Topic: The new-old Enterprise will have transporters???
Shik
Starship database: completed; History of Starfleet: done; website: probably never
Member # 343
posted
It was just a fcuking POINT OF REFERENCE. And the texting of the book made me think of that note. So I put it down. Fuck YOU if you don't like my phrasology.
People are so fucking quick to bash people around here lately. Some of us aren't in EITHER fucking camp, y'know.
In conclusion, may I say "EAT ME," & if you don't like my phrasology, I don't care. Take me to task for it, though, & you can suck my short fat hairy Kike CRANK.
Enjoy the image. End of line.
-------------------- "The French have a saying: 'mise en place'—keep everything in its fucking place!"
"People are so fucking quick to bash people around here lately."
Like you're doing?
Your statement about the TNGTM does not convey the idea you were apparently trying to get across. J misunderstood you (for obvious reasons, as far as I'm concerned), and responded to what he thought you were saying (and he didn't "bash" you). You, in return, called him a "fucking ass gnome" and a "simpleton".
You're the only one bashing anyone around here. Stop. Now.
Just caught "A Piece of the Action" on Sci-Fi again and some dialogue makes these technologies problematic. Kirk tells Oxmyx that it'll be difficult to explain beaming down rather than landing, as if the Horizon crew didn't do it. He also says the Horizon used regular radio rather than subspace radio, which delayed the report for almost a century. They also say the Prime Directive wasn't in force at the time of the Horizon's visit.
All of this is dated to 100 years before the episode, which is what they explicitly state. That would make the Horizon visit later than the 150-years-earlier timeframe TPTB have placed Enterprise in.
-------------------- Never give up. Never surrender.
Shik
Starship database: completed; History of Starfleet: done; website: probably never
Member # 343
posted
Whatever. I fling feathers, you throw up a shield. Same difference. Done.
Chen-san (ha..I think of the Iron chef when I say that): werd on dat, yo. Now for the next challenge on "Survivor: The Flare Forums"--finding the landing legs on the Daedalus-class.
-------------------- "The French have a saying: 'mise en place'—keep everything in its fucking place!"
posted
Shik: Good, you've seen this. I was just about to e-mail you. Just so we're clear, if you want to stay around here, don't pull another stunt like above. I'm not saying you have to be the magical man from Happy Land, but don't be an asshole for no reason. Just so you know.
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
posted
"The TNGTM is an excellent book, and was perhaps the first semi-canon book ever made--"
Nah. Franz Joseph's old Star Fleet Technical Manual holds that distinction. Yeah, a lot of it was poorly researched. Yeah, a lot of it has since been contradicted. But the four ship classes he created and illustrated therein made it into the first three movies as dialogue and/or monitor graphics. The UFP seal seen in TMP is almost identical to the one he created. Etc, etc...
"Just caught 'A Piece of the Action' on Sci-Fi again and some dialogue makes these technologies problematic. Kirk tells Oxmyx that it'll be difficult to explain beaming down rather than landing, as if the Horizon crew didn't do it. He also says the Horizon used regular radio rather than subspace radio, which delayed the report for almost a century. They also say the Prime Directive wasn't in force at the time of the Horizon's visit.
All of this is dated to 100 years before the episode, which is what they explicitly state. That would make the Horizon visit later than the 150-years-earlier timeframe TPTB have placed Enterprise in."
All of this just gives up the tech level of the early Daedalus-class starship. We have no way to know if the respective technologies didn't exist yet, or if they were simply not incorporated into the Daedalus class for one reason or another. For instance, the Terra-10 colony had transporters (*holds up a warning finger to forestall the "canon" stick*), but I get the impression Earth/Federation transporter tech was being developed and perfected all the way up to Voyager...
--Jonah
-------------------- "That's what I like about these high school girls, I keep getting older, they stay the same age."
posted
What's this "Terra-10 colony"? What you said after it leads me to believe it's non-canon, so what bearing does it have on anything? If I say "transporters were invented by Captain Kirk a day before he started the TOS mission", that doesn't mean ENT is wrong if it doesn't follow that...
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
quote: ...but I get the impression Earth/Federation transporter tech was being developed and perfected all the way up to Voyager...
Huh? Don't worry, I'm not going to argue with you about canonicity. I read the book version of "The Terratin Incident" and though it was great. But, uh, what do you mean by the above? Technology is constantly being perfected, evolving as we develop new ideas. Sooo...what are you trying to say?
-------------------- "A celibate clergy is an especially good idea because it tends to suppress any hereditary propensity toward fanaticism."
posted
Just that transporter tech in TOS shouldn't be considered in its infancy just because we see Scotty playing with manual controls and the system goes phut all the time. I personally believe the tech we see in TOS is very much in media res, and that the newest technological breakthrough is Duotronics. Indeed, incorporating Duotronic computers into other existing systems might just be why everything always seemed to be running on spit and baling wire in TOS...
