General Star Trek thread

helimachoptor

Was it ever explained in canon why the Sao Paolo didnt get a cloaking device?

Evade

helimachoptor wrote: »

Was it ever explained in canon why the Sao Paolo didnt get a cloaking device?

Not as far as I remember but there are a couple of plausible reasons.

• The Romulans saw how Sisko abused the conditions for using the cloaking device and decided not to give him another one.
• By the time the Sao Paolo was commissioned and renamed the Defiant was part of large fleet engagements and there would be no point in one out of a hundred ships having a cloak. There were plenty of Klingon and Romulan ships for scouting duties if needed.
• And most likely, the writers forgot about it

helimachoptor

Evade wrote: »

Not as far as I remember but there are a couple of plausible reasons.

• The Romulans saw how Sisko abused the conditions for using the cloaking device and decided not to give him another one.
• By the time the Sao Paolo was commissioned and renamed the Defiant was part of large fleet engagements and there would be no point in one out of a hundred ships having a cloak. There were plenty of Klingon and Romulan ships for scouting duties if needed.
• And most likely, the writers forgot about it

#3 for sure :pac:

knucklehead6

Did the Valiant have a cloak?

helimachoptor

knucklehead6 wrote: »

Did the Valiant have a cloak?

No but that started life as the cadet ****, so would assume wouldnt be a need on a training ship.

Evade

Just like they didn't think it would be a recurring thing on the Defiant.


When they were building the set the lighting guy asked if the darker cloaked lighting scheme would come up in future episodes because they could spend a little extra and install both sets of lights and change the lighting with one switch. They were told no so they built it with one set of lights in each light source and manually changed the set up for the cloaked look and had to do this every time they needed to change between cloaked and uncloaked.

AMKC

If they ever decided to do a show about Scotty or a new series with him in it or film I think David Tannant would make a great Scotty. He has the accent for it.

Evade

But is he a good enough actor to act like he only has nine fingers?

AMKC

Here is a question. Anyone know how many Runabouts were destroyed, abandoned in DS9. Everyone always asks about Voyager but I don't think I ever seen anyone ask it about the
Runabouts in DS9.
In the episode ''The Ascent'' for instance where Odo and Quark crash the Runabout they were in is still in one piece and surely recoverable. I always thought it could have been a cool scene at the end to show the Defiant towing that Runabout home. But maybe it fitted in there shuttle bay and they brought it home that way. Although I think a Runabout might be too big to fit in the Defiant's shuttle bay.

Inviere

AMKC wrote: »

Here is a question. Anyone know how many Runabouts were destroyed, abandoned in DS9. Everyone always asks about Voyager but I don't think I ever seen anyone ask it about the
Runabouts in DS9.
In the episode ''The Ascent'' for instance where Odo and Quark crash the Runabout they were in is still in one piece and surely recoverable. I always thought it could have been a cool scene at the end to show the Defiant towing that Runabout home. But maybe it fitted in there shuttle bay and they brought it home that way. Although I think a Runabout might be too big to fit in the Defiant's shuttle bay.

It's less an issue for DS9 because they're within a resupply line, any equipment lost/destroyed could probably be replaced really quickly. For Voyager, outside of any resupply lines, the loss of things like shuttles is a big deal.

TheValeyard

I'd say DS9 had a massive fleet of them for gamma quadrant exploration of Bajor runs.

IvySlayer

AMKC wrote: »

Here is a question. Anyone know how many Runabouts were destroyed, abandoned in DS9. Everyone always asks about Voyager but I don't think I ever seen anyone ask it about the
Runabouts in DS9.
In the episode ''The Ascent'' for instance where Odo and Quark crash the Runabout they were in is still in one piece and surely recoverable. I always thought it could have been a cool scene at the end to show the Defiant towing that Runabout home. But maybe it fitted in there shuttle bay and they brought it home that way. Although I think a Runabout might be too big to fit in the Defiant's shuttle bay.

What if you shrink the shuttle down and fly around inside the Defiant?

The Defiant had shuttles onboard, mentioned loads of times. DS9 must of had at least 10 runabouts and 5 destroyed.

