moriarty@uw-june (Jeff Meyer) (05/25/84)
Before showing "Indiana Jones" the other night, they had the MTV preview for
STIII. As the Enterprise goes hurtling towards the screen, half it's
primary hull blown away, I heard someone behind me say...
"No, no, kill Chekov instead!"
"Snakes. Why did it have to be snakes?"
Moriarty, aka Jeff Meyer
UUCP: {ihnp4,cornell,decvax,tektronix}!uw-beaver!uw-june!moriarty
ARPANET: moriarty@washingtoncbspt002@abnjh.UUCP (Marc E. Kenig ) (05/25/84)
<>
I am one of the few old startrek devotees not looking forward to STIII.
The Enterprise represented for me the centerpiece of the whole of the
series. As goes it, so goes Star Trek.
Remember the opening lines of the series:
"...These are the voyages of the Starship Enterprise, it's 5 year mission..."
It doesn't say,
"...These are the voyages of Capt. Kirk and his buddies, one of whom is
a Vulcan..."
I, maybe a bit set in my ways and of the generation of original network series
watchers, felt all of Kirk's emotion during the 'Enterprise walkaround' scene
in STI-TMP. Bit silly I guess, but I liked the way that STI so carefully
added to and upgraded the Enterprise. It was The Enterprise vs. Vijer in
the ending scenes, etc.
It won't be Star Trek without the Enterprise.*sigh*
M. Kenig ["Share and Enjoy"]
ATT-IS s. Plainfield, NJ
.,..!abnjh!cbspt002barmar@mit-eddie.UUCP (05/28/84)
I saw an interview with Nimoy on Entertainment Tonight last week, and he said that he isn't sure what the advertisements mean by "final voyage of the Enterprise." It sounds like it is just advertising hype, so don't worry. -- Barry Margolin ARPA: barmar@MIT-Multics UUCP: ..!genrad!mit-eddie!barmar
merchant@dartvax.UUCP (Peter Merchant) (05/28/84)
{ Hmm... }
The only problem with having the Enterprise is that once you have the
Enterprise, you need to have the crew. As "The World of Star Trek"
so well put it, "What do you do with all those people?!"
Especially nowadays! Everyone has received almost two bumps in command.
It's hard to accept that the Federation is using its highly trained people
to sit there and open hailing frequencies. (I believe Uhura is now a
Commander and she's doing the same thing she did as a Lt.)
Send Chekov off someplace else. I wouldn't mind seeing the adventures of
Captain James T. Kirk, if it is a viable story. But this dragging along
the Enterprise and all it's excess baggage all the time is becoming a bit
silly.
Also, since they are trying to add new faces all the time to "update us"
but not get rid of the old, the numbers of people are beginning to get
very unwieldy.
This is why I didn't shed too many tears for Spock. It was an excellent
story. If they manage to bring Spock back, I will be very disappointed.
As David Gerrold put it, dead is dead. But by killing a character and
bringing them back to life basically means that you are lieing to your
audience somewhere. "Hey, remember when we said Spock was dead? Guess
what! He's not! Fooled you, didn't I! Ha ha ha ha!"
I'm not going to believe that guy ever again. Next time someone dies, even
if they are important, I won't worry. They'll bring him back if he's really
important.
I'd like to see a few other people get killed. Nuke Chekov. Sulu can go
away...he's a Captain now. He deserves his own ship. Uhura might make
a reasonable second in command someplace else. Scotty loves the Enterprise,
as does Jim. Okay. Leave them there. Now let's meet this "new generation".
Either get rid of your excess baggage, Star Trek, or get rid of your ship.
But do one or the other. The whole thing is bordering on the obnoxious.
