The reason the Olympic has a spherical hull in because it is a hospital ship. It's most pressing priority is to carry a large number of casualties/refugees/medical personnel/supplies/etc. This, since it is it's main function, would take precedence over maximum possible speed through subspace. Where other starships are desgined for maximum possible speed (sic: most desirable characteristics when moving through subspace), the Olympic needed the extra volume afforded from a spherical hull. So it was a trade-off, a concession to Starfleet's normal policy of making ships as fast as possible.

The rules that I've come up with though, can be applied to satisfactorily explain all starships we've seen, EXCEPT for the Akiraprize

So ... you can explain the Akira-Class, but not Enterprise? Do you actually expect people to believe this?

And, just on a side note, the Comfort's homeport is 10 miles south of me.

[ October 02, 2001: Message edited by: Malnurtured Snay ]

quote:

---

So ... you can explain the Akira-Class, but not Enterprise? Do you actually expect people to believe this?

---

It's simple, Jeff. Would an F-22 Raptor look out of place in the RAF of 1914?

You're comparing apples and oranges. We're talking about starship designs of the future. But, if we're comparing modern vehicles with past vehicles, take a look at the 1940's Jeep Willy, and the 2000 Jeep Wranglers. If someone were to watch "Band of Brothers" on HBO and scream "OH MY GOD! THOSE UNCREATIVE BASTARDS STOLE THE WRANGLER DESIGN! THAT DESIGN DOESN'T FIT ON THE AUTOMOBILE SCALE FOR THE 1940'S IT'S COMPLETELY OUT OF PLACE!"

Your argument makes as much sense. Please explain why Enterprise is out of place. You've yet to do so, except mumble a lot about vague hyper-dynamic theories.

Now, bear with me:

If anything, Enterprise's design (do we have a class-name?) makes much more sense that Earth's first military starship (I'm assuming thats what Enterprise essentially is) would be a single-hull design. It's easier to build, easier to design, and we don't know what if any restrictions the designers might have placed on them by the warp engine, gravity, dampening fields, etcetra.

This theory also makes the Enterprise NCC-1701 look much more advanced (60's F/X withstanding) ... Earth and the Federation have been able to construct double-hulled starships (Engineering & Saucer) ... this becomes the foundation for such classes as the Constitution, Excelsior, Ambassador, Galaxy, and so on. The original design of Enterprise also spawns a more limited class of vessels, including the 24th Century Akira-Class.

[ October 02, 2001: Message edited by: Malnurtured Snay ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Stingray:
But I have worked out a rationale for starships in general, and Olympic fits.

---

So you don't like the Enterprise design because it doesn't fit your preconceived rationale. Consider...

(1) I am going to make a system based on all available data points.

(2) Enterprise is an available data point.

Therefore

(3) I will not include Enterprise because it's hard?

Why did the process of figuring out an explanation to fit all data points end before 26 September? Did physicists give up after Newton's laws because quantum mechanics doesn't fit the previously-established curve? You took the time with the Olympic, and presumably with the Steamrunner, Defiant, and Constellation. Why do you just give up with Enterprise and call it impossible?

[ October 02, 2001: Message edited by: Ryan McReynolds ]

"The rules that I've come up with though, can be applied to satisfactorily explain all starships we've seen, EXCEPT for the Akiraprize. And believe me when I say I've tried to find an explanation, I really have. But I cannot."

That seems a less fitting analogy than mine to support our respective points. I'm sorry, Jeff but it just does. Besides which, if you were to plot the evolution of Jeeps along a similar graph with Jeep's specific environment/functional requirements/etc., you would be able to see a similar evolution. And the Willy, your Wrangler, my Grand Cherokee, and even that new Liberty thing would have their spot. However, If the Liberty were to show up before the Willy, then eyebrows would raise.

If anything, Enterprise's design (do we have a class-name?) makes much more sense that Earth's first military starship (I'm assuming thats what Enterprise essentially is) would be a single-hull design. It's easier to build, easier to design, and we don't know what if any restrictions the designers might have placed on them by the warp engine, gravity, dampening fields, etcetra.

This is the best defense of the NX-01 I have yet seen. But it seems that Starfleet's shipbuilding philosophy is to have smaller, easier constructed ships as auxiliaries (Mirandas/Nebs/Akiras), and to have the ships-of-the-line type vessels to be of the larger and the saucer/neck/secondary hull config.

