Post A Reply
my profile
|
directory
login
|
search
|
faq
|
forum home
»
Flare Sci-Fi Forums
»
Sci-Fi
»
General Sci-Fi
»
$ Battlestar Galactica (The Next Generation) $$poiler$$
» Post A Reply
Post A Reply
Login Name:
Password:
Message:
HTML is enabled.
UBB Code™ is enabled.
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Mucus: [QB] I think you two are talking about different concepts. Jason is thinking about a completely isolated system. Every computer is not networked at all. Every sensor goes to one monitor and thats it. Therefore, yes, it would require a huge amount of middle management. The sensor tech for say, the starboard sensor array would have to confer with the head sensor tech, who would relay the information to the tactical officer, etc. However, this doesn't seem likely and doesn't fit the onscreen evidence. I propose something like what follows, which fits the onscreen action and what Siegfried is thinking about and CC said briefly. 1) Every subsystem has a separate network. The sensor subsystem may join all sensors with a server and to a master control screen on the bridge but nothing else. 2) No connections between unrelated networks. Propulsion is *physically* disconnected from communications, is separate from life support, etc. 2a) No shared computer core. All calculations are done on servers native to their areas. 2b) Every console has a specific function which cannot be reconfigured. So how is this separate from what we see in say Star Trek? Well Star Trek does have a shared computer core, every console is multifunctional, everything is connected. Lets look at a few scenarios: a) Baltar's infected navigation program. Star Trek: Two choices. Infection can proceed to the navigational console, reconfigure it to a new function and send the appropriate new commands or worse go directly to the shared computer core and do whatever. BG: Infection is confined to the navigation computer. The user may get a few funny looking messages, but without any hard connections to any other systems, i.e. propulaion, nothing happens b) Bridge is taken over by hostile troops Star Trek: Redirect controls to Engineering, lock out old controls by command codes. BG: Controls harder to redirect, without pre-existing backups...screwed. c) President Rosalin's teacher computers Star Trek: Computers installed and hooked into network. Due to shared computer core, everything is "faster and more convenient." Unless higher priority functions like navigation or tactical kick in. BG: Only local resources are used. Programs run slower without distributed computing d) Moriarty goes mad Star Trek: Holodeck connected to computer core, Moriarty takes over the bridge. BG: Moriarty takes over rec-deck chess games e) Riker orders tactical pattern Epsilon Beta via voice command Star Trek: Computer inputs appropriate navigational coordinates, arms the weapons, puts a tractor on an enemy vessel and prepares a steaming cup of really good tea instantaneously BG: Riker has to talk to three separate individuals and has to go to the replicator himself. So as we can see there are advantages and disadvatages to both. With a reconfigurable console, Data can essentially control anything connected to the Enterprise computer. BG might need a tractor beam technician, a whole panel of navigation techs, sensor techs, etc. to do the same thing. However BG is much more immune to a computer virus or whatnot. But invariably, the BG setup will need a bigger crew, if only to relay orders between the various subsystems. [/QB][/QUOTE]
Instant Graemlins
Instant UBB Code™
What is UBB Code™?
Options
Disable Graemlins in this post.
*** Click here to review this topic. ***
© 1999-2024 Charles Capps
Powered by UBB.classic™ 6.7.3