is star trek dying / dead ?

[Gatefan1976]

Answering here as the thread has not split off yet.

Oh I didn't say it did change what the ship at its core is. I would say that given the multi-purpose nature of Federation vessels that the only combat retro-fitting that they should've done was put ablative armor on all their ships.

Your problem here is that armour like that starts looking like a precursor to an aggressive stance, and the UFP goes out of it's way to NOT look like an aggressive power.
Consider the real world for a moment. (I'm gonna use guns, but not as a political debate tool)
You can get guns nigh on anywhere in the USA, BUT there are very strict laws on buying and owning ballistic body armour because it implies intent to survive a gun related incident.
If starfleet started buying "flack jackets" for -ALL- it's ships, the other Major powers would -probably- see it the same way as we do today, a precursor to surviving a violent attack. "But what about shields?" you may ask, well Shields are good for everything, not just combat.

And nullify the stifling Treaty of Algeron that left the Federation without the ability to effectively engage in stealth operations.

Let me reword that for you.
Declare war on the Romulans.
The UFP effectively got around the treaty ban on cloaking tech by allying with the Klingons, who are more than willing to do that kind of work for themselves and share the intel.

The ablative armor would've extended the amount of punishment those ships could take.

Undoubtedly, but see above.

And that is a good point about stellar cartography. And I would argue that the holodeck has good combat applications too (namely the training of troops).

Sure, the Hirogen found it so, and it's probably more effective than repairing the old Kobyashi Maru simulator every few days

And re-starting the Pegasus Project (I think that's what that covert project was called that attempted to put a phasing cloak on the Pegasus)

It was.

and putting one of the Pegasus cloaks on ever ship in the fleet would've given them the ability to gather massive amounts of intelligence on Dominion activities.

Not just the dominion, but everyone, and a fleetwide upgrade like that would be known to every major power in the Alpha Quadrant within days at most, even before it could be done.

Yes the Dominion had the capacity to do anti-proton scans but i think the Feds and the Romulans had eventually modified the Romulan cloaking devices so that anti-proton scans wouldn't light up cloaked vessels like Christmas trees.

They did

And beides that...I don't think a simple anti-proton scan would nullify a cloaking device that can enable a ship to pass through solid matter like the phasing cloak on the Pegasus.

Pretty sure it would, the phasing part of the cloak was not always active IIRC, so you would have to apply the tech of the modified cloak to experimental technology which runs poorly with understood technology.
That's a huge investment in time and resources, and one I don't think they had the luxury of exploring inside the timeframe of the dominion war.

[mad_gater]

I would argue that ablative armor has exploratory applications too...like say another layer of protection supplementing the shields in case you happen to run across some ancient space-borne killing fields or some other heretofore unknown cosmic hazard. And good point about the alliance with the Klingons offering them the intel to build their own cloaking devices (which is probably how they started what was supposed to be a covert operation in building a phasing cloak) although due to that stifling treaty they would've been unable to make use of it lest they incur a war on 2 fronts battling both the Dominion and an irate Romulan Star Empire, unless their tentative alliance against the Dominion allowed for the chance to renegotiate that particular treaty.

[Annoyed]

Answering here as the thread has not split off yet.


Your problem here is that armour like that starts looking like a precursor to an aggressive stance, and the UFP goes out of it's way to NOT look like an aggressive power.
Consider the real world for a moment. (I'm gonna use guns, but not as a political debate tool)
You can get guns nigh on anywhere in the USA, BUT there are very strict laws on buying and owning ballistic body armour because it implies intent to survive a gun related incident.
If starfleet started buying "flack jackets" for -ALL- it's ships, the other Major powers would -probably- see it the same way as we do today, a precursor to surviving a violent attack. "But what about shields?" you may ask, well Shields are good for everything, not just combat.

Not going to talk about gun control here, we can continue beating that dead horse in other areas, but if you ask me, there should be no restrictions either within a society or within an intersteller society regarding purely defensive measures such as armor. You can't hurt anyone with it, it's purely defensive. Aside from presuming the owner is guilty of being aggressive, there is no logical reason to oppose it.

Let some guy build a hardened shelter under his house or around their ship or planet. If you don't intend to attack them, what difference does it make to you? Granted, the rules change if the man or species has demonstrated they are hostile by their actions, but presuming they are hostile? I don't like that idea.

Oh, and Kirk & Co. stole a cloaking device from the Romulans & then used it way back in Star Trek TOS.

[Gatefan1976]

I would argue that ablative armor has exploratory applications too...like say another layer of protection supplementing the shields in case you happen to run across some ancient space-borne killing fields or some other heretofore unknown cosmic hazard.

You can argue it, but it doesn't matter how -you- perceive it, it's how the other major powers would perceive it.

And good point about the alliance with the Klingons offering them the intel to build their own cloaking devices (which is probably how they started what was supposed to be a covert operation in building a phasing cloak)

Nono, the Klingons have no such treaty with the RSE, they can use cloaks at will, The UFP just asks their allies to do the spying (or with Klingons, probably points out a threat that they may want to know more about)
The Pegasus project itself was in direct violation of the Treaty of Algeron, which is why so few people knew of it and it was covered up.

although due to that stifling treaty they would've been unable to make use of it lest they incur a war on 2 fronts battling both the Dominion and an irate Romulan Star Empire, unless their tentative alliance against the Dominion allowed for the chance to renegotiate that particular treaty.

