StarDestroyer.Net BBS

Skylon wrote:The only aspect of the Enterprise's theft that I take issue with is when they cut to Spacedock's control center during the theft its empty. It seems like something that should be manned at all times.

You mean with the exception of one bloke cleaning up? That was the restaurant.

Pfft. That's Starfleet computers for you. I mean, what about E-D? 'Computer, locate crew member Whatsherface.' 'Crew member Whatsherface is not aboard the Enterprise.' Hey, thanks for mentioning that a crew member has gone missing while we're in the middle of nowhere. It's not like that's somehow odd and maybe the bridge crew should know or something.

"Captain Picard is not on board the Enterprise."

That was chilling and funny drama when you were watching it and you see the crew just get this look of "Holy fuck! We're light years out in deep space, where's the Captain at?"

Now it's just a perfect example of nothing wrong with the computer, just doing what it's programmed to do.

Captain Seafort wrote:

Skylon wrote:The only aspect of the Enterprise's theft that I take issue with is when they cut to Spacedock's control center during the theft its empty. It seems like something that should be manned at all times.

You mean with the exception of one bloke cleaning up? That was the restaurant.

There's also a shot of the control room that we saw occupied when the Enterprise arrived at Spacedock.

When Ent-Nil arrives: http://movies.trekcore.com/gallery/albu ... hd0160.jpg

During the theft of the Enterprise: http://movies.trekcore.com/gallery/albu ... hd0618.jpg

Notice the difference?

Skylon wrote:During the theft of the Enterprise: http://movies.trekcore.com/gallery/albu ... hd0618.jpg

Notice the difference?

Point - I'd forgotten about that shot. Maybe with a smaller night shift they just happen to be out of sight? [/grasping at straws]

Coffee break. Just because it's a post that should be manned 24/7 doesn't mean it will be manned 24/7.
'When is the next ship scheduled to arrive?' 'Nothing coming in or going out in the next 16 hours'. 'How about we go out for a Latte? C'mon, what can go wrong during the half hour we're gone?'

Crazedwraith wrote:Yes, because the fact that the computer can initiate a location check on request means that it constantly monitors the position of all ships crew at all times. That makes sense.

Yeah ... about as much sense as recording the crew's brain waves every second of the day.

Batman wrote:Coffee break. Just because it's a post that should be manned 24/7 doesn't mean it will be manned 24/7.
'When is the next ship scheduled to arrive?' 'Nothing coming in or going out in the next 16 hours'. 'How about we go out for a Latte? C'mon, what can go wrong during the half hour we're gone?'

Sure, I'll go with that. I'd also go with Kirk got an Orion slave girl who owed him a favor to show up in the break room and keep everyone distracted.

If I steal the motor of your car, is it an "engine failure" that you can't get anywhere with it?

maybe, but you shouldn't get out of the garage and half way down the street before noticing you're missing an engine (i think was the original point), however Scotty was very clever to put it (sabotage) on a 5 minute delay.

Can we come up with a pared down list of things that are indisputably engineering failures, instead of probably being blamed on some human being making a mistake or deliberate sabotage that would succeed even if the systems are well engineered?

We have list of all times Starfleet's equipment proves less than godlike: that is, it turns out to be vulnerable to deliberate sabotage (Scotty throwing a monkey wrench into the engine), interference from unknown physical factors (space whale probes using hitherto unknown and unimagined weapons), or to being overloaded by some excessive outside force that hits so hard there may really be no way to stop it from causing a disaster (like getting blown up by a photon torpedo).

But then there's a separate list of cases where we can say that engineers, as opposed to someone else, screwed up- where a mechanical system fails when it logically ought to work, when there aren't enough failsafes or alarms in place to alert people to a failure, or when bad design practices are followed.

Crazedwraith wrote:

Batman wrote:Pfft. That's Starfleet computers for you. I mean, what about E-D? 'Computer, locate crew member Whatsherface.' 'Crew member Whatsherface is not aboard the Enterprise.' Hey, thanks for mentioning that a crew member has gone missing while we're in the middle of nowhere. It's not like that's somehow odd and maybe the bridge crew should know or something.

