that, and by doing so, you are no better than these other writers (both the show-writers as well as the book-writers)!
As for the arrowhead design... there were a few indications that ship's hull geometry can be beneficial for certain FTL speeds... but I don't think design plays that much of a crucial role once you understand the technology better.
Do you understand the technology so much better to dare making assumptions? The tech is conjectural even in-verse, so we cannot even guess it's specifications, limitations, powers, or capacities out-verse! Now, I'm referring to Saquists idea that the arrowhead must mean a vessel is Slipstream capable, justifying the idea (that the Prometheus-class could have slipstream, based on the arrowhead) by a *hint* (nothing more!) from the EMH Mk2 regarding it being the fastest ship:
Because Prometheus shares more in common with the Dauntless, it's my theory that the arrow head is better for piercing slip stream velocities.
[...]
Even though Prometheus Computer didn't reveal Quantum slip stream, The MK two might have given that away since clearly Voyager is faster than 9.9.
I stated that initially, when you do not understand the technology somewhat, you end up being limited by existing designs you are using (talking about Slipstream version no. 1 which did not allow Voyager to use it more than an hour and a half perhaps in total - and the crew did very quick modifications to the core and deflector to achieve initial Slipstream).
However, when the crew DID study the technology in detail (which they obviously did 'behind the scenes' before 'Timeless' episode took place), they not only INCREASED the speed at which the ship went through in Slipstream, but also they negated the issue of hull design being the problem (because it was never stated to be a problem in this version).
To my recollection, Voyager stayed for approximately 1 minute in Slipstream before future Harry dispersed the Slipstream (it was stated by dialogue that the phase variance did not present problems until 17 seconds into the flight), and the ship travelled through 10 000 Ly's in the process - so taking into account that Voyager couldn't have stayed in Slipstream for very long before being forced out (which was displayed through their icy demise in an alternate timeline), it stands to reason the maximum amount of time the ship could have stayed in Slipstream (v2) before the Phase variance forced it out would be around 1 minute mark.
Phase variance was obviously the issue of the computers inability to properly calculate phase changes as the Slipstream was being created (their own words). This is why they sent the Delta Flyer ahead. It is likely the modifications Harry inputted were effective for the Flyer to a point, but not good enough for Voyager (different size, etc. or quite possibly Human error).
Which constantly puts a great red bummer on many things, especially evolution (human and technological)..
Do you understand the technology so much better to dare making assumptions? The tech is conjectural even in-verse, so we cannot even guess it's specifications, limitations, powers, or capacities out-verse! Now, I'm referring to Saquists idea that the arrowhead must mean a vessel is Slipstream capable, justifying the idea (that the Prometheus-class could have slipstream, based on the arrowhead) by a *hint* (nothing more!) from the EMH Mk2 regarding it being the fastest ship:
Merely deductions based on the evidence at hand.
-Voyager tells us warp fields are symmetrical to to the hull geometry
-Voyager establish warp field are disrupted by foreign objects or disruptive lines
-Voyager tells us temporal stress out side the field can destroy the ship at high speed.
-Voyager says the Intrepid design prevents it from staying at slipstream speeds for long
-Voyager's design uses an articulation frame like an F14 to stream line it's shape and thus warp field.
-Voyager uses field enhancers along the saucer hull to strengthen the forward lobe
-DS9 says the Defiant can't achieve beyond warp 9 without additional power to structural integrity (Ship design)
-TNG Tech manual says "The saucer module which carries the characteristic shape of an emergency landing craft, helps shape the forward field component though the use of a 55 degree elliptical hull planform, found to produce superior peak transitional efficiency.
That's quite a few premises.
~While not definite, through observation we find that Defiant has a more powerful Type 7 power plant composed of 4 streams.
~According to the Voyager Intrepid uses a Type 9 tri-cyclic core. likely meaning 3 streams in a cyclonic formation.
Only one of the premise are deducible and found on Prometheus. 1. A powerful warp core or in this case 3 Warp Cores. The hull matches no known configuration in the fleet and goes against all the other premise, namely Galaxy's 55 degree ellipse, Voyagers articulation frame and field enhancers.
The only external premises that fits Prometheus:
-Dauntless used a arrowhead for slipstream speeds
-Voyager used a modified warp core to achieve slipstream velocities nullifiying design limitations.
Of course this is fiction but logically we've narrowed down 10 premises to 2.
It's at the least very probable.
There is a difference between a smaller-than-1-deck shuttle/runabout, and a ship that's more than 50meters long and broad...
Point: the Flyer was apparently constructed with mostly manual labor and not full blown automation (on top of that inside a starship that did not apparently have dedicated construction equipment, even though there's no conceivable reason it couldn't have it).
Yeah... One thing we heard once and never again. Much like many things from TOS. Let's be honest here, many things simply don't match up anyway. Eugenic Wars <-> Third World War, warpless Romulan Vessels <-> Interstellar War with the Romulans, and so forth. It was bad research/track of things in TOS, didn't improve in TNG, and got worse from DS9 onwards. Instead, we hear about damage-repair crews being distributed to damaged sections all the time. where's the self-repair then?
Besides, keep in mind the characters. He was talking to a woman (Riker being the ever-smooth womaniser who want's to impress) that is essentially a farmer-girl - read: a woman used (and by her actions obviously upset) to dirt and filth, and she being responsible to clean it. So, since we never saw these self-repair powers actually IN ACTION, he might as well have boasted/bragged...
Riker wasn't really that much of a bragger in that conversation. The tone of the voice he portrayed it in certainly doesn't evoke bragging.
As for self-repair systems - many novels for example used this, including Voyager.
Fact of the matter is: Federation technology IS capable of such feats (and a lot more).
Attribute the lack of the technology in later episodes to writer stupidity because they wanted to make things more 'dramatic' (in their own view).
You see examples of this across Trek from episode to episode.
I don't think it's stated that she was working on it FOR a year, only a year BEFORE launch.... Of course she was a mere design expert, as her office (or the holographic recreation thereof) perfectly well shows. I remember a game (I believe it was Birth of the Federation) that "introduced" industrial replicators, replicator-units that were about twice as big as a regular transport pad. Still.
My point was that construction time of a starship is different (much shorter) compared to the design process and testing of designs on the drawing board before it reaches the final stage where it satisfies or exceeds the designers expectations.
Voyager crew worked with existing technology and knowledge. Also, Tom Paris already worked out the design of the Flyer in advance (and he was doing that in his spare time apparently - not necessarily for a long amount of time since the Flyer was made in early season 5 - his idea for a larger shuttle probably came into being sometime in late Season 4.
True. but then again, miracle worker.... As certain engineers seem to be always....
O'Brien was nothing special honestly. Also, if you have a team of engineers at Utopia Planitia who are supposed to be the 'best minds in the Federation' who cannot work it out, I find it very unlikely O'Brien would.
Also... for the most part, he didn't really do anything. He merely patched the ship up as much as he could (because it was not entirely finished at Utopia Planitia - although more than finished enough with the ship having an operational cloaking device and managing to get to Ds9) with the time he had (also taking into account he never overcame the structural inability of the ship to sustain high warp velocities).
That's why we have shifts. Now don't get me wrong, I hate shiftwork, I tried it once and I hate, hate, hate it. I know that machines don't require sleep, food, or demand pay (yet...), but why do we have human (!!) quality control? Because machines may be more effective, but not perfect.
You don't need 'perfect', just 'accurate' and machines are far more accurate and precise than Humans.
As I mentioned before, it comes down to how you design the thing.
If you design with cost efficiency in mind its bound to have problems.
Really? What's more cost efficient? Replacing all workers with machines yet still have human quality controllers (which require nourishment and thus cannot work all the time, have mood swings which can affect their critical perception, and so forth), or replacing all workers with machines and have a computer as a quality controller? We have machines that can automatically detect errors down to the molecular level. Why don't we use them? Because they're cold machines. Not because it's "cost (in)efficient"
We are increasingly using automated machines as the prices of automation drop even faster. The more you automate and technology takes over, prices of said technology goes down and automation then takes over.
This is inevitable and will continue to occur at an exponential pace.
Why they hadn't been replaced today... its because the cost is still apparently not in the range of what companies can afford. But they will, because in the end, they don't care about manual labor. Companies care about expending the least amount of money to increase production and lower overall costs while increasing profits (that's what 'cost efficiency' is about).
Maybe I'm not from the world, or maybe my definitions are too different, but for me, cost efficient means spending more money on a good and sound system that works for years or even decades with little maintenance, instead of buying the cheaper version, which requires more maintenance. But that's just me, thinking our whole economy is based on waste-production, waste-consumation, and waste-recycling, instead of efficiency and longevity...
