>"Captain, there's something ahead of us."
>"On-screen"
>View Screen turns on
So does that mean they were just looking at a blank screen all that time? Wouldn't that have been rather boring? Why not just have the View Screen activated all the time so you can actually see interesting stuff along the way?
Other urls found in this thread:
youtube.com
vocaroo.com
vocaroo.com
youtube.com
twitter.com
Why not just have a fucking window, they already have transparent aluminum
Most of space (literally 95%+) is empty. Im sure the stars get boring once youve been seeing them for years. Also the view screen can show magnified images
Still, I'd rather watch the hypnotizing sight of stars whizzing past than just a black screen.
Wouldn't windows of any kind be a major structural weakness on a vessel like that
It's not like they ever use them to see anything anyway, it's all done with scanners or sensors or they just have cameras on the outside
1:58 into this vid
"On screen" means "Pick a sensor array pointing in the direction of whatever you're talking about and show its feed on the view screen, then zoom in until we can actually see it"
The distance of stuff they're just detecting with their sensors is millions of miles away.
#awk #btfo #cringe #gotanymorequestions?
It means put whatever you're talking about on the view screen, not that it wasnt on in the first place
I get that, but before the thing actually gets shown, the screen was off entirely.
In what episode? I don't recall ever noticing that.
I always assumed the stuff they were putting on screen wasn't visible to the human eye from where the ship was, so they use some future camera to magnify and show it on screen as if it were there in front of them
See:
>So does that mean they were just looking at a blank screen all that time?
Nope the windows starfield screensaver runs after ten minutes. After a quarter of an hour the bridge shuts down.
so that's why Data is always fiddling around on his pad
In the tv show they just defaulted to a front view of stars passing by.
This is I guess because they're in battle and didn't need the travel screensaver
sounds legit
The movie writers were hacks
or
The pilot doesn't use the viewscreen to navigate, the Captain is always wanting to see whose shooting at or hailing them and such. They probably just had a snarky conversation with the Romulans or something and Picard "screen off'd" them and never told the crew to put it back onto forward view again.
Captain. I'm sensing something. A presence.
...
...
That's dumb. The instrumentation for each station provides everything the crewman needs to perform his duty. I bet during normal shifts on the bridge, or scientific missions, the viewscreen is off for days.
>That's dumb but I agree
Huh?
obviously they were watching tv or a movie before
at that point, they had physical shielding covering the actual window of the bridge, probably added after the myriad of times where people were sucked into space when the window got smashed by lasers.
Which episode is this from?
the viewscreen isn't actually a window, just a screen that shows a camera shot from wherever off the ship they want to view.
there are windows though on the bridge just above but we never see out of them, they just look like white lights for some reason
>the viewscreen isn't actually a window
They must have changed that in the E between First Contact and Nemesis because it gets smashed and someone gets sucked out of it in Nemesis when they crash into the Scimitar.
And why does us anyone like this movie again?
This movie fucked up the Borg, gave us bad movie quips, and didn't really feel like Star Trek.
the TOS movies on the other hand actually felt like they weren't pandering directly to a moviegoing thread with a star trek back drop
go back and watch the opening of TNG
you can see into the bridge through a little raised bubble but that's just the top of the bridge
In some episodes of TNG the screen gets destroyed and there's no display, just a broken monitor.
It's clear in the Enterprise E that all they have is a wall, and they can project a screen over it, with holodeck technology or something similar. Perhaps there is a physical window behind that wall that can open in times of emergency.
>This movie fucked up the Borg
That was Voyager. And I was always okay with the Borg Queen idea seeing as they were based on insects anyway (Conspiracy).
>and didn't really feel like Star Trek.
Sure it did. It was just more like a TOS episode than a TNG one, and young fans always seem to miss that.
>the TOS movies on the other hand actually felt like they weren't pandering directly to a moviegoing thread with a star trek back drop
And none of the TOS movies were like TOS episodes. They were definitely movies, and people levelled the same criticisms at them too.
Did you mean to quote ? And that shot was a reference to the opening of The Cage which did the same thing.
That's the D, I said the E.
They only had the wall in First Contact, it was changed to a window later
Why didn't they just build a Dyson-like frame around a distant star and harness to energy to replicate entire ships? Or at least pods or probes that could explore the galaxy...
Because Picard's report on the dyson sphere they found in Relics made them realise it was a bad idea.
And I suspect such a project was well beyond them anyway.
Do you think by the time of Enterprise E they could replicate torpedoes? I would think replicating a shuttlecraft would be at least possible, or a maquis style fighter. You could make countless small fighters, drones perhaps, in no time and simply overrun a planet's defenses with no losses. Also seems like starship crews, especially bridge crews, should be on some remote planet controlling the starships from there. If something bad happened they wouldn't be in danger.
If you consider Voyager canon, then yes. They must have invented a way to replicate torpedoes without mentioning it in the show, so they would have informed Starfleet at some point before Admiral Janeway was sending them on missions.
>That was Voyager
uh huh
>Sure it did. It was just more like a TOS episode than a TNG one, and young fans always seem to miss that.
It was nothing like a TOS episode at all. It was like a typical TNG box-office movie mixed in with the TOS time travel. Nothing about the quips and overdone special effects, Data's bad emotionalism, or Cromwell's forced drunken scientist schtick is anything approaching TOS.
That was a bad pretend opinion comparison. It was meant to be a box-office orchestral explosion fest.
>And none of the TOS movies were like TOS episodes. They were definitely movies, and people levelled the same criticisms at them too.
Oh, so then your second opinion doesn't mean anything.
I take that back, you're just trying to bump the thread. Good job though, this could actually become a decent trek thread if we try.
I wonder why they don't replicate data. Or use a transporter trick to reproduce his pattern a hundred times. A whole crew of datas
Because the transporter doesn't make copies of people, that's not how it works.
>but what about Thomas?
The planet's energy field created him, not the transporter.
>Because Picard's report on the dyson sphere they found in Relics made them realise it was a bad idea.
When was this exposited by Picard?
>made them realise
Made who realise?
>it was a bad idea
Who said it was a bad idea and when?
>When was this exposited by Picard?
>Who said it was a bad idea and when?
Subtext based on the fact that everyone inside was dead and it almost killed them too
>Made who realise?
>Why didn't they
Them
>Subtext based on the fact that everyone inside was dead and it almost killed them too
There is no actual dialogue from which subtext is to be determined upon since there was nothing between Picard and Starfleet that we actually see. And more importantly, they also didn't find dead people, it was deserted.