Star Trek Federation Ships Achilles Heel

[Mark CMG]

I believe that the Achilles Heel of Star Trek Federation Ships named Enterprise in the TNG era was Data. The number of times he was easily taken over by an alien entity are astounding.

 

[Someone]

I believe that the Achilles Heel of Star Trek Federation Ships named Enterprise in the TNG era was Data. The number of times he was easily taken over by an alien entity are astounding.

And the Holodeck. I don't think the use it got as romantic scenario and instant holiday spot compensates the continous flow of deadly threats it generated.

 

[The Grumpy Celt]

...was Data.

Yeah, they really should have made certain his firewalls and antivirus software stayed current.

 

[babomb]

And that's without even getting into the really obvious stuff, like seatbelts for bridge chairs, or body armor and something better than flashlights for away missions into hostile territory...

My pet peeve is the consoles on the bridge explosively shorting out when the ship is attacked. Any 20th-century electrician could wire it so that it doesn't do that.

 

[Ranger REG]

At least the Battle Star Galactica has no "Achilles Heel Bridge". (But they don't have shields.... )

Now I know why I like the original Battlestar Galactica.

 

[Olgar Shiverstone]

The thing that's always bothered me about Trek Tech...where are the Fighter ships!?!? You've got these huge, powerful, behemoth starships, which carry dozens of small, maneuverable shuttlecraft and support vehicles. They all have shields and phasers...why not armor them up a little, power up the phasers, mount 2 photon torpedoes on the roof, and use them as fighters?

Haven't played Starfleet Battles, have you? Drones and PFs, the SFB equivalent, kick capital ships' asses in big fights. Swarm the big'uns with the little ships ...

 

[WhatGravitas]

Haven't played Starfleet Battles, have you? Drones and PFs, the SFB equivalent, kick capital ships' asses in big fights. Swarm the big'uns with the little ships ...

And fighters are also a bit more popular in STS9, especially during the Dominion War.

Hmmm... the funny thing about Star Trek is, that the fans are actually more able to justify dramatics with technobabble then the show itself...

 

[Relique du Madde]

Yeah, they really should have made certain his firewalls and antivirus software stayed current.

Unfortunately, Doc. Soong conned the Federation into believing that Data came fully equipt with either Apple's OS or Linux when he actually was preinstalled with Windows 95 and a anti-virus program he dled from a Warez site.

 

[WayneLigon]

... which makes so much sense in a setting with transporters. I usually try not to nitpick sci-fi shows, but anything with an associated "Technical Manual" has it coming.

In the original series, transporter tech wasn't nearly as precise as it was in later shows. It was horrifically dangerous to transport things from inside the ship to inside the ship, so dangerous that they only did it once.

Or, for that matter, have a transporter pattern of everyone in the crew on file, and when they're wounded, simply de-materialize and re-materialize them with the damaged parts replaced with pristine tissue.

They do have a transporter pattern for everyone. That's how the transporter works. It effectively kills you, then reconstructs you at the other end. That's why McCoy hated the thing. And they do use it like that in at least two OS shows I can think of. I always got the idea that they didn't really know all the ins and outs of the transporter. The 'show' reason why it existed was to keep them from having to do shots of the ship landing and taking off (some of the original designs would have allowed that); it was too expensive.

And that's without even getting into the really obvious stuff, like seatbelts for bridge chairs, or body armor and something better than flashlights for away missions into hostile territory...

One of the most amusing things in the first movie was where the captains chair arms fold in to keep him in his seat, just because people kept harping on that point

I think the main point was that if the shields went down, you were screwed no matter where you put the bridge. So you might as well put it on the part of the ship that can detach (as far as I know, they do this once and once only in any of the series) and up top so in case you have to crash land, it'll be the last thing to be destroyed.

 

[Relique du Madde]

I think the main point was that if the shields went down, you were screwed no matter where you put the bridge. So you might as well put it on the part of the ship that can detach (as far as I know, they do this once and once only in any of the series) and up top so in case you have to crash land, it'll be the last thing to be destroyed.

Tats assuming that the ship's stablizers were functioning properly and were able to keep the sauser section from flipping over or enterijg into a death spiral on reentry.


BTW. Seeing Enterprise's Saucer Section crash land in Gneration made up for Kirks prolonged death (he should have said "Spock...." then died) and the cheesiness of the nexus plot device.