Something that Trek allegedly made away with. I say allegedly, because the shows with Miles infiltrating the Orion Syndicate showed a rather different perspective...
See my earlier reply.
Cost efficiency (on a corporate level) = expending less money to increase ones production while lowering production costs (which usually also means focusing on monetarily CHEAP raw materials that were designed to fail after a specific period of time for the purpose of 'encouraging' people to spend more money as well as cutting corners).
Also, not all cheap products are bad and break down immediately... actually my experience has been the opposite and my cheaper products were far more reliable than numerous so-called brand names.
It depends on how you handle the said product and whether you maintain it properly (if maintenance is possible at home).
Yeah, so? New things can scare some people. Now at first, I thought about Barklays transporter-phobia as a over-exaggerated idea of McCoys dislike for transporters, but they played the card pretty well, albeit a bit quirky with the idea of incorporating an entire alien species in the process.
It was idiotic. McCoy's dislike for transporters was entirely unfounded and ridiculous given the amount of knowledge he had at his disposal and the premise the technology in question was used for a LONG time.
Writers simply wanted to introduce many things that still exist today which stem from lack of relevant information.
In Trek (for both civilians and especially SF officers), such things should be unheard of because they WOULD be exposed to relevant information on the subject matter and grown up in the environment where transporting was commonplace.
Barclay's phobia was plain and simple idiotic. He was an engineer, not an ignorant moron.
Cybernation? Reminds me to a disco-even nearby. Same name...
That was how Jacque Fresco referred to the project back then. He renamed it into 'Resource Based Economy' and The Venus Project.
You can look it up if you are interested (the FAQ section of TVP website offers comprehensive answers - but I warn you, its lengthy reading).
Anyway, essentially, the Federation follows in large parts more the socialist concept of moneyfree economy.
Limited representation. Different writers had different ideas and also didn't know how to think within such line of thinking (because they effectively grew up in a monetary based economy and were likely never exposed to potential other concepts that would expand their horizons - which is why in Ds9, Trek progressively introduced some kind of medium of exchange, even though it was utterly ridiculous, and at least 1 episode of Ds9 had Jake Sisko mentioning Humans don't use money, but he was unable to explain it adequately which only showed that the writers had 0 clue on how to think within a moneyless frame of mind without reverting to outdated concepts).
And where's the science in deducting the USE of a technology that the Federation didn't have yet only from one haphazardly said line (as done on the matter of Slipstream by Saquist) or the EXISTENCE of technology based on facts that are never stated onscreen but only on an (even less correct) "Tech Manual" (as you did with the whole Automation-stuff)?
The mere premise of what their technology has been said (and observed) to be capable of on a episode to episode basis, as well as extremely powerful computer system.
Logical connection of existing features perhaps?
I know, and for that fact, I welcome automation. Yet, as you so clearly stated, we live in a money-based economy, so I wonder, how will they support their living then?
In a monetary based system, you can't because:
No job = no money = no access to basic necessities (or anything else for that matter).
We will need to replace the existing economic model with a non monetary one.
The Venus Project offers such an option.
[/quote]
Yes, I know, the unemployment-rate is skyrocketing because of that. See, in the 70s, people with a lesser degree of education simply became factory worker. Apart form the fact that 4/5th of these jobs are done by machines now, the few remaining jobs require a higher degree of education and sometimes even a specialised apprenticeship or even more. Because the Automatons are becoming more and more sophisticated. In the 70s, anyone with a good knowledge of mechanics and electronics could work on a robot arm, program it, and stuff. Nowadays, you need to have studied IT, know at least 3 program languages, and a whole cr*pload of other stuff. With few people getting their heads around one thing...
And those who are incapable of adapting to the new requirements are jobless crooks. They could dedicate themselves to .. well, what? They still need to pay their rents and bills... But they can't, because automation made them jobless.
[/quote]
And therein lies the problem. The current monetary system is a big catch 22 situation.
You need money to gain access to the things you need (including education).
Without money, you cannot gain access to ANYTHING, and you are effectively 'dead'.
People incapable of adapting are NOT 'jobless crooks' - in order to adapt, you need money, and without money, you cannot adapt.
Catch 22.
Observation: the monetary system is outdated and does NOT function in a world with developed science and technology. It needs to be replaced with a system that implements automation for the wellbeing of EVERYONE on the planet (not just the select few).
And we are fast approaching this critical point because automation will inevitably put people out of work.
There is a Gaussian curve to think about here.
Automation will produce the following:
Production will be sky high, while purchasing power will be at rock bottom = collapse of the monetary based system (this will probably occur in the next 10 years, possibly 16 years).
Automation will inevitably continue to replace Humans everywhere because NO ONE is 'irreplaceable'.
Whatever Humans do is a quantifiable process that CAN be easily enough replicated by computer algorithms.
Humans effectively do either repetitive or highly specialized work, both of which, computers surpassed us at approximately 10 years ago.
The Internet already has numerous algorithms doing things online for years that Humans cannot even imagine.
Well, fascism is a scourge of mankind in any form. Communism, and capitalism are in essence two extremes which are impossible to work because of the discrepancies between the idealised vision and the reality. But if you look closely, the UFP is essentially a socialist state.
The UFP was supposed to be based on Resource based economy. The reason it ended up portrayed as a socialist state is because the writers had no idea how to wrap their brains around RBE concept, and they wanted something 'simplistic' that will 'connect' the show to today.
[quote[
That would've made the Federation a state of anarchy; as per the definition of anarchy is a state with no centralised organs of government, NOT -as it is often falsified- a state where there is no law...
[/quote]
Laws are artificial constructs of man. Natural law on the other hand is what should have been applied and lived by. Early TNG hinted at this.
True of the most part, and in an idealised way, many of the government concepts are outdated. Yet, people cling to them because they're afraid of new ideas (or because they're afraid to lose their power, if they happen to have it as part of the government), and because mankind as a rather slothful being, when it comes to change...
The only reason people cling to governments is because they were NOT exposed to relevant general education, critical thinking or problem solving.
That's the main issue in society.
The monetary system is great and creating industrialized education where heads are filled with literal nonsense and does NOT prompt people to THINK, nor does it encourage critical thinking or problem solving.
The existing educational system was designed specifically to create workers and consumers - that's your main issue, but ever since we started living in the era of technology and global communications, people were no longer limited to TV as a source of information, but rather to alternative sources which expanded their minds to include different ways of thinking.
This 'trend' will continue to accelerate exponentially as there are more and more people 'waking up' (to use the proverbial term).
Not an ubership by its own existence, but an ubership by it's (means of) creation.
Hardly... merely using Trek technology to near it fullest potential - which the writers never did.
I'm writing my own story based on the Nightfire and its supposed to actually include another societal 'evolution' of Federation society to resemble Resource Based Economy. It will be a slow process though, and the social experiement with different forms of behavior will happen on the Nightfire for starters to see how it works.
Yes. And it's sad to see not done.
We will, once we drop the ridiculous monetary based economy... and as I said, we are fast approaching the collapse which will present us with the option to do just that and transition away into a much better stat eof being.
Let me paraphrase that, maybe then you see my problem with this concept. You see an error/mistake/writers messup/whatchamacall. You substitute your ideas to clear up the error you perceived.
Understand now? It's your view of a mistake, but that doesn't mean others see it as a mistake. And it certainly does not mean that your solution will suit all others. Yet you simply assume that, and by doing so, you are no better than these other writers (both the show-writers as well as the book-writers)!
There is a difference here because I'm actually using what I know of Trek and its technological abilities to explain the errors the writers did - much like the pocketbooks did.
To requote your initial words:
Do you understand the technology so much better to dare making assumptions? The tech is conjectural even in-verse, so we cannot even guess it's specifications, limitations, powers, or capacities out-verse! Now, I'm referring to Saquists idea that the arrowhead must mean a vessel is Slipstream capable, justifying the idea (that the Prometheus-class could have slipstream, based on the arrowhead) by a *hint* (nothing more!) from the EMH Mk2 regarding it being the fastest ship:
I gave you an answer to that... so yes, I do think that from what I observed in the show I do have an good understanding of how the fictional Slisptream is supposed to work.
My point was that if you don't understand the technology in detail and do not research it, you will probably be limited by your own current technology and understanding in how you can use that new technology... however, once the Voyager crew researched the technology properly and adapted it, they made serious headway.
Which constantly puts a great red bummer on many things, especially evolution (human and technological)..
No... my point here was to illustrate writer stupidity yet again.
They tested the engine molecule by molecule and probably ran simulations beforehand... I find it RIDICULOUS that such extensive testing would miss the phase variance well before Tom found it in a simple warp core diagnostic.
The level absurdity increases from that point on.
The crew had to have made and designed necessary modifications so the ship would be able to cope with phase variance.