--
"And here's my two cents change..." -- Peter Merchantnova@abnjh.UUCP (Scott D. Allen) (06/06/84)
I seem to remember in one of the STAR TREK episodes that the Enterprise could be self-destructed by letting all the matter and anti-matter "mix" at one time. I assume that such a blast would cause significant damage to the planet the Enterprise was orbiting at the time. I don't think this method is the only way of blowing up the old girl. Remember, in ST III, Kirk and crew wanted to blow up the Enterprise and GET OUT! They planned to beam to Genesis to get to Spock and have a fighting chance. They only wanted to destroy the Enterprise and hopefully take out a few Klingons in the process. The method they used probably had some type of fail-safe to protect the anti-matter so only the ship would go. Or maybe they hit the old "Destroy-the-ship-and-kill-Klingons" button. Scotty -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Scott Allen ATT-IS Orlando, Florida ..!abnjh!ncoss
john@hp-pcd.UUCP (john) (12/09/84)
<<< The only way that the Big E could jettison a anti-matter bottle at escape velocity for a planet would be thru the photon torpedo tubes. If the ship is functioning that well then they would not be self destructing. Any ship destruct procedure must be based on the assumption that all major systems are non-functioning. But then an ounce of anti-matter fired at a Klingon ship....Mmmmm John Eaton !hplabs!hp-pcd!john
jin@hplabs.UUCP (Tai Jin) (12/17/84)
> How about this theory about why the antimatter in the engines didn't > make a big bang the way it should have - there are (at least) 2 modes > of self-destruct - I will call them "Big bang" and "little bang" > The "big bang" is for when you have to self-destruct and you want to take > as much with you as possible (such as in deep space surrounded by an > army of Romulans) you let the antimatter loose and let it do its thing. > The "little bang" is for when you merely want to destroy the ship, not > anything nereby (such as a planet) you somehow jettison the antimatter, > then allow conventional explosives (or whatever) destroy the ship. > This is what you saw in TSFS. The antimatter could be aimed at some > asteroid or something so no one will bump into it by accident. > Any comments? > > "There's a madness to my method." Mike Moroney > ..decwrl!rhea!jon!moroney the "big bang" you mention...isn't that the corobomite bluff? so i thought it wasn't for real. anyway, isn't their power derived from the dilithium crystals? i don't know the mechanism, but i think the antimatter is derived from the crystals. does anybody know?
bsa@ncoast.UUCP (Brandon Allbery) (12/23/84)
> Article <1271@hplabs.UUCP>, from jin@hplabs.UUCP (Tai Jin) +---------------- | the "big bang" you mention...isn't that the corobomite bluff? so i thought | it wasn't for real. anyway, isn't their power derived from the dilithium | crystals? i don't know the mechanism, but i think the antimatter is derived | from the crystals. does anybody know? Wrong. The ``big bang'' is from "The Deadly Years", *not* "The Corbomite Manoeuver". Actually, I have a sneaking suspicion that someone decided that something like corbomite might come in handy, developed it, and put it in/on the Enterprise's framework when they refitted her... and we saw *that* go off in ST:TWOK. Not unlikely. Dilithium does *not* create antimatter (or has the stuff posted both here and in net.tv.drwho warped some minds? :-); it *regulates* the matter/antimatter reaction. But I'm damned if I can remember where I learned that bit of information. (Speaking of tie-ins: in the animated episode "The Terratin Incident", dilithium is likened to organic material... and it's pinkish when it's inert. Shades of tie-ins; you think maybe they discovered it on Arisia? :-) --bsa -- Brandon Allbery @ decvax!cwruecmp!ncoast!bsa (..ncoast!tdi1!bsa business) 6504 Chestnut Road, Independence, Ohio 44131 (216) 524-1416 <<<<<< An equal opportunity employer: I both create and destroy bugs :-) >>>>>>
hawk@oliven.UUCP (Rick) (12/27/84)
> The only way that the Big E could jettison a anti-matter bottle at escape >velocity for a planet would be thru the photon torpedo tubes. If the ship >is functioning that well then they would not be self destructing. Any ship >destruct procedure must be based on the assumption that all major systems >are non-functioning. > But then an ounce of anti-matter fired at a Klingon ship....Mmmmm is the underlying principle of a photon torpedo, last I heard. rick
friedman@uiucdcs.UUCP (12/28/84)
> Wrong. The ``big bang'' is from "The Deadly Years", *not* "The Corbomite > Manoeuver". Actually, I have a sneaking suspicion that someone decided > that something like corbomite might come in handy, developed it, and put > it in/on the Enterprise's framework when they refitted her... and we > saw *that* go off in ST:TWOK. Not unlikely. Sorry, you're wrong. The corbomite bluff was introduced in "The Corbomite Maneuver" -- hence the name of the episode. It was resurrected in "The Deadly Years", just mentioned in a bluff message to Star Fleet; it wasn't even essential to an understanding of DY to have seem CM and understood the reference.