Evade

TheValeyard wrote: »

I'd say DS9 had a massive fleet of them for gamma quadrant exploration of Bajor runs.

I think they only ever had three based on the station and ordered replacements whenever on was lost or destroyed. In the Jem'Hadar when Sisko had a runabout in the Gamma Quadrant the remaining runabouts went with the Odyssey to rescue them and there were only two of them.

AMKC

Inviere wrote: »

It's less an issue for DS9 because they're within a resupply line, any equipment lost/destroyed could probably be replaced really quickly. For Voyager, outside of any resupply lines, the loss of things like shuttles is a big deal.

True but still if the runabout is in one piece and salvageable why not salvage it?Surely even in the Federation resources are not infinite. Even if it could not be fully repaired I am sure some parts could have been used and the rest of it recycled. Also maybe they might want to examine how it performed in the crash just like a car company does now with roads cars and see how they could make it better and stronger.

TheValeyard

Came across this online about Runabouts in DS9....

Star Trek forum...

The original three runabouts assigned to Deep Space 9: Rio Grande, Yangtzee Kiang, and Ganges. During the first four seasons, they were being destroyed and replaced at a pace of one per season.

Yangtzee Kiang crashlanded and was damaged beyond repair in "Battle Lines." Replaced by the Orinoco ("The Siege").

Ganges was destroyed in "Armageddon Game." Replaced by the Mekong. ("Whispers")

Mekong was destroyed in "The Die is Cast" trying to escape the Jem'Hadar armada. Replaced by the Rubicon. ("Family Business")

Orinoco was destroyed in "Our Man Bashir". Replaced by the Yukon. ("Sons of Mogh")

That was when I think the writers stopped keeping track with a total five runabouts lost during Season 5. And at some point during Season 4, four runababouts were assinged to the station. The Volga was featured in "Body Parts." Three runabouts were still at the station in "In Purgatory's Shadow" and "By Inferno's Light" (the Rio Grande, the Yukon, and the Volga) even after Worf and Garak took one into the Gamma Quadrant. One could hypothesize that the Rubicon was destroyed at Torga Four ("The Ship"), then its replacement was destroyed at Ajillon Prime ("Nor the Battle to the Strong"), then its replacement destroyed in "The Ascent". But the Rubicon was the runabout featured in "One Little Ship." The only destroyed runabout mentioned by name in Season 5 was the Yukon. The runabout destroyed in "Empok Nor" was not mentioned by name. That could have been the Volga since it was never again mentioned.

The Shenandoah was first featured in "Change of Heart" only to be destroyed later in Season 6 ("Valiant"). Same for the Gander in Season 7 ("Penumbra"). In all, four runabouts were lost battling the Jem'Hadar

Kirby

Thank you for that report, Lieutenant Commander Data.

TheValeyard

Kirby wrote: »

Thank you for that report, Lieutenant Commander Data.

IvySlayer

Rewatching Homefront and Paradise Lost

This is one of my favourite dialogues, because Joseph Sisko is right!

Then we have the Federation President who I hated for some reason...Just seemed bland considering the position he was in.

Endaaaagh

Georgiou and Michael been taking a walk on Mars??
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/nasa-spots-star-trek-starfleet-logo-on-mars-surface-today-2019-06-13/

Rawr

TheValeyard wrote: »

Came across this online about Runabouts in DS9....

Star Trek forum...

The original three runabouts assigned to Deep Space 9: Rio Grande, Yangtzee Kiang, and Ganges. During the first four seasons, they were being destroyed and replaced at a pace of one per season.

Yangtzee Kiang crashlanded and was damaged beyond repair in "Battle Lines." Replaced by the Orinoco ("The Siege").