The writers simply didn't want the ship leaving the Delta Quadrant... so they made up (yet another) ridiculous reason to hamper the crew's efforts and bring the ship closer to home (when seriously... the crew could have made a ton of small 10 second Slipstream jumps - giving the ship enough time to avoid the phase variance well before it even becomes an issue and 'hop' all the way back to the Federation).
Point: the Flyer was apparently constructed with mostly manual labor and not full blown automation (on top of that inside a starship that did not apparently have dedicated construction equipment, even though there's no conceivable reason it couldn't have it).
Question of purpose. It's a small science and survey vessel, actually not intended for long-range or deep-space exploration. So in the design-idea, the ship would've barely more than a week to the next starbase for repairs, refit, or whatever. That's why they saw no need to extensive construction and/or assembly areas.
Riker wasn't really that much of a bragger in that conversation. The tone of the voice he portrayed it in certainly doesn't evoke bragging.
As for self-repair systems - many novels for example used this, including Voyager.
Fact of the matter is: Federation technology IS capable of such feats (and a lot more).
Attribute the lack of the technology in later episodes to writer stupidity because they wanted to make things more 'dramatic' (in their own view).
He always smooth-talked with women. Maybe the word "bragger" was ill-chosen (please forgive me that, I'm not a native speaker, after all). Let's rather say he likes to over-exagerrates. As per the novels, well,not everyone reads them. So in my view, you can't call something canon, only because some cool story said so. Star Wars may work like that, the Warhammer-verse and a couple of others, but Trek isn't.
My point was that construction time of a starship is different (much shorter) compared to the design process and testing of designs on the drawing board before it reaches the final stage where it satisfies or exceeds the designers expectations.
Voyager crew worked with existing technology and knowledge. Also, Tom Paris already worked out the design of the Flyer in advance (and he was doing that in his spare time apparently - not necessarily for a long amount of time since the Flyer was made in early season 5 - his idea for a larger shuttle probably came into being sometime in late Season 4.
Perhaps even Season 3. His idea of an advanced embarked craft was first mentioned some time after they had this Futures End-incident...
O'Brien was nothing special honestly. Also, if you have a team of engineers at Utopia Planitia who are supposed to be the 'best minds in the Federation' who cannot work it out, I find it very unlikely O'Brien would.
Also... for the most part, he didn't really do anything. He merely patched the ship up as much as he could (because it was not entirely finished at Utopia Planitia - although more than finished enough with the ship having an operational cloaking device and managing to get to Ds9) with the time he had (also taking into account he never overcame the structural inability of the ship to sustain high warp velocities).
Well, he may not be a miracle worker in terms of Federation tech, but considering the desolate state Terok Nor was when the Feds came aboard, he managed to clang it up in less than a season to withstand the structural stress of inertia. Tho there's the next writers messup, why make a station have so much thrust-power that it can traverse a solar system? A station is, well, stationary. At least supposedly.
He may not be a miracle worker like Geordie, who already was significantly weaker than Scotty, but he's still pretty capable.
You don't need 'perfect', just 'accurate' and machines are far more accurate and precise than Humans.
As I mentioned before, it comes down to how you design the thing.
If you design with cost efficiency in mind its bound to have problems.
It was idiotic. McCoy's dislike for transporters was entirely unfounded and ridiculous given the amount of knowledge he had at his disposal and the premise the technology in question was used for a LONG time.
Well, not really idiotic, rather quirky. I mean, he IS a doctor, wh knows how his body works. So he's just scared of having all this stuff (ivers, lungs, stomach, bladder, all the strands of muscles and so forth) disassembled into it's atoms, digitised, sent through circuits into space, maybe through some atmosphere, and then reassembled at some spot. It's somewhat understandable, given that some people were afraid of the first cars insofar they feared that driving the cars could hurt their body (not in crashes but rather due to poor streets). Pointless if you look at it, but from their point of view a totally valid thing.
On the other hand, Pulaski had the same issue an I found that obnoxious. Then again, Pulaski was specifically made like McCoy to revive the only antagonism between the sarcastic and down-to-earth medical man (McCoy/Pulaski) and the scientifical whizz-kid and super-brain (Spock/Data). An attempt that went badly wrong...
In Trek (for both civilians and especially SF officers), such things should be unheard of because they WOULD be exposed to relevant information on the subject matter and grown up in the environment where transporting was commonplace.
Barclay's phobia was plain and simple idiotic. He was an engineer, not an ignorant moron.
As said, it's a question of personal views. Barclays phobia was merely the over-the-top extreme...
That was how Jacque Fresco referred to the project back then. He renamed it into 'Resource Based Economy' and The Venus Project.
You can look it up if you are interested (the FAQ section of TVP website offers comprehensive answers - but I warn you, its lengthy reading).
I've heard of it often now. I only got a few tidbits (I think I even saw something similarly named on facebook...) so far, but I think I'll check it out more.
Limited representation. Different writers had different ideas and also didn't know how to think within such line of thinking (because they effectively grew up in a monetary based economy and were likely never exposed to potential other concepts that would expand their horizons - which is why in Ds9, Trek progressively introduced some kind of medium of exchange, even though it was utterly ridiculous, and at least 1 episode of Ds9 had Jake Sisko mentioning Humans don't use money, but he was unable to explain it adequately which only showed that the writers had 0 clue on how to think within a moneyless frame of mind without reverting to outdated concepts).
Well, Jake's just a kid, so it shouldn't be made his fault.
On the other hand, Picard explained this system on several occasions, with varying explanations and equally varying results..
The mere premise of what their technology has been said (and observed) to be capable of on a episode to episode basis, as well as extremely powerful computer system.
Logical connection of existing features perhaps?
No. You cannot deduce facts of a conjectual tech (Slipstream, which the Federation never had in any screen-show!) from observation of a preceeding technology (warp-drive), or alien usage (Borg, or the Species that built the Dauntless).
And therein lies the problem. The current monetary system is a big catch 22 situation.
You need money to gain access to the things you need (including education).
Without money, you cannot gain access to ANYTHING, and you are effectively 'dead'.
People incapable of adapting are NOT 'jobless crooks' - in order to adapt, you need money, and without money, you cannot adapt.
Catch 22.
Observation: the monetary system is outdated and does NOT function in a world with developed science and technology. It needs to be replaced with a system that implements automation for the wellbeing of EVERYONE on the planet (not just the select few).
I know an small community somewhere in the Scandinavian region (I think somewhere in Norway), where they completely abandoned money. They "pay" by working. The farmer works his land or animals and puts the goods out to be taken by those who want them. The butchers takes the meat from meat-farmers and processes them to a range of goods that are also free to take. Everyone in this town-tall community has a purpose and task and fullfills it.
Automation will inevitably continue to replace Humans everywhere because NO ONE is 'irreplaceable'.
Whatever Humans do is a quantifiable process that CAN be easily enough replicated by computer algorithms.
Humans effectively do either repetitive or highly specialized work, both of which, computers surpassed us at approximately 10 years ago.
Wrong. Teachers will always be humans (I hope so, because the day that a computer teaches about arts will be a terribly black day for the entire human culture!). Babysitters will always be humans; generally, the whole list of jobs affiliated with the social care sector (care of the youth, care of elders) must always be human-staffed.
The only reason people cling to governments is because they were NOT exposed to relevant general education, critical thinking or problem solving.
That's the main issue in society.
The monetary system is great and creating industrialized education where heads are filled with literal nonsense and does NOT prompt people to THINK, nor does it encourage critical thinking or problem solving.
Hardly... merely using Trek technology to near it fullest potential - which the writers never did.
I'm writing my own story based on the Nightfire and its supposed to actually include another societal 'evolution' of Federation society to resemble Resource Based Economy. It will be a slow process though, and the social experiement with different forms of behavior will happen on the Nightfire for starters to see how it works.
Well, it's the writers to define "fullest potential". That's why Star Wars has such super-ships like the kilometer-long super star-dreadnaught Eclipse with it's own miniature Death-Star Cannon, or the fighter-sized Suncrusher that can shoot a simple torpedo that can cause a sun to go nova, or the World Cruisers of the Vuuzhan Vong (or how ever they're spelled...) that does not only look like a milkyway galaxy, but actually id even designed like one, and is about 100 kilometers in diameter, or ...
See my point? Fullest Potential may be fine, but if you overdo it, it becomes too superior for it's own good.
We will, once we drop the ridiculous monetary based economy... and as I said, we are fast approaching the collapse which will present us with the option to do just that and transition away into a much better stat eof being.
I hope so. Several of my friends and family members (and myself as well.) are eager to rid themselves of money.
I gave you an answer to that... so yes, I do think that from what I observed in the show I do have an good understanding of how the fictional Slisptream is supposed to work.