I'm not 100% sure, but I think the initial deal of -only- allowing the Defiant to use the cloak in dominion space did become a bit more relaxed, but I doubt the RSE would be happy with the UFP having cloaked ships around willy nilly.

[Gatefan1976]

Not going to talk about gun control here, we can continue beating that dead horse in other areas, but if you ask me, there should be no restrictions either within a society or within an intersteller society regarding purely defensive measures such as armor. You can't hurt anyone with it, it's purely defensive. Aside from presuming the owner is guilty of being aggressive, there is no logical reason to oppose it.

But it is, right now, in pretty much every country.

Let some guy build a hardened shelter under his house or around their ship or planet. If you don't intend to attack them, what difference does it make to you? Granted, the rules change if the man or species has demonstrated they are hostile by their actions, but presuming they are hostile? I don't like that idea.

ALL the major powers have been at war with each other at some stage, they are not presuming they are hostile, they know they can be hostile.

Oh, and Kirk & Co. stole a cloaking device from the Romulans & then used it way back in Star Trek TOS.

Yes, the enterprise incident, but only Kirk knew they had orders to do it, they make it quite clear no one else knows about it.

[Annoyed]

[ALL the major powers have been at war with each other at some stage, they are not presuming they are hostile, they know they can be hostile.

Even then, I don't think I can find a logical reason to prevent a planet or society from having any sort of shields or passive defenses they want. Yea, Starfleet might not like it, just like the opposition might not like whatever Starfleet is using for defenses, but that's part of any fight. If that shield can't be used offensively, to take life or to destroy something, I can't really object.

[Gatefan1976]

Even then, I don't think I can find a logical reason to prevent a planet or society from having any sort of shields or passive defenses they want. Yea, Starfleet might not like it, just like the opposition might not like whatever Starfleet is using for defenses, but that's part of any fight. If that shield can't be used offensively, to take life or to destroy something, I can't really object.

Notice how you have shifted from defence, to "in a fight"?
They are not the same thing, at all and it is the reason why body armour is classified as military or para-military hardware around the world.

[Annoyed]

Notice how you have shifted from defence, to "in a fight"?
They are not the same thing, at all and it is the reason why body armour is classified as military or para-military hardware around the world.

Well, there's no point if there is no fight. So while they can have all the protective gear they want, but it doesn't matter if they're not attacked. So it only comes into play if there is a fight. Still nothing wrong with them having it, whether is used or not.

[mad_gater]

Well, there's no point if there is no fight. So while they can have all the protective gear they want, but it doesn't matter if they're not attacked. So it only comes into play if there is a fight. Still nothing wrong with them having it, whether is used or not.

not to mention tougher armor might mean the difference between their ship surviving some sort of cosmic hazard when said hazard pops their shields and cracking like an egg when the shields get popped by said hazard

and there are a great many cosmic hazards for which you might want a little extra protection for your ship besides the shields

[Laxian of Earth]

I've seen a few people say this since Discovery started and I've had the same response every time - No 1st season of Star Trek (TNG, DS9, VOY and ENT anyway) is good. And the characters never come across as anything other than relatively bland and lifeless. TNG season one is awful to the point of being unwatchable if it wasn't for how hilariously bad the scripts are.

Now I grant we expect more from TV shows these days, but Star Trek does have a disadvantage in that it is such massively broad story telling. You can literally do anything or be anywhere with a Star Trek episode. And that kinda means that some times a character will suffer. Personally I really like Burnham but I can see why some people are a bit uncertain about her. But at the end of the day you're asking someone to play a woman who is human... but with a little Vulcan along for the ride. That's a tough mix to get right and it's ok for an actor to take some time to get a feel for their character.

Well, I don't (also popularity should never be measured with casual fans in mind who aren't really all that interested in what they are watching...no a franchises' worth comes from the true nerds IMHO!)!

Burnham is a traitor and a mutineer and should at the very least be in prison (I'd prefer dead!), not to mention that her backstory makes no sense (and is a retcon, too!) raised by Vulcans but can't control her emotions and is basically an afraid little girl that shouldn't be on the bridge of a ship? Damned, you screwed up writers, you screwed up big time and that's without talking about her name! Sorry, but "Michael" is a male name and in this day and age this virtue signalling BS ("Oh, look we have a non-traditional female main character!") just pisses me off, as it has already ruined another of my favourite science fiction universes (Star Wars!)...and it's not like I hate strong female lead characters (my favourite in Stargate is Samantha "Sam" Carter after all and she's not the only female character I like, so nope calling me sexist won't score you any points!), but they need flaws and they can't treat all the men around them like **** and they can't basically get away with murder because they are women either!

So yeah, Star Trek is on the decline ATM (it might bounce back, it has done so before after all!)

greetings LAX