Favorite film

posted on April 25th, 2010, 3:37 pm

I guess the White House must be equipped with nuclear warheads then 

In the Fleet Ops timeline at least, the Spacedock is hardly equipped with any weapons - it's something to defend, not a massive weapons structure. In fact, I can't recall a single occasion where that Spacedock fired off even a single weapon - even though it has been threatened on numerous occasions.

posted on April 25th, 2010, 3:40 pm

the only time we see it threatened was in star trek IV, when it was completely disabled by the whale probe. any other time there's been an attack on earth the enemy could have simply attacked from the opposite side of earth lol, meaning spacedock wouldn't have been able to shoot.

i dont want it to be like it used to be in fo, even though in canon it should probably be armed, in fo i agree it should be defended, not like a super starbase to control large areas of space.

[Dominus_Noctis]

posted on April 25th, 2010, 3:45 pm

Last edited by Dominus_Noctis on April 25th, 2010, 4:02 pm, edited 1 time in total.

We also see it unable to stop Kirk's ship from leaving, not to mention the Breen or Borg from engaging. I guess you could argue that it isn't in geosynchronous orbit (which is odd for such a massive and high orbiting object), but either way, the images we've seen show the Spacedock from the same angle above Earth - and the same angle when the Borg attack! Weee writer's gaff again 

posted on April 25th, 2010, 4:44 pm

i stand corrected on the kirk thing. but the other two i can explain away by saying that we never saw spacedock on screen, presumably it was on the other side of the planet at the time.

for the kirk thing maybe it happened too quickly for them to deploy weapons. we saw the ds9 weapons had to extend out of their storage. or possibly scotty disabled their weapons too lol.

but that doesnt explain away the fact that they should have used tractor beams. maybe tractor beams weren't as powerful back then. i will ignore the evidence in that film lol because star trek III was so boring it shouldn't count also it kinda dropped the ball with the genesis device crap. ds9 ignored it, terraforming was done in a longer process rather than by launching a torpedo at planets to "life" them up.

i prefer to think that spacedock is armed, but not to the teeth, because the enemy could just attack from a different angle.

but for fleet ops it should definitely be way weaker than a starbase. maybe about two romulan turrets worth.

posted on April 25th, 2010, 4:48 pm

I see a decent FO Spacedock as the same weapons as a basic Outpost, with defence of a single-upgraded Outpost. No upgrades of its own.

Weee writer's gaff again 

Yes, writer's gaff. Rule of Cool, Rule of Funny and Rule of Who cares? and several others reign supreme in all films.

posted on April 26th, 2010, 6:27 pm

I'd figure that Spacedock, being a 'classic' structure of the federation, would have signifigant Beam Phaser capability.  On strips, not little turrets.  That would allow it to fire with no more delay than it takes to charge the capacitor and defend itself.

I also suspect that when Kirk did that, Starfleet didn't really want to blow holes in him.

posted on April 26th, 2010, 7:12 pm

why not? his ship was badly damaged and he was violating orders pretty bad, i think the station commander would give the order to kill him  at least he would be too dead to make star trek V and generations. but we would lose IV and VI which were good films.

[Tyler]

posted on April 26th, 2010, 7:25 pm

Last edited by Tyler on April 26th, 2010, 7:27 pm, edited 1 time in total.

why not? his ship was badly damaged and he was violating orders pretty bad, i think the station commander would give the order to kill him 

Name a time a Starfleet crew has tried to stop ship theft by death. Starfleet doesn't kill hostile attackers unless forced to (except during war), they hate killing their own legendary crews even more.

It's a Starfleet station, not a Klingon one.

posted on April 26th, 2010, 7:31 pm

hey they gave him plenty of chances to stop, he disabled their new ship (which apparantely was the only ship there) and stole another. quite clearly to go piss off the klingons, risking a war which the feds could probably not win. he also escaped incredibly slowly, meaning starfleet should have had enough time to decide to nuke his vessel. i would have given the order. not just cos i think william shatner cant act, but because he was doing something very stupid.

[Tyler]

posted on April 26th, 2010, 7:37 pm

Last edited by Tyler on April 26th, 2010, 7:41 pm, edited 1 time in total.

