enigma 521 Posted March 9, 2011 Enigma, how many times do you intend to change the parameters of this debate? Also, there is no evidence that a ship could not engage a tractor beam while in motion. Yes, they are almost always used while stationary, but the reason for that she be obvious. Easier to lock on to an object while stationary. Less to compensate for. There may be a smaller likelihood of achieving a lock, but I fail to see how it would be impossible to use while in motion. I'm not changing anything. I'm just trying to prove to Jason that there are many reasons as to why it would be inefficient and uneconomical to raise a damaged saucer section. As for why they do it while stationary. I do recall at least in one ep (I think in TNG) that they had to be careful or else they would either damaged their ship or the ship they wanted to tractor. Also, check out Memory Alpha in regards to tractor beam. It mentions several times that it creates stress on the target vessel. If they want to tow it and go into warp, the target vessel's engines have to be disabled to prevent shearing forces on the towed vessel. Engaging the tractor beam in motion CAN be used but in combat scenarios as shown by the Defiant managing to deflect part of a Vorcha class Klingon ship's disruptor or if both ships' hulls are strong enough for a tow but then again used in an aggressive manner and both vessels have to match velocities. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Praeothmin 532 Posted March 9, 2011 Enigma, I don't see why you want to argue that they can't do it when they've done so many more outlandish deeds in the series. Even moreso when I think all (except Jason of course) agree there's no reason for them to re-use the saucer section, except as base material for re-materializing parts for new ships... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
enigma 521 Posted March 10, 2011 Enigma, I don't see why you want to argue that they can't do it when they've done so many more outlandish deeds in the series. Even moreso when I think all (except Jason of course) agree there's no reason for them to re-use the saucer section, except as base material for re-materializing parts for new ships... I'm more of saying that it is a possibility that they may not be able to just like they can do crazy things with a transporter yet simple rocks or slightly freaky atmosphere can mess it up. Last part I totally agree. Reclamation and recycling. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Praeothmin 532 Posted March 10, 2011 I'm more of saying that it is a possibility that they may not be able to just like they can do crazy things with a transporter yet simple rocks or slightly freaky atmosphere can mess it up. Well,,we'll just have to agree to disagree then... Last part I totally agree. Reclamation and recycling Yup, put the saucer in a big blue or green recycling bin and put on the curb for next Tuesday... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
enigma 521 Posted March 10, 2011 Well,,we'll just have to agree to disagree then... I disagree with that agreement. lol Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Praeothmin 532 Posted March 10, 2011 I knew you would, after all, you're from Ontario... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
enigma 521 Posted March 11, 2011 I knew you would, after all, you're from Ontario... Born being a politician even though I'm not a political person. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
enigma 521 Posted March 11, 2011 I knew you would, after all, you're from Ontario... Born being a politician even though I'm not a political person. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Praeothmin 532 Posted March 11, 2011 Yeah, I got it the first time, no need to repeat yourself, I'm not Jason... Sheesh, just like a politician... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
enigma 521 Posted March 11, 2011 Yeah, I got it the first time, no need to repeat yourself, I'm not Jason... Sheesh, just like a politician... Ain't my fault for the double post. But then again as a politician, I treat everyone as if they are Jason. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Tyralak 12,068 Posted March 12, 2011 I know it isn't canon but one of William Shatner's ST novels mentioned that the saucer section was barely able to support its own weight. Yeah. There's a reason why books aren't canon. Damn, you're dense. All that took place where? In outer fucking space. The crew doesn't have to worry about keeping itself in one spot while it tractors an object. We never see at any time a starship tractoring an object through the atmosphere. I'm not saying it can't happen but there is no proof to date that they could. We've also never seen a ship staying in one place inside a planet's atmosphere. We always see it in motion whether it is flying or landing\taking off. What you are spouting shit that I already know. At every time, the E-D is stopped before it tractors an object before moving again. Do we ever see the E-D lock on its tractor beam on a ship while at warp or even at impulse? No. Hell doing so would most likely at minimum rip the tractor beam emitter off the ship and at worst the ship would be severely damaged if not destroy it. Pay attention next time. I was not talking about tractoring an object in space but if there were possible complications to tractoring the saucer to space from the planet. What I posted were "what ifs" because we do not know if a starship could those things because it has never been shown to do it. For all we know, the atmosphere could disrupt\interfere\deflect the beam from locking on to the target on the planet below. When we see the beam in action, there were nothing between it and the target. WRONG. I await your next barrage of ignorant faggotry. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