That's the point. The big word here is "supposed" (along with "you do think, btw.)... That means you don't know how it should work, or how it actually works! Soyour ideas are still just as conjectual.
They tested the engine molecule by molecule and probably ran simulations beforehand... I find it RIDICULOUS that such extensive testing would miss the phase variance well before Tom found it in a simple warp core diagnostic.
The level absurdity increases from that point on.
The crew had to have made and designed necessary modifications so the ship would be able to cope with phase variance.
The writers simply didn't want the ship leaving the Delta Quadrant... so they made up (yet another) ridiculous reason to hamper the crew's efforts and bring the ship closer to home (when seriously... the crew could have made a ton of small 10 second Slipstream jumps - giving the ship enough time to avoid the phase variance well before it even becomes an issue and 'hop' all the way back to the Federation).
Yes, that much is true, yet you could just as easily argue that the structural stress could endanger the ships non-slipstream performance, or that some important wiring shorts out and they don't want to waste to much material on constantly replacing it (they might replicate the wiring, but the replication also requires energy, which comes from their fuel, and we've seen them be on shortages every now and then), or that the self-build/self-installed QSD shorts out too often (or fries itself completely).
In the end, however, it's the captains decision. You're in change of several hundred beings and have to chose between either getting them home the fast way and possibly killing them in the attempt, or traveling the long route, where you have more chance at avoiding a sudden and imminent "Slipstream tunnel collapse" (or whatever technical flaws you wish you blame, writers choice..). Keep in mind, as a captain, the fate of the entire ship is in your hands. To be perfectly honest, I wouldn't have used the slipstream engine either after they almost killed themselves. In their view, they were facing either high risk of sudden death on one hand, and equally high risk of death somewhere along the way, yet not sudden - and thus easier to avoid.
In a very few amount of people the basic human drive to procreate is superseded by pure imagination.
There are 7 Billion people on the planet and nearly half of them live in poverty.
It just might be okay if a few don't share that drive.
Rest assured, Wishbone, I do have a fiancee, and without intending to disclose too much of our private life, I'd like to point out that we had a wonderful and hot night, despite me being a Trek-geek (something she isn't, however).
Like all long term projects, Nightfire is one of my longest terms ones.
I'm still fidgeting with the main hull geometry a bit, making adjustments.
Phaser strips on the saucer are temporary (I'll need to replace them eventually with better ones), right now I'm using these as a place-holder.
Some modifications can be seen of course.
Considering that this ship is set in 2392 (14 years after Voyager returned to Federation space), I want to implement an ideology used by Buckminster Fuller in 1970-ies: 'ephemeralization' in hull design and create just enough in terms of hull texturing where its not overtly busy.
Trek ships should really reflect this (especially post Voyager ones)...
At any rate, I plan on making hull grids of course, but relatively faint ones. Windows will still be present of course.
Sensor arrays... Voyager clearly had a greebled indentation inside its saucer edge for instance... I'll just go along with what Enterprise-D had and make it more 'plain'.
No need to have sensitive hardware on the outside of course.
Anyway... it's a small mod, on the overall 'flow' of the ship (primarily with the phaser strips), and I got rid of indentation in the saucer (felt it was unnecessary).
Voyager has numerous sensor arrays. Most notable is the large one between the registry and auxiliary deflector on the saucer top. There is also a good size one in the spine behind the bridge. There are a few sensor strips around the saucer edge and sides of the secondary hull. They're all pretty greeble heavy, due to the smaller size of the ship. With the immensity of the Enterprise-D, there was no point in making them highly detailed, due to only seeing them close up once or twice. (then larger section models were constructed) Since Voyager is smaller, they're easy to see.
Voyager was smaller, but it was also more advanced.
I think the 'greebling' has more to do with presenting a ship in 'more detailed capacity' for visual purposes than anything else.
The hull grids for instance (light/thin ones) seem ok, but other than that, most of the technology would be embedded inside the hull.
Oh... I was thinking on extending the lower bit of the nacelle pylon so it connects/extends to the secondary hull (as opposed to just doing so on the mid section).
Not sure how to explain it better.
I'll try to make the adjustments and show it instead.
Posts
Nothing major, but I did some secondary hull changes as well as the underside of the saucer and modified the aft shuttlebay somewhat.
I've been working on a temp job and have other things to pay attention to, so 3d work was sporadic at best.
Hope you like the proposed idea for how the Warp core should be placed on the ship.
I figured I can retain the half-vertical position while extending the core to a higher level.
Larger core could conceivably provide more power... though its not a guarantee. I guess the notion of technical efficiency can produce small but monstrously powerful warp core... we'll see... its initial theory on how I thought about Warp core placement for this particular design.
I keep fiddling with the hull a bit, making changes, etc. so I'm fearful to actually go ahead and do the windows.
Meh... I guess the hull is really done now, and windows should be next along with the hull grids.
The first two shots are essentially a camera with a very skewed perception inside the shield - kinda produces an interesting effect similar to Slipstream.
I guess I wanted to find a way to merge multiple design choices into one... the nacelles however are highly distinctive in shape... though the Bussard collectors do emulate the Galaxy class.
If the Prometheus and Sovereign class are any indication, its possible that Starfleet is donning the more circular saucer for the arrowhead one when it comes to newer ships (we do have an indication that hull geometry could play a certain part when traveling at FTL speeds - same applies to vessel's mass).
Even though Prometheus Computer didn't reveal Quantum slip stream, The MK two might have given that away since clearly Voyager is faster than 9.9.
The fake-Fed USS Dauntless was encountered on Stardate 51978, in mid-2374.
The Prometheus-prototype to which the EMH of Voyager to transferred to was hijacked somewhere around 51462, also in 2374, but even earlier than the encounter with the Dauntless. Since building a starship already takes several years, and designing around equally much, I'd wager that the Prometheus-concepts were started somewhere around 2365, give or take 2 years. And when Voyager encountered the vessel and it's slipstream-engine, everyone was going "hey wow, that's new!" (Chakotay was amazed by the new hull geometry, Tuvok pointed in his typically Vulcan dryness out that the ship was launched around 3 months prior to them meeting it, Paris doesn't recognise the engine configuration, and when they are down in engineering, Paris refers to the weird power core by this line: "I don't know what it is.." and after he reads out that it's a QSD, Chakotay and Tuvok are surprised - to say the least...)
Even the alledged memo from Starfleet Command said it's experimental and high-risk...
So there's no way the Prometheus could have QSD. Firstly because by the time the ship was designed, something should've leaked out so that at some point in time, the Voyager crew would've pondered about building a QSD themselves. And yet, later when they run across the Equinox in 2376, after telling them about that, even they seem surprised about such a technology...
According to some official and semi-official books and booklets, the arrowhead design is really partially as a result of the efficienty of engines (every official Trek-sheet dealing with subspace calls it a medium with rather liquid attributes, so a streamlined vessel is more likely to travel through it better), but also as a result of the frequent battles, and the Dominion War in paticular causing such agressive lines like the Sovereign and the Prometheus... (meh...)
If you were doing it manually, yes... with automation? Hardly.
I would imagine that using fully automated work-bees, shuttles, transporters, robotic arms and other types of machines that the Federation probably has at their disposal, it would take several days, maybe a week or so to build a full-fledged starship.
Automation is hundreds/thousands of times faster and more efficient than Humans or Humanoids in general.
To build massive structures in space such as the large starbase or star-ships any other way would be plain and simple: impractical and stupid.
Besides, the Federation emphasizes technical efficiency. Automation IS one aspect of technical efficiency, and the Nightfire is supposed to reflect that.
Also, there is no job that cannot be automated. Anything that Humans (or Humanoids) do is quantifiable and either: repetitive or highly specialized (in real life, computers surpassed Humans in those tasks over 10 years ago - in Star Trek, the notion of 'manual labor' really shouldn't exist unless there's an emergency and automation repair systems are out).
Think of it as a 'kick in the rear end' because the writers over the years have progressively dumbed down Federation capabilities because they had 0 clue on how to portray things realistically within the scope of the time frame and universe in question (besides, most writers were stuck in the current day mindset and couldn't imagine a potential economy that doesn't run without money in any shape or form because such concepts were alien to them [what with being brought up in an environment where the monetary system is 'still' in place).
The Nightfire simply speaking takes place in the Trek universe as it was meant to be - more or less - doing away with writer stupidity and bringing back the premise of what Trek was supposed to be about in TNG and beyond - cultural progress and indication of hope.
As for the arrowhead design... there were a few indications that ship's hull geometry can be beneficial for certain FTL speeds... but I don't think design plays that much of a crucial role once you understand the technology better.