They had plently of time to use the Tractor beams and didn't, which was plot induced stupidity. The no-killing part is they way Starfleet works, they don't kill. If the Spacedock Commander (you) ordered them too, he'd have been court-marshalled when Starfleet finds out he ordered the murder of an Admiral.

Starfleet doesn't kill for anything except visiting a certain planet. If it was a Klingons spacedock, he'd be dead before the ship leaves sight of the people by the windows.

posted on April 26th, 2010, 7:42 pm

its possible tractor beams werent as strong back then, maybe they could only tow ships with disabled engines. maybe they advanced by ds9 times to be able to restrain vessels.

also starfleet should have killed kirk, he was quite obviously going to genesis, something which would piss off the klingons bad, starfleet wouldn't want a war with the klingons, so they would sacrifice a fat admiral to save all of the federation.

[Tyler]

posted on April 26th, 2010, 7:46 pm

Last edited by Tyler on April 26th, 2010, 7:50 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Visiting Talos IV is a death sentence, nothing else. Going to Genesis wasn't a crime, stealing the Enterprise was. That was still not a death penalty worthy crime, nor was sabotaging the Excelsior.

Going there also didn't risk the peace, it was killing the Klingons already there that did that.

posted on April 26th, 2010, 8:59 pm

not true, the klingons were furious that starfleet was developing genesis, they were absolutely livid. taking a combat ready starship there would definitely risk a war. the grissom was a science vessel, and it still pissed off the klingons.

starfleet knows that the klingons will escalate if they send military ready vessels there (the klingons didnt know it was damaged). they also know that kirk has had a history of picking fights with klingons, and generally just pissing them off. of all the people to go to genesis kirk is the worst. they can look back to his five year mission to see how much crazy tomfoolery he got himself and starfleet into.

if i was a starfleet admiral i would have ordered spacedock to stop kirk at all costs. of course that would have ended the movie before it got good (did it ever get good?) and we have to suspend our disbelief.

[Tyler]

posted on April 26th, 2010, 9:43 pm

Last edited by Tyler on April 26th, 2010, 9:47 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Grissom was destroyed because of a mistake (the Captain wanted prisoners, the tactical officer overestimated an Oberths defences). The Klingons also don't care about Genesis or Starfleet being there, they wanted the device that created it. The planet itself means nothing to them.

Notice how the Klingons never made a fuss about Kirk being at Genesis, only the people he killed? Plus, the Klingons just don't seem to like Kirk.

If you were an Admiral, you'd still be court-marshalled if they died intentionally, sending marines and knocking them out would work (Spacedock should have plently of those).

Coming down to the base, it was all plot-induced behaviour. Even Picard did dumb things when they put Wesley at the front of an episode.

posted on April 26th, 2010, 10:15 pm

Order...to shoot KIRK?!

Okay, here's why you don't do that. 

#1 - James T. Kirk is a hero.  A hero to nearly every world in the Federation.  You kill him, you risk a revolution, or the dissolution of the entire Federation.  It would have to look like an accident, or be done by someone who was not Federation...who would then be lynched by Federation citizens.

#2 - Spock is a hero, and the son of the most powerful and influential Vulcan diplomat.  You kill him without it being the 100% logical decision, and you've just created a hell of a diplomatic incident that could affect the lives of trillions.

#3 - McCoy is a hero, and at the time, the best damned doctor in Starfleet.  He's not quite as famous and influential as the previous two, but it's still a politically stupid decision to shoot him.

#4 - Every other senior officer on that thing is a hero.  See above.

#5 - The Klingons pick fights.  Remember, if you are too 'afraid' to send ships to check things out, they'll take it as a sign of weakness...and attack you.  If you do send ships, it's a sign of aggression, and they'll probably attack you.  Kirk going out there is actually slightly safer for the Federation, but there's no way he could be ordered to do so, as the people giving the orders would be seen as trying to instigate a war.  Damned if you don't, probably damned if you do.  So do, just do it off the books.

#6 - I'd like to reiterate this whole 'hero' thing.  You don't shoot your own heros, it makes your citizens fear, hate and distrust you.  Which means high likelihood of revolt.  Do you REALLY want to see revolting Humans, Tellarites, and Andorians?