derek@uwvax.UUCP (Derek Zahn) (12/30/84)
> > Dilithium does *not* create antimatter (or has the stuff posted both > here and in net.tv.drwho warped some minds? :-); it *regulates* the > matter/antimatter reaction. But I'm damned if I can remember where I > learned that bit of information. > My original suggestion was not that dilithium crystals create antimatter, but rather that they regulate a conversion between normal matter and antimatter. If this newly created antimatter reacted immediately, the dilithium could indeed be said to be *regulating* a matter/antimatter reaction. While I realize that this probably goes against something or other Scotty said in some episode or some mention in an *official* handbook, I think it makes a much simpler and more aesthetically pleasing solution to the no- big-bam-boom destruct question than self-powered course-programmed antimatter escape pods. Besides, if we took the literature as law on everything, we would get nowhere, as with the "speed of warp" question. The 'official' explanation (warp^3 * c or something like that) was quite impossible to reconcile with events on the show. This dilithium scheme makes sense to me, solves a troubling problem, and I don't think it is too far out of line with what we know of the show. derek -- Derek Zahn @ wisconsin ...!{allegra,heurikon,ihnp4,seismo,sfwin,ucbvax,uwm-evax}!uwvax!derek derek@wisc-rsch.arpa
bsa@ncoast.UUCP (Brandon Allbery (the tame hacker on the North Coast)) (01/02/85)
> Article <24900069@uiucdcs.UUCP>, from friedman@uiucdcs.UUCP +---------------- | > Wrong. The ``big bang'' is from "The Deadly Years", *not* "The Corbomite | > Manoeuver". Actually, I have a sneaking suspicion that someone decided | > that something like corbomite might come in handy, developed it, and put | > it in/on the Enterprise's framework when they refitted her... and we | > saw *that* go off in ST:TWOK. Not unlikely. | | Sorry, you're wrong. The corbomite bluff was introduced in "The Corbomite | Maneuver" -- hence the name of the episode. It was resurrected in "The | Deadly Years", just mentioned in a bluff message to Star Fleet; it wasn't | even essential to an understanding of DY to have seem CM and understood the | reference. You got me wrong. "The Deadly Years" referred to a matter/antimatter reaction; "The Corbomite Manoeuver" referred to a hypothetical substance with destructive potential. I *still* think the framework of the Enterprise was treated with something to make it dissolve before the rest of the ship; look at the view of the girders glowing but the hull plate still whole (except at the girders). Anyway, TDY referred to a different kind of event from TCM. --bsa -- Brandon Allbery @ decvax!cwruecmp!ncoast!bsa (..ncoast!tdi1!bsa business) 6504 Chestnut Road, Independence, Ohio 44131 (216) 524-1416 Who said you had to be (a) a poor programmer or (b) a security hazard to be a hacker?
dpb@cbosgd.UUCP (Daniel Bidinger) (01/04/85)
*** REPLACE THIS LINE WITH YOUR MESSAGE *** The Enterprise was partly destroyed in the book: BLACK FIRE this is where Spock gets courtmartialed but breaks out of prison to join some space pirates. Well anyway the Enterprise "sheds" a couple hulls. Then it limps back to starfleet Spock gets back on the enterprise after stopping a war with the Romulans this is an awesome book.
daf@ccice6.UUCP (David Fader) (01/12/85)
> Wrong. The ``big bang'' is from "The Deadly Years", *not* "The Corbomite > Manoeuver". Actually, I have a sneaking suspicion that someone decided > that something like corbomite might come in handy, developed it, and put > it in/on the Enterprise's framework when they refitted her... and we > saw *that* go off in ST:TWOK. Not unlikely. I believe the movie was something like "The Search For Spock" not "The Wrath Of Khan" Please post all future articles to net.fool. -- The Last Surviving Bronto