Enterprise

[ToSeek]

Just to start things off, I wanted to mention the "Enterprise" episode a couple of weeks ago where they found a ship "motionless in space." Even my zoology major wife asked, "Um, how can they tell?"

[Ben Benoy]

And, to get things off topic just to start, is there anybody else who doesn't even get UPN? This is seriously bothering me, since I can't watch Enterprise.

Ok, hijack over.

Ben Benoy

[Hale_Bopp]

Well, in Star Trek, they seem to have some sort of coordinate system agreed upon since you hear them talk about their headings and what not. I don't honestly know what the coordinate system is, but bet you could find it in a Star Trek Technical manual somewhere (probably a Sun centered system).

Therefore, it was probably at rest with respect to their random coordinate system which would be quite a coincidence for an alien ship since they would have probably selected a different coordinate system, probably oriented around their home star, which is in all likliehood moving relative to our Sun.

Another unbelievable coincidence!

Rob

[Phobos]

If you consider the galaxy as a whole you could imagine a grid system based upon;

1. Galactic centre of gravity.

2. Our galaxy is relatively flat. The plane of best fit should be considered.

As you start to go through the possiblities there are doubtless numerous ways you could define such a grid system, but I would have thought that a galactic grid would be designed to be independant of your home planet.

Jeff

[Trish]

Yes, but you forget that even the BORG call our solar system Sector 1. So we're really heliocentric in Trek.

[MongotheGreat]

On 2001-10-22 16:30, ToSeek wrote:
Just to start things off, I wanted to mention the "Enterprise" episode a couple of weeks ago where they found a ship "motionless in space." Even my zoology major wife asked, "Um, how can they tell?"

My thoughts revolve around the dramatic event of finding a "motionless" and therefore "spooky" or "interesting" ship as it was probably used to initiate the plot of the episode. Just another example of artistic liscence taken at the expense of poor old astronomy.
Just imagine the odds of a disabled ship being perfectly motionless with respect to a random coordinate system. Then again, they could have been using the coordinate system of the ship itself, then it would be motionless.[img]/phpBB/images/smiles/icon_biggrin.gif[/img]

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: MongotheGreat on 2001-10-23 00:49 ]</font>
Trying to get my signature to work

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: MongotheGreat on 2001-10-23 00:52 ]</font>

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: MongotheGreat on 2001-10-23 00:54 ]</font>

[Simon]

[Simon]

Erm, I suppose it's not likely that they just meant it's engines weren't activated?

No, that would be too logical... And besides, they would have probably phrased it differently...


Right, I'm getting the hang of this. Really...

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Simon on 2001-10-23 04:12 ]</font>

[WHarris]

On 2001-10-22 21:47, Trish wrote:
Yes, but you forget that even the BORG call our solar system Sector 1. So we're really heliocentric in Trek.

The Borg only call it sector 001 because we do.

[ToSeek]

On 2001-10-23 00:48, MongotheGreat wrote:

My thoughts revolve around the dramatic event of finding a "motionless" and therefore "spooky" or "interesting" ship as it was probably used to initiate the plot of the episode. Just another example of artistic liscence taken at the expense of poor old astronomy.

I was thinking they could just as easily (and more visually dramatically) have shown the ship spinning in some fashion, which would also have served as an indicator that something was wrong and would actually have made sense.

[James]

IIRC, the way the coordinate system is set up in relation to a ship is 360 degrees in any direction. i.e. 270 x 90 mark 2 would be a turn to the upper-left, I believe. I don't know. It's been a while since I read a Star Trek techinical book. [img]/phpBB/images/smiles/icon_confused.gif[/img]

[Donnie B.]

I don't think "motionless wrt the galaxy" is good enough. After all, the galaxy is rotating as a whole, and the individual stars are all orbiting its center at different speeds. So you can't say there's a universal "landmark" that every spacefaring species would agree on.

It's much like the situation on Earth, where there's an objective North and South Pole (though different cultures/observers might name them differently) and Equator, and thus a universal standard for latitude; but for longitude, it took an international commission to settle on Greenwich, England as the zero mark.

So even if the Federation uses a galaxy-centered coordinate system, which would allow two objective, fixed dimensions (north-south and distance from the center) it still has to choose a third, arbitrary reference line for the third dimension... such as a line from the galactic center through the Sun, or Vulcan's sun, or something of the sort.

I tend to agree with Simon's suggestion that the ship was simply unpowered... not under warp drive, not accelerating, perhaps not radiating any energy above cosmic background (or whatever would be expected due to illumination by the nearby star/s).

