Post A Reply
my profile
|
directory
login
|
search
|
faq
|
forum home
»
Flare Sci-Fi Forums
»
Star Trek
»
Starships & Technology
»
Static Galaxy-class spaceframes at UP's surface base?
» Post A Reply
Post A Reply
Login Name:
Password:
Message:
HTML is enabled.
UBB Code™ is enabled.
[QUOTE]Originally posted by FawnDoo: [QB] [QUOTE]Originally posted by Lee: [qb]All so construction people don't have to wear spacesuits? Get real. [/qb][/QUOTE]Now it might just be me, but I find a comment like "get real" quite amusing when used in the context of a discussion about starship construction facilities on Mars. FTL we can handle. Antimatter torpedoes? Easy. Phased beam weapons? Piece of piss. Sentient computers? Yeah, ok. Sentient holograms? Fine. Sentient SOLID holograms? Fine and dandy-o. Assembling a major structure on a planet? Get real. Really, it has a comedic beauty all it's own. Anyways, I think local atmospheric conditions wouldn't be a problem - I would assume a forcefield would be able to shield the inside from the outside, otherwise you've just got a pretty crap forcefield. After all they do use them on ships in space to keep the air [i]in[/i], right? I assume they could also somehow be used to keep stuff [i]out[/i]. Otherwise you might as well just have some lights set into the wall and a guy behind it making "hmmmmm" sounds with a comb and paper (or a kazoo) to make the whole "forcefield" effect complete. As for being blas� about atmospheric shots, I don't think I am: I'm just openminded about what a huge culture like the Federation might be capable of. They're not the biggest power seen in "Trek" but they're very advanced, technologically: why should a Federation shipyard resemble anything even close to our understanding of the word? What if they replicate ships from scratch? Grow them in nanonic clusters? Have a programmable fluidic metal that sorts itself into a rigid shape when directed? Have them built by robots? Ok so these are off the top of my head and might not work in a Trek universe, but I think there is too much of a tendency to view the Federation - and by extension it's background, culture and methodology - as basically the 20th century with cooler guns and blinky lights. If there's a tendency to become blas� about anything, it's there. As for the Galaxy class's thin neck and performance in a gravity well...this would the the same class of ship that hid inside the chromosphere of a star in "I, Borg" wouldn't it? The same class of ship that hung around for a while damned close to another star in "Descent, part 2" and worked to stir up a solar flare? That flew very near a star to dump a garbage freighter? ("Final Mission") (y'all get some of that there gravity stuff near a star, don'tcha?) The same class of ship that has dipped into atmosphere to flush out an enemy target ("Arsenal of Freedom" and ok, just the battle section, but still...) The same class of ship that has braved transwarp conduits, trans-quadrant travel courtesy of Q which spun it around on it's axis incredibly quickly, all sorts...the Galaxy class doesn't strike me as being particularly fragile, considering all we have seen it handle on screen. Besides, I think it would be good if the construction people didn't have to wear spacesuits. Bad enough having a wedgie or an itch in an inconvenient place, but having that for 8 hours in a spacesuit hammering hull sections on with nails? Wow, that's harsh. [/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