Timeline for Why was the saucer separation so rarely done on the USS Enterprise (NCC-1701-D)
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
18 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| May 15, 2017 at 21:36 | history | edited | Blackwood | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
Clarify wording
|
| May 15, 2017 at 21:26 | history | edited | Valorum |
edited tags
|
|
| Jun 21, 2016 at 19:24 | comment | added | Lightness Races in Orbit | @Michael: That was entirely different, though! The Prometheus's segments were all heavily armed and warp-capable.... and not designed to carry non-combatants. | |
| Dec 9, 2015 at 3:26 | vote | accept | HighInBC | ||
| Dec 8, 2015 at 18:45 | comment | added | user11521 | @Himarm That didn't stop them from taking it a step further with the Prometheus! | |
| Dec 8, 2015 at 14:33 | comment | added | Valorum | @Lilienthal - I think the idea is that you park the families in orbit of a friendly planet (or deep space out of everyone's way) while the weapons platform goes off to confront the baddies. | |
| Dec 8, 2015 at 12:17 | comment | added | user42419 | So wait, if I'm reading these wikis correctly, this separation essentially dumps all the non-combatants in a giant, unwieldy section of the ship that has no warp capability and presumably limited offensive or defensive capabilities, and then they're told to bugger off back to base? And this is considered tactically advantageous? | |
| Dec 8, 2015 at 11:51 | history | tweeted | twitter.com/StackSciFi/status/674194477800628224 | ||
| Dec 8, 2015 at 8:04 | answer | added | Miral | timeline score: 14 | |
| Dec 8, 2015 at 2:20 | comment | added | HighInBC | @jpmc26 You make a strong point. At first I was thinking any situation too dangerous to bring the non-essential crew into, but really lifepods could evacuate those people in a pinch. The battle of Wolf 359 first came to mind, they could have left most of the crew behind on what seemed at the time to be a suicide mission. I agree you have a good question there, if you don't ask it I will. | |
| Dec 8, 2015 at 1:23 | comment | added | jpmc26 | I would find the reverse question more interesting: how often is this actually advantageous? You mention "many occasions." Please name some and explain how it would have helped the situation. I think the question is a little vague without that info. | |
| Dec 8, 2015 at 0:38 | comment | added | HighInBC | I wish I had my old STTNG tech manual, I think it talks about wear and tear. | |
| Dec 7, 2015 at 22:44 | comment | added | Valorum | For exactly the same reason I haven't used 99.9% of the features on my phone since the day I bought it. | |
| Dec 7, 2015 at 22:30 | answer | added | Valorum | timeline score: 54 | |
| Dec 7, 2015 at 22:24 | comment | added | Himarm | because it was a stupid idea | |
| Dec 7, 2015 at 22:22 | comment | added | HighInBC | @Richard I don't think so, he did it the very first chance he got. I am wondering if Geordie(No not Geordi, Sarah MacDougal?) yelled at him after. | |
| Dec 7, 2015 at 22:22 | comment | added | Valorum | Because Picard hated it. | |
| Dec 7, 2015 at 22:22 | history | asked | HighInBC | CC BY-SA 3.0 |