StarDestroyer.Net BBS

After briefly switch to watch the Startrek movie on free to air TV which involves the Gensis device, I watched a self-destruct device on the Enterprise blowup the bridge, annihilate the front half of the saucer, give the rest of the Enterprise enought kick to start an uncontrolled re-entry. There is then a scene were the enterprise (front 1st) transversing the horizen as a long red streak with little/no sign of breaking up(looked to be going for a crash somewere too).

Compared to how 'modern' trek ships, I get the distinct feeling that they dont make them like they used to in the trek universe anymore.

you want toughness look at ST6 the good ol Ent a took what a half dozen torp hits ,one punched THROUGHT the ship, and didnt go kablewwie

No warp core breech even as the E-Nil was plunging through the atmosphere. For that matter, Reliant didn't detonate even when she had an entire nacelle blown off (while E-D blows up from a low speed tap to her starboard nacelle).

RedImperator wrote:No warp core breech even as the E-Nil was plunging through the atmosphere. For that matter, Reliant didn't detonate even when she had an entire nacelle blown off (while E-D blows up from a low speed tap to her starboard nacelle).

E-D blows up if you sneeze on the warp core!

RedImperator wrote:No warp core breech even as the E-Nil was plunging through the atmosphere. For that matter, Reliant didn't detonate even when she had an entire nacelle blown off (while E-D blows up from a low speed tap to her starboard nacelle).

They really don't make them like the oldies anymore do they?

paladin wrote:E-D blows up if you sneeze on the warp core!

Bah, E-D blows up if you stare at it too hard.

At least the Enterprise E is back on the right path, after the disaster that was the initial Galaxy run they seem to have wisened up a bit.

Poor E-D. Bad writing made her a sick joke.

The Silence and I wrote:At least the Enterprise E is back on the right path, after the disaster that was the initial Galaxy run they seem to have wisened up a bit.

She may be a stronger ship but shes still a peice of shit. Give me an old Connie any day with Scotty in Enginering.

Hmm.

E-D skims the atmosphere and they start screaming about the hull temperature going up.

E-Nil cruises through Earth atmosphere (Tomorrow is Yesterday), all they're worried about is getting back up to escape velocity. Hell, their deflectors don't even get put back up until after they get out of the atmosphere!

One reason the E-Nil might not have detonated over/on Genesis could be that the Klingon hit while they were in orbit damaged the ship enough that the computer may have auto-ejected the core and AM reserves without even waiting for human intervention. (this could explain also why they had to switch to emergency power)

Uraniun235 wrote:One reason the E-Nil might not have detonated over/on Genesis could be that the Klingon hit while they were in orbit damaged the ship enough that the computer may have auto-ejected the core and AM reserves without even waiting for human intervention. (this could explain also why they had to switch to emergency power)

Even if that's so it's a remarkably sensible precaution that the Ent-D should have. And more importantly, it worked. That goes to show you the Ent-D is a peice of shit.

The NCC-1017 Constellation took huge anti-proton blasts from the Doomsday Machine to her unshielded hull but held together long enough for Kirk to save the galaxy. They just don't make 'em like that anymore...

I think by the TNG era they rely too much on their shield,so the hull of the starships are made cheaper and thiner

Montcalm wrote:I think by the TNG era they rely too much on their shield,so the hull of the starships are made cheaper and thiner

Still doesn't explain the warp core exploding if you stare at it in a nasty way.

Give me the E-Nil over the flying deathtrap any day.

Or purhaps it's like my Geo vs. a '47 Olds in a crash....

Sure the olds has no seat belts but the Civilian version of the sherman tank is rolling away a hell of a lot more likely then my plastic fantastic chevy.

Its a question of size. The D is a lot bigger (by 400+ meters) and thus harder to support. Think of the diffrense between trying to hold together a small rubber ball with a crack down the middle and trying to hold together a huge ball in which one crack can cause many more. Also D's Warp core is more powerfull thus esier to break.

Look at what the Defiant took to bring it down, but I would still take the first Enterprise (NCC-1701). Even when they intentional self destruced the ship, she still held together on re-entry.

Unlike the origional entaprise, the D has Anti-matter charges placed arround the hull inorder to make it's self distruct more effective. (in case of Prime Directive probloms)

Ajaz50 wrote:Also D's Warp core is more powerfull thus esier to break.

But it shouldn't be as volitale as it is. They neglected basic saftey features which would have prevented the loss of the Yamato and stopped the ticking time bomb scenarios so common to the Galaxy class. It's more dangerous but not because it has to be.

Ironically, Voyager was beaten to floating scrap in "Year of Hell" and still was able to enter into battle.

She's a smaller ship then the D and more compact

Ajaz50 wrote:She's a smaller ship then the D and more compact

And that means what?

So an ineffective self-destruct is good... why?

Ajaz50 wrote:She's a smaller ship then the D and more compact

If your technology isn't up to building a 600 meter starship that can hold together without active force fields and a warp core that doesn't blow up because someone thought nasty thoughts about it, the proper engineering solution is to build a smaller starship, not build a fucking 600m deathtrap (and let children ride on board, at that). And anyway, the Sovereign is longer and doesn't have the E-Ds problems, and we saw Galaxies getting the shit pounded out of them during the Dominion War and holding together, meaning the problems with the first-run Galaxies were fixable, but it took them almost a decade to get around to it.

Howedar wrote:So an ineffective self-destruct is good... why?

Because when a bunch of single episode bastards takes over the ship, the crew's character sheilding won't fail to work.