So you don't like the Enterprise design because it doesn't fit your preconceived rationale.

Uh...yeah. Everything here is our opinion. I thought I was past the point in fifth grade where I had to start every sentence with, "My opinion is..."

(1) I am going to make a system based on all available data points.

(2) Enterprise is an available data point.

Therefore

(4) I will not include Enterprise because it's hard?

Good logic. If this were real science, then I would be forced to concur. However, we are in fact talking about a television show which affords me the luxury of plugging my ears about anything I want.

quote:

---

Der.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Stingray:
Good logic. If this were real science, then I would be forced to concur. However, we are in fact talking about a television show which affords me the luxury of plugging my ears about anything I want.

---

Ah -- yes, but! It seems that the Federation Starfleet of the 23rd and 24th Century philosophy is to have the ships-of-the-line type vessels... But, my whole arguement is based that Earth/Starfleet has not yet begun construction of vessels that large, and that Enterprise is the testbed of coming tech.

As for Enterprise and an Akira-Class ... could someone post pictures of both ships next to each other? Personally, I think the Akira-Class looks a lot more different and more modern then Enterprise, in the same way the two Jeeps (Willy & Wrangler) look different from each other.

While canon can be debated, continuity is pretty straightforward. To maintain continuity, a writer must not directly contradict what has happened before (or will happen later). I agree with Bear on his point about the Klingon. We all know that budget restrictions were the primary reasons for the appearance of the Klingons in TOS, but wouldn't it have been clever (and CREATIVE) for the writers to have a TOS Klingon and then explain in later episodes the reason for the difference? Of course, the opportunity to do this was destroyed in the DS9 episode "Trials and Tribbilations." They really dropped the ball by portraying Kang, Koloth, and Kor as "modern" Klingons. This would have been the perfect opportunity to explain the Klingon thing, but they chose instead to throw it all away on Worfs glib reply, "it's a long story." Ironically, I really enjoyed this episode as a light-hearted celebration of the Star Trek anniversary, but this example of laziness on the part of the writers and producers was a major disappointment. Of course, if they hadn't used the gimmick of bringing back the famous TOS Klingons in the first place, the episode would have worked just as well and not had any continuity problems at all.

I think that overall, the writers have done very well maintaining continuity through all the series. However, the Klingon thing is such a major loose end, I really can't understand why they have refused to address it head on. I always thought there could be two species of Klingons, one generally smaller without all the bumps, and the other larger and more agressive. Perhaps the smaller brainy Klingons were in power early on and were overthrown, or maybe they coexisted for awhile until they were discommoded or exiled as the result of a racial/ethnic purge. Now that would have created an interesting dynamic to explore. The Klingons would have a dark episode in their history to deal with and the exiled Klingons would be refugees attempting to find a new homeworld and trying to regain their honor and standing in the galaxy.

Regarding originality, while I understand there will be familiar technology and terminology, I think the new series should have taken a few more risks and not relied quite so heavily on what has already been seen. Some people like the NX-01. I agree, it's a cool design. But I can't understand why the producers didn't look at the original drawing and say, "Wow, that looks a lot like the Akira. Cool design, but let's do something different." Was it really necessary to have transporters in this series? The transporters mainly served as a device in TOS to provide a quick, cheap way to get crew down to a planet without using shuttles (and having to create the various models and film them). Why not show what it was like before transporters could be safely used by living beings? And if you're gonna use them, why show the transporter working faster and better than those of the 24th century?! Come on!

Why, if this is Earth's first starship, are there any aliens in the crew at all? Here is another chance they missed to do something really different. It would have been really interesting to see an all-human crew explore strange new worlds for the first time by themselves. They would have a wealth of fears and prejudices to overcome. Good drama there. Everyone in the 24th century is so perfect, so self-actualized. No one identifies with these characters! You can't identify with Picard who reads Shakespeare, is and excellent swordsman, and whose family are vintners. But you can identify with Worf when he refuses to give blood to save a dying Romulan.

There was a comment made earlier yesterday that I have to disagree with:

quote:

---

Our 'original' poster has made the fatal error of assuming that TOS was 'original' in the first place. It wasn't. What it was was SUCCESSFUL, much as Shakespeare's adaptations of Play that were NOT his, originally, were successful, despite not being that new.

Don't you remember the oft-stated original concept for TOS? "'WAGON TRAIN' to the Stars!" Is THAT original, basing a show concept on another show?

---