enigma 521 Posted March 12, 2011 ...aren't you two supposed to be friends? Dude, are the only friends you have, inflatable? If you had friends, you'd know that there will be times when you'll argue with them. Does this mean I'm pissed at Tyralak? No. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Tyralak 12,068 Posted March 12, 2011 Dude, are the only friends you have, inflatable? If you had friends, you'd know that there will be times when you'll argue with them. Does this mean I'm pissed at Tyralak? No. So true. Wait.... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
enigma 521 Posted March 12, 2011 Yeah. There's a reason why books aren't canon. Relevant, how? That is an intact starship designed to LAND AND TAKE OFF FROM A PLANET! You are reaching Jason's level of denseness. Shit, even more useless. That unfinished starship is being propped up! For fuck's sakes that is one piece of shit of evidence. Not only that but in a different universe. What I was saying in regards to Shatner's novel was about the saucer AFTER IT CRASHED! Not about the saucer unable to support it's mass if it hadn't crashed. I thought you knew what I was typing. Care to tell me what they were saying because Youtube's CC sucks crap. CC spewed gibberish about Leon, being Katherine, Holland, increased Holland and business investments online. What was the name of that episode? I await your next barrage of ignorant faggotry. That's funny because that was all you spewed. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Tyralak 12,068 Posted March 12, 2011 Relevant, how? That is an intact starship designed to LAND AND TAKE OFF FROM A PLANET! You are reaching Jason's level of denseness. My point being, these ships aren't as fragile as you make them out to be. Shit, even more useless. That unfinished starship is being propped up! For fuck's sakes that is one piece of shit of evidence. Not only that but in a different universe. Yes. Because the laws of physics are different there. You also realize, that after it's done it has to fly out of there, don't you? What I was saying in regards to Shatner's novel was about the saucer AFTER IT CRASHED! Not about the saucer unable to support it's mass if it hadn't crashed. I thought you knew what I was typing. No, you weren't clear. You sounded like you were saying a ship's saucer section couldn't support it's own weight in normal gravity. Care to tell me what they were saying because Youtube's CC sucks crap. CC spewed gibberish about Leon, being Katherine, Holland, increased Holland and business investments online. What was the name of that episode? It was a DS9 episode called "The Ship". They find a crashed Jem Hadar ship on a planet and are trying to capture it. In that scene, they tried to fix the engines to lift off, but they wouldn't work, so Sisko said they will have to wait until the Defiant gets there to pull them off the planet with a tractor beam. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
enigma 521 Posted March 12, 2011 This is the closed captioning of that Youtube video. "That does not, the different operations continue, on and off, civil rights restore trend toward formed, if we can bring the ships that was on my immediately of industry from here, susie finished can start to make war, gore because of mister interactions I'd like to get back artist, and for that, explorers to fine tune the magnetic flux first, circumstances concerns and, must do it, everyone brace yourselves this is going to be a rough draft, tell us what sequence, understands fully charged let alone colors one cold also considers online pastors to, what happened, do you have a lot of frequency resonance mainly after housing payments online, just because a few years that's, damansara next month, holland, metal objects to what happened, activities and it's just like status, increased holland, being kathleen reminding me, leon, business investment, yes, the farmers he's used, socialist resumes collapsed, we're going to defined, to be able to pull some of you with a truck to be, which means we have forty six dollars to make repairs ewbal know what to do." Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Tyralak 12,068 Posted March 12, 2011 LOFL! That's better than the translated instructions on cheap Chinese made junk. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
enigma 521 Posted March 12, 2011 I never made the claim that Federation starships cannot withstand being inside a planet's atmosphere. I have only been referring to the E-D's saucer section after it crashed. Nowhere did I claim that it applied to all ships. Nowhere. Shit this whole debate ended up centered around the saucer section that crash landed on Veridian 3 (I think that is the name of the planet). I do not know where you got the idea I was talking about all ships not being able to support its weight upon entering a planet's atmosphere. The only thing I was referring to other ships was in regards to tractoring through the planet's atmosphere and even then it was just a theory as I do not recall any instance of it happening. If there's proof (I need to hunt down the script for that episode to see for myself.) then I retract my theory. No hard feelings, eh? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