Indeed, the first version of Slipstream didn't allow Voyager to use it for about an hour and 15 to 30 mins, if we include the chase for the Dauntless and then back again) and that one was explained as a problem of hull geometry inherent in the Intrepid class.
The second version of the Slipstream drive was extensively modified - and as a result, design issue wasn't the problem... but rather it was the inability of the computer to calculate the phase variance in the Slipstream threshold formulation (which seemed a bit far fetched, considering the computer operated at FTL - then again, it wasn't specifically designed to accommodate Slipstream technology from the get go, which points into the direction the crew did extensive modifications to both the computer and the main deflector dish to do this properly - and it was indicated the drive was extensively tested, so for the life of me, I don't understand how they could have missed the phase variance issue, especially after testing the engine molecule by molecule - yet another intentional writer messup - will probably need to write in conceivable error of some kind to explain that tidbit away)
Since Trek has refined how warp works it's implied that speed is either defined by efficient shapes or powerful energy cores to compensate. You note that the first attempt had hull design limits but that was before they retrofitted the warp core so arguably the type 9 core was outputting substantially more to overcome design limitations. The variance problem is difficult to justify scientifically . Warp drive already manipuates space on the quantum level. To be honest...the whole.."projecting a quantum field" is horse hockey. Technobable run amok.
P.S I just finished watching most of Blake's 7.
I am astounded how a show this old got all the terminology right. They dealt with Blackholes and Neutron stars, Time distortion and kept the abilities of their ship and tech amazing consistent. It puts Trek to shame.
13 years is excessive to be the third incarnation of the design. Granted they were likely building them simultaneously but the Registry shows a number of ships, New Orleans, Akira, Ambassador and Nebula were precursors to the Galaxy with similar size structure and tech as Galaxy. So this wasn't a ship designed in a vacuum. They knew how to do it.
Numbers on Registry confirmed Star Fleet Constructed on average 357 ships a year during peace time. To put out that many ships a year you'd have to have 2000+ construction facilities.
Note too that to Deks Point. The ISS Defiant was constructed in just a years time. Construction at a non Ship yard and improvised facilities. OF course production in Trek couldn't show us automation but it had to have been done and if we disregard the 80's mentality to construction show in the Tech manual then likely every ship is constructed just so.
Something wrong with the forums?
Btw... dreamwalker... you are quite correct on that... but while replicators are exceedingly fast at manufacturing things, my point is that on an industrial level even without replicators, you'd still be able to churn out ships extremely fast - much less than a year, and that you DON'T need replicators to achieve abundance (not by a long shot) even though they DO simplify the process considerably by converting energy into matter (literally their own words - not manipulating matter and transforming it from one form into another [which is something they CAN do btw], but actual energy into matter conversion) and you basically need to ensure you have ample energy to work with (and seeing how they can also convert energy from one form into another form of energy... you get the point).
Fully automate the process (eliminate any and all process of manual labor) and you end up with extremely fast production that no manual labor could possibly match (Replicators or no replicators).
Btw... anyone remember that fully automated repair station from Enterprise series (in the 22nd century that was taking live specimens of Humanoids to boost its own computational capabilities)?
THAT is what Federation construction facilities would be capable of (except of course snatching people).
The medical drone that repaired Reeds leg? It would be child's play to create in the mid to late 24th century with what the Federation has. Build a basic antigrav unit, put a medical or all purpose-grade tricorder inside with several or just one slot which is modular and can accommodate a vast array of medical equipment and heal away.
Seriously... do you have any idea how many issues could be avoided in medical emergencies?
Just beam specialized medical drones to reported areas where injuries are, or have major designated areas have them in storage on standby if internal transporters aren't available (which is practically impossible considering you also have shuttles and their transporters to work with)...
Get it yet?
On second thought... it would appear that my Sensei status allows me to do this.
And due to Human error, it seems I pressed 'edit post' instead of 'reply with quote'.
My apologies Areius.
Here's a repost of my reply:
There is a difference between designing a starship on the drawing board (which probably does take some time) compared to actual construction times of the ship.
Also, the crew of Voyager didn't really take that long of a time to design the Delta Flyer because they were working on the holodeck to begin with.
Actual construction time for the Flyer was up to what... 6 days with some incompletions... but as we saw, this was done via manual labor and not automation (thank you writer stupidity - where you conveniently forgot you had other shuttles, tractor beams, transporters, probably a highly advanced version of robotic arms and a computer that can be programmed through simple voice commands to replace the entire crew and done things with speeds that no ordinary mortal in Trek could possibly match).
Also, have we forgotten about self-repair systems Federation ships should have?
Riker plainly stated in TNG that the ship can clean itself and repair itself.
Oh right... one more thing out the window for the sake of 'drama'.
Leah may have worked on the propulsion system for the Galaxy class for a full year, but this doesn't mean she was building it from scratch with her bare hands.
She was probably doing it on the drawing board. The actual construction would come out later after all simulations and computer models passed the testing phase to her satisfaction.
With transporters and replicators (or just highly specialized machines that are used for industrial manufacturing) it would literally be assembled by the computer (not by manual labor) and done in a fraction of the time it takes Humanoids.
Sisko being assigned to Utopia Planitia for 3 years accounts for the design process, the actual commission of the Defiant being 4 years after this assignment was completed doesn't mean it took SF 4 years to build the thing, because even the dialogue does NOT correspond with that.
Sisko clearly stated that he worked on the Defiant design for 3 years... but that would be on the drawing board.
He also stated in 'The Search' that SF already previously tested the ship in full but had problems at high warp speeds which is why the ship was never commissioned sooner and the project scrapped (until the Dominion entered the picture).
And I'm sorry, but scrapping a fully operational starship simply because you had issues at higher warp speeds (which O'Brien was able to iron out more or less when Sisko brought the Defiant to Ds9 and later on as time went by even more) seems quite frankly... stupid.
Per the dialogue, the Federation WAS able to keep up with the Dominion... just barely (they apparently had to put in some effort).
As for automation not possibly being thousands of times faster/efficient compared to manual labor... do some research on automation in real life and then come back and tell me a Human can work 24/7 without breaks while assembling a car at speeds comparable to basic robotic arms as its being done in factories.
Or better yet, creating electronic components at the size of microns (which you cannot do through manual labor, but instead require specialized machines which quite literally churn them out in large numbers extremely fast).
Problem with Trek as it went on: the writers completely missed the mark with technological automation and downplayed it for the sake of 'drama'.
Why?
Because often enough writers have a very limited understanding of science and technology, resulting in grasping onto things they barely understand from the real world (which is very little).
Incorrect. The only reason we still have manual labor is because we live in a monetary based economy which focuses on 'cost efficiency' (what is monetarily AFFORDABLE to achieve) as opposed to 'technical efficiency (focusing purely on available resources to create more by using less with the latest science at our disposal), so the rate of automation being incorporated today is accelerating because the cost of technology is coming down faster... that's the only limitation in monetary based economy 'cost' (not actual resources).
We have the ability to design things that will not break down (the only reason they do so now is because they are made from monetarily cheap materials, not superior synthetic materials that can be synthesized in sustainable abundance - and because its more profitable for computers and electronics to break down after a specific period of time because that forces people to 'upgrade' after a relatively short amount of time and spend money - instead of say upgrading existing technology by making it completely modular, and harvesting raw materials from existing technologies to manufacture new ones - the process of technical efficiency allows us to create more with less, so we can easily create for example 2 smartphones using raw materials from just 1 older one because we learned to make better materials that are thinner, lighter and much more stronger/flexible).
We also already have machines capable of self-maintenance and machines that build other machines.
The only conceivable reason you might need Humans is the prospect to very rarely check if the the machinery works properly (which it does if its DESIGNED properly - in a monetary system where everything is based around 'cost efficiency', you end up cutting corners and going for the FINANCIALLY CHEAP ENOUGH design where you spend less money - not the most TECHNICALLY EFFICIENT design that uses the BEST possible combination of materials with least amount of used power and expended resources) which would maybe require of a person that loves doing these types of things to set aside say 30 mins or 1 hour per WEEK to do that (while the machinery would actually beep a technician automatically if something goes wrong - incidentally, this is already being done in case you didn't know - technicians are mainly on standby and only go to the factory to do repair work when the machinery beeps them - but that machinery can be designed to be self-maintaining).
No... I'm saying that utilizing technology to its fullest potential is something the writers completely missed as the show progressed (they even tried to create certain phobias around various technologies).
And there's nothing 'superhuman' about it.
Roddenberry understood this to a degree. His whole concept of a moneyless society stemmed from Jacque Fresco idea called 'cybernation' at the time which later on was renamed as 'resource based economy' (which heavily relies on automation).
