Youtube - TrekYards

PST: discuss Star Trek without "versus" arguments.

Moderator: Vympel

Post Reply
Prometheus Unbound
Jedi Master
Posts: 1141
Joined: 2007-09-28 06:46am

Youtube - TrekYards

Post by Prometheus Unbound »

Does anyone else watch this channel?

It's essentially technical Trek analysis, but including STO and a couple of books. It's not a "vs" channel, more speculation on tech, designs and lineage.

https://www.youtube.com/user/knightstalker666/videos


Anyone else watch or like it?
NecronLord wrote:
Also, shorten your signature a couple of lines please.
User avatar
Lord Revan
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 12235
Joined: 2004-05-20 02:23pm
Location: Zone:classified

Re: Youtube - TrekYards

Post by Lord Revan »

It's decent enough if you're after entertaining depictions of trek (or other scifi, mostly trek though) ships, but if what you're after is raw numbers for a vs. debate it's not the place you should go nor is it the place to go if you can't tolerate the idea that trek isn't 100% perfect as the hosts are rather vocal about their dislikes. Best parts I think are discussion about the ship with the orginal designers (when avaible) as it gives nice insights into the design process.
I may be an idiot, but I'm a tolerated idiot
"I think you completely missed the point of sigs. They're supposed to be completely homegrown in the fertile hydroponics lab of your mind, dried in your closet, rolled, and smoked...
Oh wait, that's marijuana..."Einhander Sn0m4n
Prometheus Unbound
Jedi Master
Posts: 1141
Joined: 2007-09-28 06:46am

Re: Youtube - TrekYards

Post by Prometheus Unbound »

Lord Revan wrote:It's decent enough if you're after entertaining depictions of trek (or other scifi, mostly trek though) ships, but if what you're after is raw numbers for a vs. debate it's not the place you should go nor is it the place to go if you can't tolerate the idea that trek isn't 100% perfect as the hosts are rather vocal about their dislikes. Best parts I think are discussion about the ship with the orginal designers (when avaible) as it gives nice insights into the design process.

Yeah - as I said above it's not a "vs channel" - nah it's not for biggatons and stuff - but I do find it interesting when they dig up old blueprints and yes - the episodes where they have the original designers (Andrew Probert is my favourite along with Rich Sternbach) - when they reminisce over the designs and why this or why not that. Lots of fun :)


There's a lot of speculation here and there of course - the channel defines its own canon (but to be fair, mostly sticks to established stuff). They don't tend to do EU stuff like books, but they'll cover computer game ships or ships from Axanar etc.



They also do other scifi ships sometimes. Plus the last few episodes (Akira is one) they've had access to the original computer models from ILM / Digital Muse etc which lets them see inside the ships for real - Akira DOES have 15 torp launchers and Akira DOES have like 100 shuttles with a carrier deck(s) haha. It's awesome :D
NecronLord wrote:
Also, shorten your signature a couple of lines please.
User avatar
Lord Revan
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 12235
Joined: 2004-05-20 02:23pm
Location: Zone:classified

Re: Youtube - TrekYards

Post by Lord Revan »

Personally I love the NX-01 episode due to the designer insights like the fact that it wasn't that designers got lazy but they got an order to make it the Akira and the NX-01 design was the best compromise they were able to get between what they knew that fans wanted (aka a new design) and what the executives wanted (aka the Akira).

And tbh I don't mind the speculation that much as they give all ships their due respect and even when they don't like the design (like the JJ-trek connie) they don't get lazy or bash the design without reason.
I may be an idiot, but I'm a tolerated idiot
"I think you completely missed the point of sigs. They're supposed to be completely homegrown in the fertile hydroponics lab of your mind, dried in your closet, rolled, and smoked...
Oh wait, that's marijuana..."Einhander Sn0m4n
Post Reply