So, maybe "motionless" would just be a shorthand term. Or maybe it was uttered by a spaceflight "newbie" who hadn't learned to be precise.

I like ToSeek's suggestion of spinning/tumbling as a good "visual shorthand" for abandoned/adrift. Only a spacecraft with active guidance would maintain stationkeeping with the background stars for very long, I suspect. Even random events (heating and cooling) would eventually impart some spin. Or parts would break off, or a tank would leak causing a jet... entropy rules!


_________________

My God! It's full of stars!

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Donnie B. on 2001-10-23 09:20 ]</font>

[WHarris]

On 2001-10-23 07:37, ToSeek wrote:
I was thinking they could just as easily (and more visually dramatically) have shown the ship spinning in some fashion, which would also have served as an indicator that something was wrong and would actually have made sense.

Not given the context of the episode. The ship had been taken over by the alien bad guys, and the crew's corpses strung up so that whatever the aliens wanted could be processed out of them. Since the alien bad guys were planning on coming back, they'd want to leave the ship in a position for easy docking. (ie not spinning)

[Tom]

So even if the Federation uses a galaxy-centered coordinate system, which would allow two objective, fixed dimensions (north-south and distance from the center) it still has to choose a third, arbitrary reference line for the third dimension... such as a line from the galactic center through the Sun, or Vulcan's sun, or something of the sort.

Close. The Earth's coordinates in Star Trek are 0,0,1. Guess which race out of all the superior ones got to pick to coordinate system? [img]/phpBB/images/smiles/icon_wink.gif[/img]

And the question I had about the itty-bitty dead ship... when the Big One came back, it obviously dwarfed the NX-01. Why did they leave the ship, bodies, equipment, etc., if it was so important? (Can you say plot device?) It was big enough to have a cargo hold the size of West Palm Beach.

[Wally]

What always got me is the fact that whenever ships meet, they're on the same plane in relation to each other. This, even during battles. Even in Wrath of Kahn during the final battle scene, after Spock points out Kahn is thinking only in 2 dimensions, Kurk "sinks" down out of the plane Kahn's on. All well and good. However, once down "below" the level of Kahn, he finds it necessary to "rise" back up to the same plane (after Kahn passes by) before firing at him. So. . .why didn't he just pitch the nose of the ship up 90 degrees from below him and fire??? Wonder if the Geneva Convention in the 24th century forbids fighting from different relative planes or something. . .

[Geo3gh]

What always got me is the fact that whenever ships meet, they're on the same plane in relation to each other.

I always laugh when they use this so a ship can block another, as if this point in space were a choke point.

"Oops. Can't go forward anymore. Someone's in our way."

"Can't we go around them?"

"Shut up, Ensign Redshirt."


Jeff

[David Hall]

I always laugh when they use this so a ship can block another, as if this point in space were a choke point.

"Oops. Can't go forward anymore. Someone's in our way."

"Can't we go around them?"

"Shut up, Ensign Redshirt."

Jeff

Actually, I don't think this would be as ludicrous as it seems. Any ship blocking your way would be able to manoeuver to intercept you faster than you would be able to get around it. Not unless your ship was much faster than it.

So I see it not so much as a physical blocking as a stalemate. You can't move in any way without the other ship countering it. So why bother trying.

I remember Larry Niven's story "The Ethics of Madness" has a similar idea. One man fleeing in a ramship couldn't turn it around to go home because the ship pursuing it instantly corrected it's course every time he tried. So both ships kept heading out into the void forever.

[Lisa]

I'm glad that someone else has noticed that. I've always thought that all the ships being on the same plane was weird. This is space, not the ocean.
And with the lovely "artifical gravity" plot device, we can also ask why Chekov fell out of his chair every time the Enterprise was hit.
Lisa

[Tom]

Uh, the artificial gravity... even in the turbolifts...

On the episode we've discussed, I was pleased that the pod docked upside down with respect to the other ship.

This week's episode had the pod dock underneath, and the characters climbed up into the alien ship. How the heck did they build a gravity generator into 3 inches of hull, while maintaining strength and insulation?

It's good, it's bad, it's TV!

[Sean]

In non combat situations there could be conventions in place that govern how one ship aproaches another. These conventions do not have to make sense as long as someone with enough authority creates the rule. This would explain non combat situations. Protocal requires it so we do it. Happens alot in the military.

