The Official Star Trek Movie Forum

The Official Star Trek Movie Forum > Star Trek > Star Trek XI: The Movie > Compared With the Prime Universe....
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

View Poll Results: Is the Alternate Federation More Powerful Now Than in the Prime Universe?
Yes 11 18.64%
No 15 25.42%
Insufficient Information 33 55.93%
Voters: 59. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11  
Old 06-22-2009, 09:11 AM
kevin's Avatar
kevin kevin is offline
Federation Councillor
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: East Kilbride, Glasgow, UK
Posts: 21,077
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MrQ1701 View Post
True, very true. The JJverse seemed to make transporters even more of a redheaded stepchild than ENT ever did!! They are slow and and can't lock onto anything without it standing very still!! It seemed that way anyway. Could have been the interference from the drilling beam, when it comes to Spock's mom anyway. When it comes to Kirk and Sulu falling, that is NOT an excuse because the beam had been turned off. Imagine, if two people falling are moving too fast for the transporter to track and lock onto without a Wesley like genius at the controls, then how the heck does anything moving in space ever get beamed aboard a ship?
How many times in Star Trek do we see people being transported while falling at high velocity through a planet's atmosphere?

The general principle of transport is that you do it standing, or at the very least, in a motionless position.

Therefore it's not really a surprise that a regular transporter tech would have to try and lock on two objects falling at high speed. It's probably not an everyday event and a clear limit of the technology.

But there's always someone with the instinctive skill to manage it. It's emphasizing Chekov's skills.

And since he never really had anything special going for him in TOS, it's a little bit more interesting.
__________________
'If the Apocalypse starts, beep me!' - Buffy Summers
'The sky's the limit.....' Jean-Luc Picard, 'All Good Things'


courtesy of Saquist
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 06-22-2009, 09:13 AM
mmoore's Avatar
mmoore mmoore is offline
Captain
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: OKUSA
Posts: 1,973
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MrQ1701 View Post
True, very true. The JJverse seemed to make transporters even more of a redheaded stepchild than ENT ever did!! They are slow and and can't lock onto anything without it standing very still!! It seemed that way anyway. Could have been the interference from the drilling beam, when it comes to Spock's mom anyway. When it comes to Kirk and Sulu falling, that is NOT an excuse because the beam had been turned off. Imagine, if two people falling are moving too fast for the transporter to track and lock onto without a Wesley like genius at the controls, then how the heck does anything moving in space ever get beamed aboard a ship?

Don't forget they can now transport light years away!! I think the next movie will show massive transporter stations that beam you from one planet to another! (sarcasm intended)
Remember, Amanda's movement was sudden and unexpected. There might not have been time to compensate.

Imagine aiming a gun at a stationary "target" and it jumps just as you squeeze the trigger. Too late. By the time you aim and fire again, the target could be gone.
__________________
"Are you out of your Vulcan mind?"
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 06-22-2009, 09:19 AM
DevilEyes's Avatar
DevilEyes DevilEyes is offline
Lieutenant
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 309
Default

The Federation is obviously weaker:

- Founding planet Vulcan destroyed, vast majority of Vulcans dead
- a large number of Starfleet ships and its crews destroyed
- enormous damage to the reputation: how strong is really the Federation, if a crew of lunatics - albeit with a dangerous future technology - destroy one of their founding planets, endagner another, and destroy so many Starfleet ships, in such a short time?
__________________
Treason, like beauty, is in the eye of the beholder.
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 06-22-2009, 09:31 AM
kevin's Avatar
kevin kevin is offline
Federation Councillor
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: East Kilbride, Glasgow, UK
Posts: 21,077
Default

I'd hope the federation wasn't so weak that the loss of 7 ships represented a sizeable portion of their fleet - otherwise they weren't very strong.

And the future tech makes a big difference - then again so does torturing defense security codes that they don't know have been compromised til it's too late.
__________________
'If the Apocalypse starts, beep me!' - Buffy Summers
'The sky's the limit.....' Jean-Luc Picard, 'All Good Things'


courtesy of Saquist
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 06-22-2009, 10:00 AM
Samuel Samuel is offline
Vice Admiral
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 3,883
Default

How do you torture a security code?
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 06-22-2009, 10:04 AM
DevilEyes's Avatar
DevilEyes DevilEyes is offline
Lieutenant
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 309
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by kevin View Post
I'd hope the federation wasn't so weak that the loss of 7 ships represented a sizeable portion of their fleet - otherwise they weren't very strong.

And the future tech makes a big difference - then again so does torturing defense security codes that they don't know have been compromised til it's too late.
Well the question is whether they are stronger or weaker, and the loss of any ships doesn't make them stronger than they otherwise would've been, for sure. Although the other two points are far more important.