--Jonah
-------------------- "That's what I like about these high school girls, I keep getting older, they stay the same age."
posted
On FJ being semi-canon: Well, the entire fan concept of "semi-canon" books only really came about by the time of TNG, generally brought on to distinguish the Okuda books from the crap like Mr. Scott's Guide and Worlds of the Federation and their ilk.
Was FJ official? Yes. Was it authorized? Yes. Was it on-the-whole a worthy effort? Yes. Canon? Certainly not. Semi-Canon? Well, it depends on one's definition of this term.
I've always considered Semi-Canon to generally be reserved for the Trek Pentateuch (Chronology, Encyclopedia, TNGTM, TNG Blueprints and DS9TM) which have been books where one can assume within a reasonable doubt that if a piece of information contained within had been needed onscreen it would have been pulled from them. For instance, if, as Ira Stephen Behr notes in his DS9TM Introduction, a line was needed for onscreen info about the composition of a Cardassian lifeboat's hull, it would have come from the DS9TM. Okuda largely speculated that Scotty's lines in "Balance of Terror" meant that Romulans didn't have warp drive period before the Treaty with the Klingons and incorporated this as conjectural detailing into the Chronology. Piller clearly canonized this conjecture when doing some dialogue in Insurrection. To draw a more controversial example, the Defiant's length is semi-canonically 170m, as one can assume that if a line had come up on DS9 where someone had said how long the Defiant was it would have been that. Of course, as many people around here feel, the VFX suggested a different onscreen length quite often, which may be cause to say there is an overriding canon length value of something like 120m.
Franz Joseph's work doesn't enjoy this kind of status today. If Voyager had encountered a derelict Constitution-class starship somewhere in the Delta Quadrant, we can by no means assume the writers would run to Mr. Joseph's work the same way we can assume they would run to Sternbach's work if it had been a Bajoran cruiser.
A second factor, IMHO, in "canonicity" is accesibility. Old and out-of-print books of which few copies exist (like the FJ Blueprints, for instance) are far less likely to enjoy semi-canon status to work that is readily accessible to both the writers and fandom.
-------------------- "I was surprised by the matter-of-factness of Kafka's narration, and the subtle humor present as a result." (Sizer 2005)
posted
If Franz Joseph's work isn't semi-canon, it's completely because of GR's efforts after their falling out. GR made sure things onscreen would contradict FJ's work wherever possible. Another reason I never liked the man. I give him a little grudging respect as the acorn that begat the oak, but sometimes I think he did as much to hinder the franchise as help it.
IP: Logged
posted
What, GR said "the Federation doesn't build warships" for the sole purpose of pooping on FJ's dreadnoughts?
FJ served as something of a semi-canonical work during TMP and TWOK and then was run aground largely because GR woke up and saw how badly conflicting a lot of the stuff was with his vision, and because Harve Bennett and the crew didn't think the stuff was worth it's weight in shit. A lot of the stuff in it can still be reconciled with Okuda/Sternbach-era visions of the 24th century (unlike, say, Mr. Scott's Guide) but amongst the general fan body today and TPTB it doesn't hold remotely the same credence as the done-by-people-on-the-show stuff.
-------------------- "I was surprised by the matter-of-factness of Kafka's narration, and the subtle humor present as a result." (Sizer 2005)
posted
Maybe if you didn't try to put words in my mouth. Among other things, it's generally accepted that GR arbitrarily created his rules of starship design in the early 80s purely to invalidate all the ships FJ kitbashed. Look at the drawings at Bernd's website illustrating the rules. They show FJ designs being crossed off. Be honest, can you imagine any other reason why these weird rules suddenly came into existence?
IP: Logged
Rule #1 Warp nacelles *must* be in pairs. (The "All Good Things" Enterprise is explained not to violate these because it has two warp field coils in each nacelle, thus creating three pairs. The Franz Joseph Designs single-nacelle ships are not official canon...)
I'm guessing this was to keep the ships rather symmetrical-looking.
Rule #2 Warp nacelles must have at least 50% line-of-sight on each other across the hull.
I don't really know about this one. I'd say it was supposed to have something to do w/ the warp field, except that I doubt GeneR really cared about that.
Rule #3 Both warp nacelles must be fully visible from the front.
If that's where the Bussard collectors are, this makes perfect sense.
Rule #4 The bridge must be located at the top center of the primary hull.
Wasn't this always something GeneR wanted? Didn't it supposedly have something to do w/ the ships' not being warships, so they didn't need to hide the bridge, or whatever?
Topic Closed
Printer-friendly view of this topic