As far as Combat goes in the wrath of khan werent targeting computers down? If that was the case than rising to the easiest point to fire from would make sense. In other cases to hit specific targets on a ship may require putting yourself at a point where your in line with them. Admittedly this is not a great reason but possibly one to work from.

[Mr. X]

On 2001-10-23 10:54, Wally wrote:
What always got me is the fact that whenever ships meet, they're on the same plane in relation to each other. This, even during battles. Even in Wrath of Kahn during the final battle scene, after Spock points out Kahn is thinking only in 2 dimensions, Kurk "sinks" down out of the plane Kahn's on. All well and good. However, once down "below" the level of Kahn, he finds it necessary to "rise" back up to the same plane (after Kahn passes by) before firing at him. So. . .why didn't he just pitch the nose of the ship up 90 degrees from below him and fire??? Wonder if the Geneva Convention in the 24th century forbids fighting from different relative planes or something. . .

I can't believe I am actually saying this, as I will sound like a complete idiot, but then again I am a brave man.

It could be because there was a chance they could miss, because ships in Star Trek move fast enough, even if they seem to be going 1 kilometer per hour in the mutara nebula (however it's spelled). Since they have no sensors, and if the ship was moving perpendicular to them, they could miss it, and if you notice a little earlier they actually DO miss (UNBELIEVABLE BUT TRUE!), so my guess is they want to take as little chances as possible from missing, because had Khan seen fire coming from below, he would certainly have started to fight in 3 dimensions. If the ship moves away from them and they are behind it stays in the relative same space, hence it is easier for the total incompetent that managed to miss before at the weapons console to score a hit (pure luck it seems). My guess is without sensors it is more difficult to match velocity, so if they wanted to point the nose up as you said and fire, they could match velocity with lateral manoeuvering thrusters (do they have those? How are they called?) and it would have been a little difficult if the guy at the helm was as competent as the one at the weapons console I guess he could have triggered the self destruct sequence by mistake or something.

Well, in theory of course. [img]/phpBB/images/smiles/icon_razz.gif[/img]

[SeanF]

On 2001-10-23 12:13, Lisa wrote:
And with the lovely "artifical gravity" plot device, we can also ask why Chekov fell out of his chair every time the Enterprise was hit.
Lisa

I thought it was cute in the pilot for "Enterprise" when they got knocked around and one of the characters (I think it was Hoshi) said, "When we get back, we should recommend seat belts in these things". Apparently they never got around to it!

[Azpod]

On 2001-10-23 10:54, Wally wrote:
What always got me is the fact that whenever ships meet, they're on the same plane in relation to each other. This, even during battles. Even in Wrath of Kahn during the final battle scene, after Spock points out Kahn is thinking only in 2 dimensions, Kurk "sinks" down out of the plane Kahn's on. All well and good. However, once down "below" the level of Kahn, he finds it necessary to "rise" back up to the same plane (after Kahn passes by) before firing at him. So. . .why didn't he just pitch the nose of the ship up 90 degrees from below him and fire??? Wonder if the Geneva Convention in the 24th century forbids fighting from different relative planes or something. . .

Actually, that's a good point. When I worked at Interplay on Starfleet Academy, one of the biggest problems that we had was orientation, because the player could and often did move thier ship in 3 dimensions. But they often became disoriented if the enemy ships attacked from any dimension and without the "tops" of thier ships lining up with the "top" of the player's ship. So we had to have the computer AI reorient itself with respect to the player to attack from the same plane that the player's ship currently was in.

I'm glad I didn't get stuck writing that code! [img]/phpBB/images/smiles/icon_biggrin.gif[/img]

But that's why the ships are facing the way they are in Trek, so that the audience (who is used to seeing things the way they are on Earth, where there's a definite "up") doesn't become disoriented and confused. Too bad it has to be that way, though. In a "real life" space battle, ships would be facing any which way and attacking from potentially any angle.

Of course, ships in Trek also get rediculously close to each other, especially when they are doing battle! [img]/phpBB/images/smiles/icon_eek.gif[/img]

_________________
Just my two neurons worth,
Azpod... Formerly known as James Justin

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Azpod on 2001-10-23 14:51 ]</font>

[ToSeek]

On 2001-10-23 09:22, WHarris wrote:

On 2001-10-23 07:37, ToSeek wrote:
I was thinking they could just as easily (and more visually dramatically) have shown the ship spinning in some fashion, which would also have served as an indicator that something was wrong and would actually have made sense.