Trek was a TV show and numerous other writers took part in the process. Roddenberry had to make numerous compromises from the original TNG ideas he had because the station at the time thought the concept was too 'out there' (that people wouldn't be able to connect with it at all).
I'm sorry, but if you want encourage people to THINK, you don't cater to existing notions. You CHALLENGE the very foundations and think critically. That's how science is supposed to operate.
Evidence is not proof and correlation is not proof of causation.
As such, science is based on the guideline that everything and anything is subject to change at any given time, regardless of how much evidence you may have (in essence, there is no 'belief' or fixation on anything - you may follow certain paths that you arrive at using the scientific method, but as a scientist you have to keep an open mind to the possibility that this could be incorrect and could change... and actually, you TRY to continuously falsify it by looking for other options).
Automation is nothing to be feared btw. It can liberate Humans from the notion of having to work for a living.
Instead, people will dedicate themselves to do other things.
We had the technology in the 1970-ies already to reduce the working day to 15 hours per week, but this didn't materialize due to the outdated concept of working 40 hours per day.
Today, we have the technology to automate well over 75% of the global workforce tomorrow, and the rest in under 5 years.
But bear in mind that Capitalism WILL inevitably automate one way or the other because automation is financially cheaper, easier and faster than manual labor - except that if you keep Capitalism or any monetary based system where you have to have a job to earn money and gain access to basic necessities and everything else (which Humanity in real life has been producing in absurd abundance for over 100 years using science and technology), then you end up with problems.
Roddenberry realized that a moneyless economy CAN work... but it has nothing to do with communism, socialism, capitalism or fascism.
Also, he had numerous restrictions in place so he couldn't have eliminated the notion of 'governments' from the show either (even though he wanted to).
Because, when you have a general population exposed to relevant general education, critical thinking and problem solving along with massive technology (even ours from current day), you realize that governments as such are completely ridiculous concept that do not apply anymore.
Whoever said this was an uber-ship?
I didn't say this, and certainly wasn't suggesting that.
However... to put things into perspective... if we were to drop monetary constraints today and focus exclusively on available resources and designing things with modularity in mind that actually LAST, self-maintain and are as automated as our current scientific knowledge allows, we would literally improve efficiencies by ORDERS OF MAGNITUDE compared to what we do under 'monetary constraints'.
I'm basically doing away with writer constraints and inability to think within the scope of the time frame and universe in question.
Nothing 'uber' about it to be honest. That would be akin to creating computers today which are thousands of times faster and more efficient but would be at the atomic level - all of which is possible of course... just not very 'cost effective' (monetarily speaking) within the constraints of current outdated economic model.
Clarify exactly what do you mean by that?
I stated that initially, when you do not understand the technology somewhat, you end up being limited by existing designs you are using (talking about Slipstream version no. 1 which did not allow Voyager to use it more than an hour and a half perhaps in total - and the crew did very quick modifications to the core and deflector to achieve initial Slipstream).
However, when the crew DID study the technology in detail (which they obviously did 'behind the scenes' before 'Timeless' episode took place), they not only INCREASED the speed at which the ship went through in Slipstream, but also they negated the issue of hull design being the problem (because it was never stated to be a problem in this version).
To my recollection, Voyager stayed for approximately 1 minute in Slipstream before future Harry dispersed the Slipstream (it was stated by dialogue that the phase variance did not present problems until 17 seconds into the flight), and the ship travelled through 10 000 Ly's in the process - so taking into account that Voyager couldn't have stayed in Slipstream for very long before being forced out (which was displayed through their icy demise in an alternate timeline), it stands to reason the maximum amount of time the ship could have stayed in Slipstream (v2) before the Phase variance forced it out would be around 1 minute mark.
Phase variance was obviously the issue of the computers inability to properly calculate phase changes as the Slipstream was being created (their own words). This is why they sent the Delta Flyer ahead. It is likely the modifications Harry inputted were effective for the Flyer to a point, but not good enough for Voyager (different size, etc. or quite possibly Human error).
As if the pocket books didn't do this (and done a pretty good job at it I might add).
Besides, keep in mind the characters. He was talking to a woman (Riker being the ever-smooth womaniser who want's to impress) that is essentially a farmer-girl - read: a woman used (and by her actions obviously upset) to dirt and filth, and she being responsible to clean it. So, since we never saw these self-repair powers actually IN ACTION, he might as well have boasted/bragged... I don't think it's stated that she was working on it FOR a year, only a year BEFORE launch.... Of course she was a mere design expert, as her office (or the holographic recreation thereof) perfectly well shows. I remember a game (I believe it was Birth of the Federation) that "introduced" industrial replicators, replicator-units that were about twice as big as a regular transport pad. Still. True. but then again, miracle worker.... As certain engineers seem to be always.... That's why we have shifts. Now don't get me wrong, I hate shiftwork, I tried it once and I hate, hate, hate it. I know that machines don't require sleep, food, or demand pay (yet...), but why do we have human (!!) quality control? Because machines may be more effective, but not perfect. Really? What's more cost efficient? Replacing all workers with machines yet still have human quality controllers (which require nourishment and thus cannot work all the time, have mood swings which can affect their critical perception, and so forth), or replacing all workers with machines and have a computer as a quality controller? We have machines that can automatically detect errors down to the molecular level. Why don't we use them? Because they're cold machines. Not because it's "cost (in)efficient" Maybe I'm not from the world, or maybe my definitions are too different, but for me, cost efficient means spending more money on a good and sound system that works for years or even decades with little maintenance, instead of buying the cheaper version, which requires more maintenance. But that's just me, thinking our whole economy is based on waste-production, waste-consumation, and waste-recycling, instead of efficiency and longevity...
Something that Trek allegedly made away with. I say allegedly, because the shows with Miles infiltrating the Orion Syndicate showed a rather different perspective... Yeah, so? New things can scare some people. Now at first, I thought about Barklays transporter-phobia as a over-exxagerated idea of McCoys dislike for transporters, but they played the card pretty well, albeit a bit quirky with the idea of incorporating an entire alien species in the process. Cybernation? Reminds me to a disco-even nearby. Same name...
Anyway, essentially, the Federation follows in large parts more the socialist concept of moneyfree economy. And where's the science in deducting the USE of a technology that the Federation didn't have yet only from one haphazardly said line (as done on the matter of Slipstream by Saquist) or the EXISTENCE of technology based on facts that are never stated onscreen but only on an (even less correct) "Tech Manual" (as you did with the whole Automation-stuff)? I know, and for that fact, I welcome automation. Yet, as you so clearly stated, we live in a money-based economy, so I wonder, how will they support their living then? Yes, I know, the unemployment-rate is skyrocketing because of that. See, in the 70s, people with a lesser degree of education simply became factory worker. Apart form the fact that 4/5th of these jobs are done by machines now, the few remaining jobs require a higher degree of education and sometimes even a specialised apprenticeship or even more. Because the Automatons are becoming more and more sophisticated. In the 70s, anyone with a good knowledge of mechanics and electronics could work on a robot arm, program it, and stuff. Nowadays, you need to have studied IT, know at least 3 program languages, and a whole cr*pload of other stuff. With few people getting their heads around one thing...
And those who are incapable of adapting to the new requirements are jobless crooks. They could dedicate themselves to .. well, what? They still need to pay their rents and bills... But they can't, because automation made them jobless. Well, fascism is a scourge of mankind in any form. Communism, and capitalism are in essence two extremes which are impossible to work because of the discrepancies between the idealised vision and the reality. But if you look closely, the UFP is essentially a socialist state. That would've made the Federation a state of anarchy; as per the definition of anarchy is a state with no centralised organs of government, NOT -as it is often falsified- a state where there is no law... True of the most part, and in an idealised way, many of the government concepts are outdated. Yet, people cling to them because they're afraid of new ideas (or because they're afraid to lose their power, if they happen to have it as part of the government), and because mankind as a rather slothful being, when it comes to change... Not an ubership by its own existence, but an ubership by it's (means of) creation. Yes. And it's sad to see not done. Let me paraphrase that, maybe then you see my problem with this concept.
You see an error/mistake/writers messup/whatchamacall.
You substitute your ideas to clear up the error you perceived.
Understand now? It's your view of a mistake, but that doesn't mean others see it as a mistake. And it certainly does not mean that your solution will suit all others. Yet you simply assume that, and by doing so, you are no better than these other writers (both the show-writers as well as the book-writers)! To requote your initial words: Do you understand the technology so much better to dare making assumptions? The tech is conjectural even in-verse, so we cannot even guess it's specifications, limitations, powers, or capacities out-verse! Now, I'm referring to Saquists idea that the arrowhead must mean a vessel is Slipstream capable, justifying the idea (that the Prometheus-class could have slipstream, based on the arrowhead) by a *hint* (nothing more!) from the EMH Mk2 regarding it being the fastest ship: Sounds about right... Which constantly puts a great red bummer on many things, especially evolution (human and technological)..
