Hypothetical Starfleet ship roles

[stitch626]

...and if something affected the camera you are back to the same situation.

just jumping in b/c I glanced at this, but we've seen the resiance of trek cameras (or what ever tech they use to transmit vusual light. They use this tech for the view screens, and I've never seen a battle in trek where the cameras were broken or dislodged enough to blind the bridge officers so to speak (yes they'd have other sensors as well, so it wouldn't be blind exaclty). Short of Nemisis, (where the entire view screen was destroyed) the bridges have always been able to view any angle off the ship they've wanted befure during and after battle, AFAIK.

Are you forgetting TWOK?

[Lt. Staplic]

I may be wrong, but aren't those images generated by the ships sensors and not a camera?

idk, but either way it appears to be a good and reliable system.

Are you forgetting TWOK?

Actually never seen it...

but now we're at 2 instances where the view screen failed....out of how many, and in one its because the entire viewscreen was vaporized....IMO that still seems pretty reliable

[stitch626]

Unfortunately, I don't have enough time (or motivation TBH) to watch every episode of Trek to find instances of complete sensor blindness.

As for TWOK, when the E-A and Reliant battled, they did not have shields or sensors and the veiwscreen gave very little beyond static.

[m52nickerson]

Using the argument that "we haven't seen other windows break" is tantamount to saying "let's wait until someone is killed who otherwise might not have died, and then we'll address the issue." If there's a big hole in your roof, would you wait until it rained before fixing it?

By that we should not let people fly of drive cars, because there is a possibilty that they might die.

To answer your question I would fix it, I would not on the other hand put a new roof on my house because I found out that a single shingle cracked.

[Sionnach Glic]

Only when you ignore that fact that we have never seen any other windows break during combat or other situations.

Which is irrelevant. They've been shown to be unable to withstand the same stresses as a similar sized piece of hull. That weapons usualy smash the hull just as easily as the windows is irrelevant. What part of this is so hard for you to understand?

....and how often do you think low level crew get to use a holodeck?

Often enough to stop 'em going crazy. A window with a view of absolutely nothing isn't going to be a great help. So they obviously have some way of keeping themselves sane.

....and gee when a crew member get off duty in one of those parts of the ship with no windows they go were, back to their quarters that have windows.

And every single one of the ~1000 people on board have a window in their cabin?

Worked and lived is two different things.

I am talking about lived. Ships used to take months to reach their destinations back in ye olde days. And they managed to stay mostly sane in absolutely shitty conditions. With the conditions of a GCS, I can pretty safely bet they'll be able to stay sane on a GCS over larger periods of time.

...and if something affected the camera you are back to the same situation.

We've seen a grand total of 1 occasion in which the cameras were inoperative. And that was in the middle of a nebula, where visual observation would have been of damn all use as well.

I may be wrong, but aren't those images generated by the ships sensors and not a camera?

Proof?

[Mikey]

As for TWOK, when the E-A and Reliant battled, they did not have shields or sensors and the veiwscreen gave very little beyond static.

IIRC, the problem was more lack of visibility in the visible-light EM band rather than anything else.

By that we should not let people fly of drive cars, because there is a possibilty that they might die.

Poor analogy. A closer one to the point would be that by your logic, we should let people drive cars with known safety issues, rather than recall those cars and fix the issues. Even sarcastic comments should be somewhat related to the point they reference.

To answer your question I would fix it, I would not on the other hand put a new roof on my house because I found out that a single shingle cracked.

Why fix it before it rains? By your logic, there's no need to fix potential problems, only actual ones.

[Tsukiyumi]

At this juncture, I'd like to add that submarines don't have windows (there's nothing to look at anyways), and the crews don't go nuts. Why? Because they're psychologically vetted before they get to serve on one.

[Mikey]

At this juncture, I'd like to add that submarines don't have windows (there's nothing to look at anyways), and the crews don't go nuts. Why? Because they're psychologically vetted before they get to serve on one.

Wait a minute... they don't put people aboard who aren't capable of serving? That's just madness!

[stitch626]

It should also be noted that submarines as such are 100% war vessels and frequent ports.
I'm not sure on this, but I think they don't go out to sea for months without ever surfacing or refueling.

[Mikey]

USS Nautilus.

'Nuff said.

[stitch626]

One sub (you are referring to the sub right) out of hundreds.

[Mikey]

The point is that in the 1950's a sub made over 6 months without making port; a modern nuclear sub can and does go for longer.

[stitch626]

I'm conceding my points (whatever they are, I'm not even sure what I'm arguing). I'm too tired. May pop in if I have anything relevant to add.

[Mikey]

Get some rest. Get some for me, too.

[m52nickerson]

Which is irrelevant. They've been shown to be unable to withstand the same stresses as a similar sized piece of hull. That weapons usualy smash the hull just as easily as the windows is irrelevant. What part of this is so hard for you to understand?

No, one window was shown not to withstand the same stresses, not multiple or all of them, one. So that is one out of how many?

Often enough to stop 'em going crazy. A window with a view of absolutely nothing isn't going to be a great help. So they obviously have some way of keeping themselves sane.

Really are you sure of that? Yes a window, regardless of the view will be a great help. It has nothing to do with what the view is or is not it is just the fact that the person can see outside of the ship.

And every single one of the ~1000 people on board have a window in their cabin?

Have we seen otherwise?

I am talking about lived. Ships used to take months to reach their destinations back in ye olde days. And they managed to stay mostly sane in absolutely shitty conditions. With the conditions of a GCS, I can pretty safely bet they'll be able to stay sane on a GCS over larger periods of time.

Wait, people on ships in the ye olde days could not go outside, or look out portholes?

We've seen a grand total of 1 occasion in which the cameras were inoperative. And that was in the middle of a nebula, where visual observation would have been of damn all use as well.

Proof?

What was the name of the episode were Worf tricked the sensors in thinking there was an other ship in the area and that ship appeared on the view screen?