Not given the context of the episode. The ship had been taken over by the alien bad guys, and the crew's corpses strung up so that whatever the aliens wanted could be processed out of them. Since the alien bad guys were planning on coming back, they'd want to leave the ship in a position for easy docking. (ie not spinning)

Well, as others have pointed out, it wouldn't take much for the ship to start to spin if there's no one at the helm. I think it still makes a lot more sense than "motionless in space."

[Rob Scott]

On 2001-10-23 14:49, Azpod wrote:
Of course, ships in Trek also get rediculously close to each other, especially when they are doing battle! [img]/phpBB/images/smiles/icon_eek.gif[/img]

Yeah, that always bothered me. I know it's so Joe Sixpack understands what's going on, and so the effects look good, etc. but it always seemed to me there was a way to do it more realistically and still have it look cool and be understandable.

The only SF show I can recall that actually tried was Babylon 5. I vividly remember one episode (can't remember title offhand) where a group of ships detect an enemy battle group fairly far off; and they start firing into the distance. Then the point of view switches to the enemy group and you see them firing back. It was wayyyyy cool and I was jumping up and down in my chair, thinking (if not yelling) "Good astronomy! Good astronomy!" Fortunately my wife was not there or she would have thought me more nuts than usual.

[James]

On 2001-10-23 14:07, SeanF wrote:

On 2001-10-23 12:13, Lisa wrote:
And with the lovely "artifical gravity" plot device, we can also ask why Chekov fell out of his chair every time the Enterprise was hit.
Lisa

I thought it was cute in the pilot for "Enterprise" when they got knocked around and one of the characters (I think it was Hoshi) said, "When we get back, we should recommend seat belts in these things". Apparently they never got around to it!

IIRC, they haven't been back to Earth yet. Maybe in a future episode? [img]/phpBB/images/smiles/icon_confused.gif[/img]

[The Rat]

On 2001-10-23 14:07, SeanF wrote:

I thought it was cute in the pilot for "Enterprise" when they got knocked around and one of the characters (I think it was Hoshi) said, "When we get back, we should recommend seat belts in these things". Apparently they never got around to it!

I would be willing to bet that this was an 'inside' joke. I certainly chuckled over it.

[Geo3gh]

[/quote]

Actually, I don't think this would be as ludicrous as it seems. Any ship blocking your way would be able to manoeuver to intercept you faster than you would be able to get around it. Not unless your ship was much faster than it.

So I see it not so much as a physical blocking as a stalemate. You can't move in any way without the other ship countering it. So why bother trying.

I remember Larry Niven's story "The Ethics of Madness" has a similar idea. One man fleeing in a ramship couldn't turn it around to go home because the ship pursuing it instantly corrected it's course every time he tried. So both ships kept heading out into the void forever.
[/quote]

Yeah, but Niven was keeping a bit more to physics as we know it. We're talking about Trek here. The "Picard Manuever" relies on being able to accelerate to Warp 1 faster than your opponent's crew or sensors can accomodate. They could do that to get around the one-ship blockade too.

[Geo3gh]

Of course, ships in Trek also get rediculously close to each other, especially when they are doing battle! [img]/phpBB/images/smiles/icon_eek.gif[/img]

But they'll quote great distances anyway, regardless of what the SFX guys decide to show.

Maybe they have one of those mirrors: objects look closer than they really are.

[Chip]

[quote]
On 2001-10-23 16:33, Rob Scott wrote:

On 2001-10-23 14:49, Azpod wrote:
"...The only SF show I can recall that actually tried was Babylon 5. I vividly remember one episode (can't remember title offhand) where a group of ships detect an enemy battle group fairly far off; and they start firing into the distance. Then the point of view switches to the enemy group and you see them firing back. It was wayyyyy cool and I was jumping up and down in my chair, thinking (if not yelling) "Good astronomy! Good astronomy!" Fortunately my wife was not there or she would have thought me more nuts than usual."

Babylon 5 -- I love that show! They did that long range fighting effect several times. Unlike Star Trek, they've also had scenes where areas within their big battle ships are in "micro gravity" i.e. weightless. This includes the bridge, where the Captain and crew are strapped in their chairs. (The more advanced aliens however have gravity throughout their space craft, and they can wear fancy robes without getting caught in doorways!) Never the less, a very cool show! Narn ships are wicked looking - and the Shadow shps are....chilling! (-;

("B5" is not perfect though. They also had WWI style "dog fights" sort of in the Star Wars style. Dramatic yes, but not exactly "good astronomy.")

In fairness to Star Trek, in the original series, (the episode where they first see Romulans,) there is a reference to war in space where you "never see the enemy ships." They are too far away during battle.

Chip