Merely deductions based on the evidence at hand.
-Voyager tells us warp fields are symmetrical to to the hull geometry
-Voyager establish warp field are disrupted by foreign objects or disruptive lines
-Voyager tells us temporal stress out side the field can destroy the ship at high speed.
-Voyager says the Intrepid design prevents it from staying at slipstream speeds for long
-Voyager's design uses an articulation frame like an F14 to stream line it's shape and thus warp field.
-Voyager uses field enhancers along the saucer hull to strengthen the forward lobe
-DS9 says the Defiant can't achieve beyond warp 9 without additional power to structural integrity (Ship design)
-TNG Tech manual says "The saucer module which carries the characteristic shape of an emergency landing craft, helps shape the forward field component though the use of a 55 degree elliptical hull planform, found to produce superior peak transitional efficiency.
That's quite a few premises.
~While not definite, through observation we find that Defiant has a more powerful Type 7 power plant composed of 4 streams.
~According to the Voyager Intrepid uses a Type 9 tri-cyclic core. likely meaning 3 streams in a cyclonic formation.
Only one of the premise are deducible and found on Prometheus. 1. A powerful warp core or in this case 3 Warp Cores. The hull matches no known configuration in the fleet and goes against all the other premise, namely Galaxy's 55 degree ellipse, Voyagers articulation frame and field enhancers.
The only external premises that fits Prometheus:
-Dauntless used a arrowhead for slipstream speeds
-Voyager used a modified warp core to achieve slipstream velocities nullifiying design limitations.
Of course this is fiction but logically we've narrowed down 10 premises to 2.
It's at the least very probable.
Point: the Flyer was apparently constructed with mostly manual labor and not full blown automation (on top of that inside a starship that did not apparently have dedicated construction equipment, even though there's no conceivable reason it couldn't have it).
Riker wasn't really that much of a bragger in that conversation. The tone of the voice he portrayed it in certainly doesn't evoke bragging.
As for self-repair systems - many novels for example used this, including Voyager.
Fact of the matter is: Federation technology IS capable of such feats (and a lot more).
Attribute the lack of the technology in later episodes to writer stupidity because they wanted to make things more 'dramatic' (in their own view).
You see examples of this across Trek from episode to episode.
My point was that construction time of a starship is different (much shorter) compared to the design process and testing of designs on the drawing board before it reaches the final stage where it satisfies or exceeds the designers expectations.
Voyager crew worked with existing technology and knowledge. Also, Tom Paris already worked out the design of the Flyer in advance (and he was doing that in his spare time apparently - not necessarily for a long amount of time since the Flyer was made in early season 5 - his idea for a larger shuttle probably came into being sometime in late Season 4.
O'Brien was nothing special honestly. Also, if you have a team of engineers at Utopia Planitia who are supposed to be the 'best minds in the Federation' who cannot work it out, I find it very unlikely O'Brien would.
Also... for the most part, he didn't really do anything. He merely patched the ship up as much as he could (because it was not entirely finished at Utopia Planitia - although more than finished enough with the ship having an operational cloaking device and managing to get to Ds9) with the time he had (also taking into account he never overcame the structural inability of the ship to sustain high warp velocities).
You don't need 'perfect', just 'accurate' and machines are far more accurate and precise than Humans.
As I mentioned before, it comes down to how you design the thing.
If you design with cost efficiency in mind its bound to have problems.
We are increasingly using automated machines as the prices of automation drop even faster. The more you automate and technology takes over, prices of said technology goes down and automation then takes over.
This is inevitable and will continue to occur at an exponential pace.
Why they hadn't been replaced today... its because the cost is still apparently not in the range of what companies can afford. But they will, because in the end, they don't care about manual labor. Companies care about expending the least amount of money to increase production and lower overall costs while increasing profits (that's what 'cost efficiency' is about).
See my earlier reply.
Cost efficiency (on a corporate level) = expending less money to increase ones production while lowering production costs (which usually also means focusing on monetarily CHEAP raw materials that were designed to fail after a specific period of time for the purpose of 'encouraging' people to spend more money as well as cutting corners).
Also, not all cheap products are bad and break down immediately... actually my experience has been the opposite and my cheaper products were far more reliable than numerous so-called brand names.
It depends on how you handle the said product and whether you maintain it properly (if maintenance is possible at home).
It was idiotic. McCoy's dislike for transporters was entirely unfounded and ridiculous given the amount of knowledge he had at his disposal and the premise the technology in question was used for a LONG time.
Writers simply wanted to introduce many things that still exist today which stem from lack of relevant information.
In Trek (for both civilians and especially SF officers), such things should be unheard of because they WOULD be exposed to relevant information on the subject matter and grown up in the environment where transporting was commonplace.
Barclay's phobia was plain and simple idiotic. He was an engineer, not an ignorant moron.
That was how Jacque Fresco referred to the project back then. He renamed it into 'Resource Based Economy' and The Venus Project.
You can look it up if you are interested (the FAQ section of TVP website offers comprehensive answers - but I warn you, its lengthy reading).
Limited representation. Different writers had different ideas and also didn't know how to think within such line of thinking (because they effectively grew up in a monetary based economy and were likely never exposed to potential other concepts that would expand their horizons - which is why in Ds9, Trek progressively introduced some kind of medium of exchange, even though it was utterly ridiculous, and at least 1 episode of Ds9 had Jake Sisko mentioning Humans don't use money, but he was unable to explain it adequately which only showed that the writers had 0 clue on how to think within a moneyless frame of mind without reverting to outdated concepts).
The mere premise of what their technology has been said (and observed) to be capable of on a episode to episode basis, as well as extremely powerful computer system.
Logical connection of existing features perhaps?
In a monetary based system, you can't because:
No job = no money = no access to basic necessities (or anything else for that matter).
We will need to replace the existing economic model with a non monetary one.
The Venus Project offers such an option.
[/quote]
Yes, I know, the unemployment-rate is skyrocketing because of that. See, in the 70s, people with a lesser degree of education simply became factory worker. Apart form the fact that 4/5th of these jobs are done by machines now, the few remaining jobs require a higher degree of education and sometimes even a specialised apprenticeship or even more. Because the Automatons are becoming more and more sophisticated. In the 70s, anyone with a good knowledge of mechanics and electronics could work on a robot arm, program it, and stuff. Nowadays, you need to have studied IT, know at least 3 program languages, and a whole cr*pload of other stuff. With few people getting their heads around one thing...
And those who are incapable of adapting to the new requirements are jobless crooks. They could dedicate themselves to .. well, what? They still need to pay their rents and bills... But they can't, because automation made them jobless.
[/quote]
And therein lies the problem. The current monetary system is a big catch 22 situation.
You need money to gain access to the things you need (including education).
Without money, you cannot gain access to ANYTHING, and you are effectively 'dead'.
People incapable of adapting are NOT 'jobless crooks' - in order to adapt, you need money, and without money, you cannot adapt.
Catch 22.
Observation: the monetary system is outdated and does NOT function in a world with developed science and technology. It needs to be replaced with a system that implements automation for the wellbeing of EVERYONE on the planet (not just the select few).
And we are fast approaching this critical point because automation will inevitably put people out of work.
There is a Gaussian curve to think about here.
Automation will produce the following:
Production will be sky high, while purchasing power will be at rock bottom = collapse of the monetary based system (this will probably occur in the next 10 years, possibly 16 years).
Automation will inevitably continue to replace Humans everywhere because NO ONE is 'irreplaceable'.
Whatever Humans do is a quantifiable process that CAN be easily enough replicated by computer algorithms.
Humans effectively do either repetitive or highly specialized work, both of which, computers surpassed us at approximately 10 years ago.
The Internet already has numerous algorithms doing things online for years that Humans cannot even imagine.
The UFP was supposed to be based on Resource based economy. The reason it ended up portrayed as a socialist state is because the writers had no idea how to wrap their brains around RBE concept, and they wanted something 'simplistic' that will 'connect' the show to today.
[quote[
That would've made the Federation a state of anarchy; as per the definition of anarchy is a state with no centralised organs of government, NOT -as it is often falsified- a state where there is no law...
[/quote]
Laws are artificial constructs of man. Natural law on the other hand is what should have been applied and lived by. Early TNG hinted at this.
The only reason people cling to governments is because they were NOT exposed to relevant general education, critical thinking or problem solving.
That's the main issue in society.
The monetary system is great and creating industrialized education where heads are filled with literal nonsense and does NOT prompt people to THINK, nor does it encourage critical thinking or problem solving.