enigma 521 Posted March 12, 2011 I checked out the script for the episode. How large was the Jem Hadar warship? Also we do not know if the tractoring was done inside the atmosphere or out in space. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Tyralak 12,068 Posted March 12, 2011 I checked out the script for the episode. How large was the Jem Hadar warship? Also we do not know if the tractoring was done inside the atmosphere or out in space. The ship was nearly the size of the Defiant. Logic dictates that it was done within the atmosphere. They couldn't get the ship to lift itself off the planet, so Sisko said they would have to wait until the Defiant got there to lift it off the surface with a tractor beam. A later scene shows the ship being towed through space. Logically, the Defiant tractored it off the planet. There is no indication or even hint that it was taken off the planet in any other way. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
enigma 521 Posted March 12, 2011 The ship was nearly the size of the Defiant. Logic dictates that it was done within the atmosphere. They couldn't get the ship to lift itself off the planet, so Sisko said they would have to wait until the Defiant got there to lift it off the surface with a tractor beam. A later scene shows the ship being towed through space. Logically, the Defiant tractored it off the planet. There is no indication or even hint that it was taken off the planet in any other way. So I partially retract my theory. Checking Memory Alpha, the Defiant Class has landing struts so it would be one of the very few starship classes (the other that I can think of is the Intrepid) that can stay in one place in an atmosphere and be able to tractor an object. Plus in the case of the Defiant, it was able to tractor the ship after modifications were made to the tractor beam and the fact it had the power to do the job since Memory Alpha states that the energy output was equal to those of larger starships. I'm not saying it is impossible but with some arm twisting I'd say in the case of the E-D's saucer section, if Starfleet somehow decided it needed the saucer off planet and done quickly, they need about two large starships (one could possibly do it but having two is easier to share the load) that are able to land on planet as those type would be equipped to remain stationary within the planet's atmosphere. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
paul 11,988 Posted March 13, 2011 So I partially retract my theory. Checking Memory Alpha, the Defiant Class has landing struts so it would be one of the very few starship classes (the other that I can think of is the Intrepid) that can stay in one place in an atmosphere and be able to tractor an object. Plus in the case of the Defiant, it was able to tractor the ship after modifications were made to the tractor beam and the fact it had the power to do the job since Memory Alpha states that the energy output was equal to those of larger starships. I'm not saying it is impossible but with some arm twisting I'd say in the case of the E-D's saucer section, if Starfleet somehow decided it needed the saucer off planet and done quickly, they need about two large starships (one could possibly do it but having two is easier to share the load) that are able to land on planet as those type would be equipped to remain stationary within the planet's atmosphere. The landing struts were never proven in canon so thus is a moot point (which would have no bearing on if it could go INTO a planet's atmosphere or not). They wouldn't need to land to pull a ship out of the ground or in this case remove a saucer section from the planet. They'd just have to be very careful in how they did it. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
enigma 521 Posted March 13, 2011 The landing struts were never proven in canon so thus is a moot point (which would have no bearing on if it could go INTO a planet's atmosphere or not). They wouldn't need to land to pull a ship out of the ground or in this case remove a saucer section from the planet. They'd just have to be very careful in how they did it. It would make sense for a ship that size to be able to land on a planet. The reason I state that they'd need a ship or two that can land on a planet is that they are configured (landing thrusters I think.) to maintain a steady position as they land, something that other ships like the GCS and so forth lack. Can't prove it but it would make sense. Having "landing thrusters" would enable a ship to stay in one place inside a planet's atmosphere and at the same time pull out another ship or part of it. EDIT: According to Ex Astris Scientia, the MSD (Master Systems Display. or the ship's layout) of the Defiant showed that it had landing struts. Again according to the site, it mentions that Ronald Moore had said that he and other writers were never made aware that the ship could land. EDIT 2: The MSD of the Defiant. You can see the struts in front and behind the shuttlebay. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Praeothmin 532 Posted March 14, 2011 Even though these ships were not made to land, if they were able to survive inside the gravity wells of gas giants, and stars, then they more then likely could fly inside Earths atmosphere without any problems... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