OTOH I don't see evidence of anything making them stronger. How do we know that Spock will even decide to share the future technology?
__________________
Treason, like beauty, is in the eye of the beholder.
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 06-22-2009, 10:12 AM
chator's Avatar
chator chator is offline
Commander
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 1,261
Default

I got the sense that the Federation was much larger from the original tv series than i did from the movie. I think the Federation is not much more than an afterthought to the adventures of the Enterprise crew and its pseudo justification. Alot of those film shots of the Academy seem to suggest a Starfleet heavily populated by humans, with a few token aliens here and there to add spice. Starfleet in J.J.verse maybe a humanocentric thing.
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 06-22-2009, 10:16 AM
kevin's Avatar
kevin kevin is offline
Federation Councillor
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: East Kilbride, Glasgow, UK
Posts: 21,077
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by DevilEyes View Post
Well the question is whether they are stronger or weaker, and the loss of any ships doesn't make them stronger than they otherwise would've been, for sure. Although the other two points are far more important.

OTOH I don't see evidence of anything making them stronger. How do we know that Spock will even decide to share the future technology?
Depends if you equate strength purely to how many ships you have. There are other factors that play into strength.

Quote:
Originally Posted by chator View Post
I got the sense that the Federation was much larger from the original tv series than i did from the movie. I think the Federation is not much more than an afterthought to the adventures of the Enterprise crew and its pseudo justification. Alot of those film shots of the Academy seem to suggest a Starfleet heavily populated by humans, with a few token aliens here and there to add spice. Starfleet in J.J.verse maybe a humanocentric thing.
I hope that's not intended as a critique of the JJ film, because if you want to take a look at TOS and how many non-human crew members we saw on it during the series and films........
__________________
'If the Apocalypse starts, beep me!' - Buffy Summers
'The sky's the limit.....' Jean-Luc Picard, 'All Good Things'


courtesy of Saquist
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 06-22-2009, 10:17 AM
FarDreaming's Avatar
FarDreaming FarDreaming is offline
Ensign
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: My own state here in Mary-land
Posts: 44
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by DevilEyes View Post
The Federation is obviously weaker:

- Founding planet Vulcan destroyed, vast majority of Vulcans dead
- a large number of Starfleet ships and its crews destroyed
- enormous damage to the reputation: how strong is really the Federation, if a crew of lunatics - albeit with a dangerous future technology - destroy one of their founding planets, endagner another, and destroy so many Starfleet ships, in such a short time?
And I would add a great many scientists were lost in Vulcan's destruction, which may impact the AOS timeline in ways we are aware of, along with the contributions at least a fraction of those billions would have made in any number of other fields, certainly making the Federation weaker. Most of what were referred to as "the intellectual puppets" of the Federation are now gone.

As for Spock Prime, I personally hope that he has learned his lesson regarding the exposure of future knowledge/science. Had he not brought the red matter into the past, billions of Vulcans , and his mother, would still be alive.
__________________
...there comes a time when one must take a position that is neither safe, nor politic, nor
popular, but one must take it because one's conscience tells one that it is right.

- Martin Luther King Jr.
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 06-22-2009, 10:37 AM
MrQ1701's Avatar
MrQ1701 MrQ1701 is offline
Vice Admiral
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Espanola, New Mexico
Posts: 3,940
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mmoore View Post
Remember, Amanda's movement was sudden and unexpected. There might not have been time to compensate.

Imagine aiming a gun at a stationary "target" and it jumps just as you squeeze the trigger. Too late. By the time you aim and fire again, the target could be gone.
I like the target analogy, but we're talking about a future with technology so advanced they have FTL based sensors and scanners. A bullet it like a snail traveling through glue compared to the speeds these sensing devices and computers are running at. I don't buy the sudden fall throwing off such an advanced piece of technology.

We know from other Trek sources that Starships had to drop out of warp in order to use transporters. Imagine a starship engaging it's transporter while moving at 1/2 impulse and the person is on the surface of a planet, or on a stationary ship. The movement is reversed, but the effects should be the same. I'm sure 1/2 impulse is WAYYYYYY faster than the speed of a person freefalling in an atmosphere. What about the scene in Nemesis where the scorpion class fighter is beamed aboard the Enterprise as Picarde and Data escape, how fast were they moving? Maybe that's an apples and oranges comparison, but even in the JJ verse the limitations placed on transporters were very silly when the same darn movie made it possible to transport from a planet to a ship that was light years away, all the while moving at warp!
__________________
To secure the peace is to prepare for war. -Metallica
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 01:45 AM.


Forum theme courtesy of Mark Lambert
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 2009 by Paramount Pictures. STAR TREK and all related
marks and logos are trademarks of CBS Studios Inc. All Rights Reserved.