Ganges was destroyed in "Armageddon Game." Replaced by the Mekong. ("Whispers")

Mekong was destroyed in "The Die is Cast" trying to escape the Jem'Hadar armada. Replaced by the Rubicon. ("Family Business")

Orinoco was destroyed in "Our Man Bashir". Replaced by the Yukon. ("Sons of Mogh")

That was when I think the writers stopped keeping track with a total five runabouts lost during Season 5. And at some point during Season 4, four runababouts were assinged to the station. The Volga was featured in "Body Parts." Three runabouts were still at the station in "In Purgatory's Shadow" and "By Inferno's Light" (the Rio Grande, the Yukon, and the Volga) even after Worf and Garak took one into the Gamma Quadrant. One could hypothesize that the Rubicon was destroyed at Torga Four ("The Ship"), then its replacement was destroyed at Ajillon Prime ("Nor the Battle to the Strong"), then its replacement destroyed in "The Ascent". But the Rubicon was the runabout featured in "One Little Ship." The only destroyed runabout mentioned by name in Season 5 was the Yukon. The runabout destroyed in "Empok Nor" was not mentioned by name. That could have been the Volga since it was never again mentioned.

The Shenandoah was first featured in "Change of Heart" only to be destroyed later in Season 6 ("Valiant"). Same for the Gander in Season 7 ("Penumbra"). In all, four runabouts were lost battling the Jem'Hadar

The lesson of the story being: Kids if you've going to take a Runabout, make sure it is named "Rio Grande"

corkie

vargoo

https://www.cinemablend.com/television/2475210/star-treks-alex-kurtzman-gives-updates-for-every-star-trek-project-on-the-way

All the show updates...

368100

https://www.thepoke.co.uk/2019/06/26/bad-star-trek-series-led-to-obama-presidency-blowing-minds/?&tb_cb=1

AMKC

368100 wrote: »

https://www.thepoke.co.uk/2019/06/26/bad-star-trek-series-led-to-obama-presidency-blowing-minds/?&tb_cb=1

Seen that alight. One of the best Presidents America ever had. He offered something the current President can not, He offered ''Hope''

The current one divides. So sad to see the world going backwards because of him.

Rawr

AMKC wrote: »

The current one divides. So sad to see the world going backwards because of him.

Personally, I blame Neelix for that one

_Kaiser_

AMKC wrote: »

Seen that alight. One of the best Presidents America ever had. He offered something the current President can not, He offered ''Hope''

The current one divides. So sad to see the world going backwards because of him.

Wouldn't agree with the bit on Obama. I think he ultimately caused more problems and strife (particularly abroad) than he solved. But I suppose, like our own Leo V he was media friendly and that counts for a lot these days apparently.

pixelburp

Thing with US politics, is that for all the legislative power the President wields, ultimately Congress & the Senate are the movers & shakers. Obama on paper had bold, inclusive plans but his ability to enact the promises of "Hope" were completely stymied by a Republican Senate (the leader of which openly said he would block every bill Obama brought to the floor). As such he wielded executive privilege a LOT, to ram through bills - which means he has opened up precedent for the new guy.

He spoke a good game, was eloquent, intelligent and is empathic (insofar as US politics allows) - in the current climate that's no longer a given. Obama was super into the use of drones mind you, his stats for their use is kinda insane.

...
No, wait. Wait. This is the Star Trek forum! Damnit

Shut up Wesley!

Goodshape

pixelburp wrote: »

Obama was super into the use of drones mind you, his stats for their use is kinda insane.

Have always wondered about those stats – which are always thrown about as an argument for "Obama wasn't that good".

I'm sure the Obama administration did use more drones than Bush. Also probably used more iPhones and watched more MCU movies. But is that because Bush didn't like drones or iPhones or MCU, or because those things didn't exist (as much) when Bush was president.

Not sure it's a fair stat in itself.

...
No, wait. Wait. This is the Star Trek forum! Damnit

Shut up Wesley!

The Boy?!

Evade

Goodshape wrote: »

Have always wondered about those stats – which are always thrown about as an argument for "Obama wasn't that good".

Ordering the execution of a US citizen, via drone strike, without a trial is pretty bad.

Goodshape

Evade wrote: »

Ordering the execution of a US citizen

...is pretty bad.

via drone strike

...is largely irrelevant, I'd have thought.


And I'm neither defending nor criticising anything here. Just I rarely/never hear "Obama ordered more executions of a US citizens without trial than Bush did" but often hear that he used more technology – which didn't really exist when Bush was in charge – than Bush did.

Meh. Language matters, that's all.


Star Trek's good.