Yes, because the fact that the computer can initiate a location check on request means that it constantly monitors the position of all ships crew at all times. That makes sense.

Well, if the computer has enough spare processing capacity to handle more difficult tasks during emergencies, you'd think they'd be able to run periodic location checks (say, every 5/10/15 minutes) on all crew members during quiet times. It's certainly a logical precaution, especially since Starfleet crew normally wear communicator badges that would let you use something like cell phone geolocation to track them on board ship.

Simon_Jester wrote:

Crazedwraith wrote:

Batman wrote:Pfft. That's Starfleet computers for you. I mean, what about E-D? 'Computer, locate crew member Whatsherface.' 'Crew member Whatsherface is not aboard the Enterprise.' Hey, thanks for mentioning that a crew member has gone missing while we're in the middle of nowhere. It's not like that's somehow odd and maybe the bridge crew should know or something.

Yes, because the fact that the computer can initiate a location check on request means that it constantly monitors the position of all ships crew at all times. That makes sense.

Well, if the computer has enough spare processing capacity to handle more difficult tasks during emergencies, you'd think they'd be able to run periodic location checks (say, every 5/10/15 minutes) on all crew members during quiet times. It's certainly a logical precaution, especially since Starfleet crew normally wear communicator badges that would let you use something like cell phone geolocation to track them on board ship.

That's the point--it would also be a logical precaution if the computer would immediately and automatically notify Security when one of those crewmembers (especially the Captain!) was suddenly abducted. In the show [drama] it only notifies of such under direct query. A perfoect example was TNG: "Schisms".

I know, TOSDOC. I was agreeing with you.

What were the exact circumstances of Picard's abduction? Who did it? How did they avoid being detected as intruders if/when they entered the ship? Could they have used the same method to prevent their abduction of the captain from being detected, at least briefly? Could they have somehow screwed with the computer to prevent a routine search from turning up anything suspicious, at least for a while? Surely someone would notice if the captain was missing for any extended period of time anyway, computer or no computer, so I doubt they'd be aiming to do more than get away before he's missed.

And come to think of it, how long was Picard missing before someone noticed he was gone? Not knowing anything at all about the episode, it occurs to me that maybe there are routine checks, but they're infrequent, because nobody normally expects people to vanish from a moving starship in deep space.

Granted that this is in some sense a lapse in security procedures even so, but it's not an entirely unreasonable one, since normally you wouldn't have crew vanishing without a trace in mid-mission.

Simon_Jester wrote:Can we come up with a pared down list of things that are indisputably engineering failures, instead of probably being blamed on some human being making a mistake or deliberate sabotage that would succeed even if the systems are well engineered?

Well, based on the original list and my memory I can par it down a little.

The Transporter
The Motion Picture - This is the only time technobabble, spatial anomalies, ion storms or sabotage seem to have not played a factor in a transporter failure. They just turned the thing on and it killed two people.

Actually, that is literally all I got.

If anyone wants to add, get rolling.

Captain Seafort wrote:

Skylon wrote:During the theft of the Enterprise: http://movies.trekcore.com/gallery/albu ... hd0618.jpg

Notice the difference?

Point - I'd forgotten about that shot. Maybe with a smaller night shift they just happen to be out of sight? [/grasping at straws]

I'm guessing that's one of at least four such control stations, maybe eight. Given that they don't appear to be constantly launching and receiving starships, and given that nobody was expecting Enterprise to be moved for some time, it doesn't strike me as outlandish that there wouldn't be anyone manning that dock until a ship was scheduled to arrive or leave; there were probably better things for those crew to do.

aussiemuscle308 wrote:maybe, but you shouldn't get out of the garage and half way down the street before noticing you're missing an engine (i think was the original point), however Scotty was very clever to put it (sabotage) on a 5 minute delay.

Impulse and warp drives are two seperate systems which means that the sabotage of the latter won't have any effect on the former. Compare it to someone who's removed the motor oil, its absence isn't immediately obvious but will inevitably lead to an engine failure.