The existing educational system was designed specifically to create workers and consumers - that's your main issue, but ever since we started living in the era of technology and global communications, people were no longer limited to TV as a source of information, but rather to alternative sources which expanded their minds to include different ways of thinking.
This 'trend' will continue to accelerate exponentially as there are more and more people 'waking up' (to use the proverbial term).
Hardly... merely using Trek technology to near it fullest potential - which the writers never did.
I'm writing my own story based on the Nightfire and its supposed to actually include another societal 'evolution' of Federation society to resemble Resource Based Economy. It will be a slow process though, and the social experiement with different forms of behavior will happen on the Nightfire for starters to see how it works.
We will, once we drop the ridiculous monetary based economy... and as I said, we are fast approaching the collapse which will present us with the option to do just that and transition away into a much better stat eof being.
There is a difference here because I'm actually using what I know of Trek and its technological abilities to explain the errors the writers did - much like the pocketbooks did.
I gave you an answer to that... so yes, I do think that from what I observed in the show I do have an good understanding of how the fictional Slisptream is supposed to work.
My point was that if you don't understand the technology in detail and do not research it, you will probably be limited by your own current technology and understanding in how you can use that new technology... however, once the Voyager crew researched the technology properly and adapted it, they made serious headway.
No... my point here was to illustrate writer stupidity yet again.
They tested the engine molecule by molecule and probably ran simulations beforehand... I find it RIDICULOUS that such extensive testing would miss the phase variance well before Tom found it in a simple warp core diagnostic.
The level absurdity increases from that point on.
The crew had to have made and designed necessary modifications so the ship would be able to cope with phase variance.
The writers simply didn't want the ship leaving the Delta Quadrant... so they made up (yet another) ridiculous reason to hamper the crew's efforts and bring the ship closer to home (when seriously... the crew could have made a ton of small 10 second Slipstream jumps - giving the ship enough time to avoid the phase variance well before it even becomes an issue and 'hop' all the way back to the Federation).
He always smooth-talked with women. Maybe the word "bragger" was ill-chosen (please forgive me that, I'm not a native speaker, after all). Let's rather say he likes to over-exagerrates. As per the novels, well,not everyone reads them. So in my view, you can't call something canon, only because some cool story said so. Star Wars may work like that, the Warhammer-verse and a couple of others, but Trek isn't.
Perhaps even Season 3. His idea of an advanced embarked craft was first mentioned some time after they had this Futures End-incident...
Well, he may not be a miracle worker in terms of Federation tech, but considering the desolate state Terok Nor was when the Feds came aboard, he managed to clang it up in less than a season to withstand the structural stress of inertia. Tho there's the next writers messup, why make a station have so much thrust-power that it can traverse a solar system? A station is, well, stationary. At least supposedly.
He may not be a miracle worker like Geordie, who already was significantly weaker than Scotty, but he's still pretty capable.
And here again are the limitations of humans...
Well, not really idiotic, rather quirky. I mean, he IS a doctor, wh knows how his body works. So he's just scared of having all this stuff (ivers, lungs, stomach, bladder, all the strands of muscles and so forth) disassembled into it's atoms, digitised, sent through circuits into space, maybe through some atmosphere, and then reassembled at some spot. It's somewhat understandable, given that some people were afraid of the first cars insofar they feared that driving the cars could hurt their body (not in crashes but rather due to poor streets). Pointless if you look at it, but from their point of view a totally valid thing.
On the other hand, Pulaski had the same issue an I found that obnoxious. Then again, Pulaski was specifically made like McCoy to revive the only antagonism between the sarcastic and down-to-earth medical man (McCoy/Pulaski) and the scientifical whizz-kid and super-brain (Spock/Data). An attempt that went badly wrong... As said, it's a question of personal views. Barclays phobia was merely the over-the-top extreme...
I've heard of it often now. I only got a few tidbits (I think I even saw something similarly named on facebook...) so far, but I think I'll check it out more.
Well, Jake's just a kid, so it shouldn't be made his fault.
On the other hand, Picard explained this system on several occasions, with varying explanations and equally varying results..
No. You cannot deduce facts of a conjectual tech (Slipstream, which the Federation never had in any screen-show!) from observation of a preceeding technology (warp-drive), or alien usage (Borg, or the Species that built the Dauntless).
They're jobless crooks in the eyes of society... I know an small community somewhere in the Scandinavian region (I think somewhere in Norway), where they completely abandoned money. They "pay" by working. The farmer works his land or animals and puts the goods out to be taken by those who want them. The butchers takes the meat from meat-farmers and processes them to a range of goods that are also free to take. Everyone in this town-tall community has a purpose and task and fullfills it.
Wrong. Teachers will always be humans (I hope so, because the day that a computer teaches about arts will be a terribly black day for the entire human culture!). Babysitters will always be humans; generally, the whole list of jobs affiliated with the social care sector (care of the youth, care of elders) must always be human-staffed.
Bread and Circus. Rome did it long ago..
Well, it's the writers to define "fullest potential". That's why Star Wars has such super-ships like the kilometer-long super star-dreadnaught Eclipse with it's own miniature Death-Star Cannon, or the fighter-sized Suncrusher that can shoot a simple torpedo that can cause a sun to go nova, or the World Cruisers of the Vuuzhan Vong (or how ever they're spelled...) that does not only look like a milkyway galaxy, but actually id even designed like one, and is about 100 kilometers in diameter, or ...
See my point? Fullest Potential may be fine, but if you overdo it, it becomes too superior for it's own good.
I hope so. Several of my friends and family members (and myself as well.) are eager to rid themselves of money.
That's the point. The big word here is "supposed" (along with "you do think, btw.)... That means you don't know how it should work, or how it actually works! Soyour ideas are still just as conjectual.
Yes, that much is true, yet you could just as easily argue that the structural stress could endanger the ships non-slipstream performance, or that some important wiring shorts out and they don't want to waste to much material on constantly replacing it (they might replicate the wiring, but the replication also requires energy, which comes from their fuel, and we've seen them be on shortages every now and then), or that the self-build/self-installed QSD shorts out too often (or fries itself completely).
In the end, however, it's the captains decision. You're in change of several hundred beings and have to chose between either getting them home the fast way and possibly killing them in the attempt, or traveling the long route, where you have more chance at avoiding a sudden and imminent "Slipstream tunnel collapse" (or whatever technical flaws you wish you blame, writers choice..). Keep in mind, as a captain, the fate of the entire ship is in your hands. To be perfectly honest, I wouldn't have used the slipstream engine either after they almost killed themselves. In their view, they were facing either high risk of sudden death on one hand, and equally high risk of death somewhere along the way, yet not sudden - and thus easier to avoid.
Could we see some more renders instead of reams of gobbledegook?
There are 7 Billion people on the planet and nearly half of them live in poverty.
It just might be okay if a few don't share that drive.
I'm still fidgeting with the main hull geometry a bit, making adjustments.
Phaser strips on the saucer are temporary (I'll need to replace them eventually with better ones), right now I'm using these as a place-holder.
Some modifications can be seen of course.
Considering that this ship is set in 2392 (14 years after Voyager returned to Federation space), I want to implement an ideology used by Buckminster Fuller in 1970-ies: 'ephemeralization' in hull design and create just enough in terms of hull texturing where its not overtly busy.
Trek ships should really reflect this (especially post Voyager ones)...
At any rate, I plan on making hull grids of course, but relatively faint ones. Windows will still be present of course.
Sensor arrays... Voyager clearly had a greebled indentation inside its saucer edge for instance... I'll just go along with what Enterprise-D had and make it more 'plain'.
No need to have sensitive hardware on the outside of course.
Anyway... it's a small mod, on the overall 'flow' of the ship (primarily with the phaser strips), and I got rid of indentation in the saucer (felt it was unnecessary).
I like what you have so far.
Voyager has numerous sensor arrays. Most notable is the large one between the registry and auxiliary deflector on the saucer top. There is also a good size one in the spine behind the bridge. There are a few sensor strips around the saucer edge and sides of the secondary hull. They're all pretty greeble heavy, due to the smaller size of the ship. With the immensity of the Enterprise-D, there was no point in making them highly detailed, due to only seeing them close up once or twice. (then larger section models were constructed) Since Voyager is smaller, they're easy to see.
I think the 'greebling' has more to do with presenting a ship in 'more detailed capacity' for visual purposes than anything else.
The hull grids for instance (light/thin ones) seem ok, but other than that, most of the technology would be embedded inside the hull.
Oh... I was thinking on extending the lower bit of the nacelle pylon so it connects/extends to the secondary hull (as opposed to just doing so on the mid section).
Not sure how to explain it better.
I'll try to make the adjustments and show it instead.
How you doing old friend? ItAâs good to see youAâre still alive and kicking.
Welcome back!!:thumb: