HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: det@phlan.sw.stratus.com (David Toland)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech
Subject: Re: Rio Grande pulling the Cardassians...
Date: 12 Jan 1993 14:18:16 GMT
Organization: Stratus Computer, Software Engineering
NNTP-Posting-Host: phlan.sw.stratus.com

In article <1993Jan12.044950.2716@eafs000.ca.boeing.com> ten0772@eafs000.ca.boeing.com (Timothy E. Neto) writes:
>>>In article <tomcat.726618996@cwis> tomcat@cwis.unomaha.edu (Jeffrey S. Jo) writes:
>>>>Okay..I hope this isn't a repeating question...but how can the Rio Grande,
>>>>the Runabout class shuttle, tow a Cardassian warship via tractor beam?
...
>>no matter how heavy the darn thing is; a little can push
>>the  object --in space-- provided he pushes long enough
>>to get the momentum

I suspect the runabouts correspond to harbor tugboats - high ratio of
engine power to overall mass.  One of their functions may be to assist
in bringing large, not very maneuverable vessels into mooring.

We didn't see the Rio Grande trying to alter the course of the warship,
either.  That would have taken either engine power or time to complete
the adjustment.


-- 
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
All opinions are MINE MINE MINE, and not necessarily anyone else's.
det@phlan.sw.stratus.com   |  "Laddie, you'll be needin' something to wash
                           |  that doon with."
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech
From: drac@uumeme.chi.il.us (Bruce Maynard)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech
Subject: Re: Warp Speed Collisions
Date: 10 Jan 93 08:39:47 GMT
Distribution: rec
Organization: UUMEME Public Access Xenix

In article <RDUFF.93Jan8083956@arrirs04.uta.edu> rduff@arrirs04.uta.edu (Robert Duff) writes:
>
>After watching the DS9 preview, i got to thinking:
>
>	They use warp fields to reduce the mass of the ship/station,
>I assume in order to make it easier to propel.  However, in BOBW II,
>Riker, in desperation, orders a collision course with the Borg Vessel.
>He then orders engineering to prepare to go to warp speed.
>
>	If the ship were to jump into warp, wouldn't its mass be so
>reduced that the net effect of the collision would be like throwing a
>balloon at the target?

The "lessening of mass" seems to be only in relation to objects OUTSIDE of the 
warp field... so, two vessels in warp that collide would make a *very* big mess, indeed...


-- 
+------------------------------------------------------------+
| The above statements are the  | Bruce Maynard  (Da "drac") |
| delirious meanderings of a    | Hoffman Estates            |
| complete moro... er, MANIAC!! | IL 60194                   |
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech
From: bbs-aphelps@jwt.UUCP (Austin Phelps)
Subject: Re: Warp Speed Collisions
Reply-To: bbs-aphelps@jwt.UUCP
Organization: The Matrix
Date: Mon, 11 Jan 1993 07:43:37 GMT

rduff@arrirs04.uta.edu (Robert Duff) writes:

> 	They use warp fields to reduce the mass of the ship/station,
> I assume in order to make it easier to propel.  However, in BOBW II,
> Riker, in desperation, orders a collision course with the Borg Vessel.
> He then orders engineering to prepare to go to warp speed.

I wonder if the borg tractor beam would supress the supspace field 
genators from creating a full supspace bubble to jump into warp, but let 
assume they don't :)

> 
> 	If the ship were to jump into warp, wouldn't its mass be so
> reduced that the net effect of the collision would be like throwing a
> balloon at the target?

Well there still antimater. Perhaps what Riker was trying to do was a 
modified Picard Mauever (sp) aka Riker Mauever :). But making the 
Enterprise lighter the Borg would expect a lighter ship when it hits 
there vessel but perhaps before they hit they drop out of warp and hit it 
as some high impulse speed thus creating a bigger explosion - possible 
damaging the borg until the Klingons arrived :)

I ponder this for a while.

Austin C. Phelps            pick a address: bbs-aphelps@jwt.UUCP
-> Tf3 <- elsewhere                         aphelps@vicstoy.oau.org
"Let history never forget the name          tf3@delphi.com
Apple II Forever! Alliance C373   Enterprise   AAWO 3303
From: gt3716a@prism.gatech.EDU (Josh 'I'd MUCH rather be driving' Freeman)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech
Subject: Re: course of the Enterprise?
Date: 11 Jan 93 18:09:54 GMT
Organization: Georgia Institute of Technology

In article <1993Jan9.040417.9652@liberty.uc.wlu.edu> cwynne@liberty.uc.wlu.edu (Colin J. Wynne) writes:
>Umm, in DS9: Emissary, they say that the worm hole carried them either
>7000 or *70,000* light years from Bajor.  SOmeone might check that,
>because the latter is truly impossible to swallow.
>
>CJW
What do you expect from a wormhole?  If spacetime is 4-D it would be concievable
that one could have a wormhole act as a shortcut. After all, the normal laws of
physics do not strictly apply since the worm hole is akin to a black hole, but
with an exit also IMHO
Josh Freeman


-- 
It could be worse...
I could be a freshman forever!

Joshua Kimbrell Freeman, gt3716a@prism.gatech.edu
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech
From: jroberts@medusa.UWaterloo.ca (J. P. Robertson)
Subject: Re: Trill Symbiosis
Organization: University of Waterloo
Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1993 22:15:01 GMT

In article <susser-110193133617@susser.apple.com> susser@apple.com (Joshua  
Susser) writes:
[ snip ]
> So the payoff for the rider is a mobile body and a fresh outlook on life  
to
> rejuvenate its psyche.  The payoff for the host is the knowlege and  
wisdom
> of the rider, and the eventual continuation of its personality when the
> rider moves on.
> 
> Make sense, or not?  (no flames, please...)
> 
--
Sure.  I'd say it's the only rational explantion of Trills, given that
they are not parasitic.

However, it lends itself neatly to a boring, preachy story about the
host that doesn't want to be a host.  Presumably this would be before
the slug was implanted, but who knows.

Another interesting angle might be that carrying a slug lowers your
life expectency.  Or raises it.  The possibilities are endless, and
one should not expect ST:DS9 to explore any of the good ones.  :-(
---
Jeff Robertson
4B Systems Design Engineering
University of Waterloo
"All that is required for the triumph of evil is for good men to do  
nothing."
From: tchua@soda.qmw.ac.uk (Terence Chua)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech
Subject: Re: Excelsiorclass ship that was blasted in DS9
Date: 7 Jan 93 05:40:40
Organization: QMW Department of Laws
	<tomcat.726366597@cwis>
NNTP-Posting-Host: soda.berkeley.edu
In-reply-to: tomcat@cwis.unomaha.edu's message of Thu, 7 Jan 1993 00:29:57 GMT

In article <tomcat.726366597@cwis> tomcat@cwis.unomaha.edu (Jeffrey S. Jo) writes:

   POSSIBLE SPOILERS AHEAD!!!





















   gsnow@clark.edu (Gary Snow) writes:

   In article <1993Jan6.045524.747@sol.cs.wmich.edu> 52kaiser@sol.cs.wmich.edu (Matthew Kaiser) writes:
   >hiya i've just seen Deep Space Nine and the begining was **Fabutastic**
   >
   >but i'm curious did anyone catch the NCC designation and the name of the
   >Excelsior Class ship that had its saucer section blasted by the Borg?
   >
   >also does anyone know what other classes appeared besides the
   >Excelsior and Ambassador classes? 

   I didn't catch the NCC number, but the ship was the USS Melbourne...does
   that ring a bell?

(I haven't seen the episode either, but...)

If it was an Excelsior-class vessel, it *can't* have been the Melbourne. Before
it's destruction at Wolf 359, it was a Nebula class starship offered to Riker
for his command in BOBW 1.
--
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Terence Chua, Dept of Laws, Queen Mary College, University of London
Snail Mail: 22 Courcy Road, London N8 0QH
Telephone: (044)081-888-1210
E-Mail: T.Chua@qmw.ac.uk or TL2010@qmw.ac.uk or tchua@soda.berkeley.edu
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
"I am not a free man, I am a lawyer!"
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech
Subject: Re: More Holodeck
From: starman@crash.amigans.gen.nz (Robin Halligan)
Date: 7 Jan 93 23:48:18 PST
Reply-To: starman@crash.amigans.gen.nz
Organization: No organisation at all
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL6]

khill@vax1.umkc.edu wrote:
: 	Ok, more on the HOLODECK.

     [Bits removed to save space]
: 
: of memory -- yes it is very vast, yet still finite.  So, lets suppose I want
: to bring the good-ole NCC-1701D to its knees.  I enter the HOLODECK and
: run an Enterprise NCC-1701D program, I then enter that HOLODECK and run another
: Enterprise NCC-1701D program, I then enter that HOLODECK and run another
: Enterprise NCC-1701D program, etc. (you get the picture).  Something tells
: me that eventually the Enterprise would run out of memory and come to its
: knees!!  Why use photon torpedos when all that is needed is a little cunning!

Fine except that the Holodeck computer would track you and shut down all
parts of the (to you) non visable holographic NCC-1701-D's and just note in
the stack where it is with recurisive NCC-1701_D's.
(you don't think yould would be the first to try this do you)  ;-)

--
starman@crash.amigans.gen.nz  (Robin Halligan)
Amigans Public Access UUCP Node Wanganui New Zealand

I'm a K 1 W 1 from the land of the long white cloud
    from the day i begun till the day i'm done
                     I'm a K1W1
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech
From: mlj44080@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (Michael Lee Jacobs)
Subject: DS9--how to move a space station
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana
Date: Sat, 9 Jan 1993 05:52:18 GMT

Okay I think I understand their idea:
	Use a subspace field to lower the inertial (i.e. effective
mass while moving it) of the station through the magic that is subspace.
Note the actual mass doesnt change.  How do we get subspace field that big?
We crank it through large energy disseminator (i.e. shield generators)
	Biggest problem in my mind: (excepting subspace magic) that the
thrusters were on the inside of the field, unless of course what ever they
were spewing out reverted to normal inertial mass upon exiting the field
which would still create a confoozing discontinuity at the field's
boundaries. I SUPPOSE the discontinuity could act as a force for the bubble,
but the whole thing really gives me a headache because Im not real fond of
thrust/mass problems when one changes universal constants within the confines
of anything smaller than everything.
	SUMMARY: Technobabble, but not as bad as some.

-- 
"Salam and good evening to you sir.  Welcome to Agribah, land of mystery
of enchantment, and the best deals this side of the river Jordan, come on down"
From: mcelroy@bu.edu (Carl Mackin)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech
Subject: Re: Stardates
Date: 4 Jan 93 16:47:28 GMT
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL5

mannerl@kenyon.edu wrote:
: 
:  This is just a dumb guess, but Stardates look just like Julian dates.
: 
:                                             J.H.M.

I heard at that the dates are set up in the format of century-season-
episode-.shift of day{?} what ever that means.  I think that it
has to do with the breakdown of the "day" in sections.
--Mac
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech
From: katherim@fraser.sfu.ca (Katherine Merle Mason)
Subject: Turbo Lifts
Organization: Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, B.C., Canada
Date: Fri, 8 Jan 1993 20:22:44 GMT

I have a couple of questions regarding turbo lifts:
 
1)  Why is it that there is always a turbo lift there when someone desires
    to enter one?  We know from turbo shaft sceens that there is not a 
    turbo lift on every deck and we know from sceens inside turbo lifts 
    that they don't travel quickly enough that there would not be some i
    lag time.

2)  Why do persons in turbo lifts never have to wait for a turbolift in
    front two let people out?  We know there is more than one lift in a
    shaft, so why are they never in conflict?  What if someone was using
    one shaft to go down, and someone else was going up in the same shaft?
    It seems that there would be no way to avoid a collision and bring
    both parties to their destinations.

Katherine Merle Mason
Ne Oublie....
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech
From: baylor@NEBULA.SSD.LMSC.LOCKHEED.COM
Subject: Re: Holodeck
Reply-To: baylor@NEBULA.SSD.LMSC.LOCKHEED.COM
Organization: LMSC, Sunnyvale, California
Date: Mon, 4 Jan 93 16:58:33 GMT

In article <C0Bz4q.J6E@cs.dal.ca>, sweet@ug.cs.dal.ca (garth r sweet) writes:
>
>	My question is though, since it's generally accepted that the
>holodeck uses a mix of holograms, shaeped forcebeams and real matter, 
>wouldn't that make the holodeck very unuseable for Geordi? With his visor
>he can distinguish force fields and holograms easily, I have seen at least
>one show (don't know which one) where using his visor he detects a force
>field before the others can. Plus unless the replicated object used exactly
>the right matter composition, he should be able to tell them as fakes.
>
# DEFINE SOAPBOX
Folks, haven't you figured it out yet? The hologram is nothing
more than a fancy computer display device using holograms,
replicated matter, and force fields. The degree of reality simulated 
depends on the level of detail built in the routines by the programmer.
There are doubtless some killer library routines to handle typical
situations, and Geordi probably wrote one of his own so that 
things look acceptably real (as opposed to completely real) through 
his visor. Any inconsistancies in how the holodeck appears to work
are caused by different programmers. Besides, how often does 
someone not know they're in the holodeck? I can't think of any 
instance. (Although when the alien kid convinced Riker he'd lost
15 years of memory, Riker temporarilly found the "Romulan holodeck"
explanation plausable.) Anyhow, the deck doesn't need to be perfect;
Users just go along with it.
# UNDEFINE SOAPBOX
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech
Subject: Re:Holodeck
From: mannerl@kenyon.edu
Date: 6 Jan 93 18:10:15 -0500
Organization: Kenyon College

Read Spartacus, it explains everything.
3|
From: tchua@soda.qmw.ac.uk (Terence Chua)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech
Subject: Re: Excelsiorclass ship that was blasted in DS9
Date: 11 Jan 93 16:18:42 GMT
Organization: QMW Department of Laws
NNTP-Posting-Host: soda.berkeley.edu
In-reply-to: cwynne@liberty.uc.wlu.edu's message of Sat, 9 Jan 1993 19:41:25 GMT

In article <1993Jan9.194125.11848@liberty.uc.wlu.edu> cwynne@liberty.uc.wlu.edu (Colin J. Wynne) writes:

   They never showed a very good view of the Melbourne, so it's possible it
   wasn't exactly an Excelsior class.  

The Melbourne is a Nebula-class vessel, and always has been (well, up to
Wolf 359 anyway)...:)

   Also, wasn't the Saratoga from ST4:TVH an Avenger class, i.e. just like
   thge Reliant?  The one from DS9 looked more like what some tech sources
   call a Knox class -- a slightly smaller Reliant without the overhead
   weapons pod.

The Avenger class is a fandom classification. The Relian-type of starship 
has now been established as the Miranda class, which is what the Saratoga
is, apparently. 

--
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Terence Chua, Dept of Laws, Queen Mary College, University of London
Snail Mail: 22 Courcy Road, London N8 0QH
Telephone: (044)081-888-1210
E-Mail: T.Chua@qmw.ac.uk 
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
"I am not a free man, I am a lawyer!"
From: roholdr@ccu.umanitoba.ca (R Ross Holder Jr)
Subject: Re: NCC-1701D vs. Death Star
Organization: University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, Canada
Date: Thu, 7 Jan 1993 19:22:32 GMT

A few friends using the FASA Star Trek Role Playing Game and with alot of
improvising with the Starship Construction Set had a fight with a pair of
Reliant classes vs. an Imperial Star Destroyer.  Talk about your basic
battle royal!  My ship was reduced to a dead hulk and the other Reliant class
was moderately damaged (my ship was the victim of a most unfortunate fighter
attack).

I would imagine that a conflict with a Death Star would prove, albeit
interesting, rather brief and catastrophic without thousands of starships
involved in the effort.  I doubt even several Borg starships would prove
an adequate match.  Perhaps that neutronium-hulled doomesday machine...

-- 
R. Ross Holder, Jr.    INTERNET: roholdr@ccu.umanitoba.ca   (Winnipeg, Manitoba)
Department of Philosophy   ---Season's-Greetings---   The University of Manitoba
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
DISCLAIMER: The views I express are not neccessarily those of the U of Manitoba.
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech
From: z57n@unb.ca (MCKAY  N)
Subject: Re: 1701-D Saucer going warp speed
Organization: University of New Brunswick
Distribution: na
Date: Sat, 9 Jan 1993 18:19:28 GMT

>Here's my question.  The 1701-D saucer has no warp drive, and I'm
>guessing it has no warp field generators.

You're right; the warp coils are in the nacelles.

>Yet, when the two ship
>sections seperate at very high warp speed, it doesn't slow down 
>like a frisbee released from the window of a moving car.  Why?

The frisbee loses momentum because on air resistance (drag).  There isn't 
any of this in space.  According to physics as we know it today, the saucer 
section should continue more or less indefinitely.  (it would probably run 
into a planet at some point)

> A
>friend of mine said that in the book of that episode, the saucer 
>*did* lose speed quickly.  With no warp field around it, one would
>think that it would decelerate fast enough to straighten your hair.

Here's where you have to just accept the fact that science fiction writers 
can do whatever they want to do.  Supposedly, your friend is right: if the 
warp field around a starship disappears, the starship slows down.  Trouble 
is, we can't generate warp fields yet, so there's no way to see what would 
really happen.  Presumeably, the saucer section's impulse engines would be 
used to slow the ship down gradually, so as to keep the crew from being 
flattened against the walls.

+-------------------------------------------------------------+
Neill McKay                 z57n@cenov1.unb.ca, NOT z57n@unb.ca
University of New Brunswick, Fredericton, New Brunswick, Canada
+-------------------------------------------------------------+
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech
From: weber@jedi.ssd.lmsc.lockheed.com (Kevin Weber)
Subject: Re: Heavy/Light Cruiser
Followup-To: rec.arts.startrek.tech
Organization: 78-30
Date: Tue, 5 Jan 93 22:15:55 GMT

In article <C0EDE8.4rH@vuse.vanderbilt.edu>, muellerm@vuse.vanderbilt.edu
(Marc Mueller) wrote:
> In naval tradition a cruiser was a heavily armed but lightly armored ship
> built for speed. The designation of light or heavy referred to the size of
> the guns not the displacement or armorment. A light cruiser carried a large
> number of smaller caliber guns and had a role of protecting the battleships
> against destroyers and torpedo boats. A heavy cruiser carried large caliber
> guns for greater range to harass enemy battleships and so on.
> 
> The battleship, being heavily armored and armed, was dedicated to fighting
> other battleships and anything else that was slow enough for it to catch.
> 

The battle between the Hood and Bismark marked the last encounter between
battleships.  It was realized, especially in the Pacific, that the main
role of battleships was to bombard land forces from sea.  They would,
however, still chase the big aircraft carriers, which are slower than
battleships.

I should mention that the US realized this advantage.  Japan still believed
till the end of WWII that the battleship could be used for naval assualt,
an error which proved very costly at the battle for Leyte gulf, and which
resulted in the sinking of the Yamamoto.

kevin
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech
From: jcurrie@ccu.umanitoba.ca (James Gordon Currie)
Subject: Re: More Holodeck
Organization: University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, Canada
Date: Tue, 5 Jan 1993 22:42:09 GMT

          Hmmm... An NCC-1701-D inside the Holodeck...

          I *think* an episode did this, can't remember. BUT, I do know 
that one of the novels deals with just this kind of situation (_Boogymen_).

Ciao
J G Currie
From: holland@geop.ubc.ca (Stephen Holland)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech
Subject: Re: Help needed with storyline idea
Date: 8 Jan 1993 18:48:07 GMT
Organization: Geophysics & Astronomy, U.B.C. Vancouver, Canada
Distribution: world
Reply-To: holland@geop.ubc.ca
NNTP-Posting-Host: crisium.astro.ubc.ca

In article 10285@cs.hw.ac.uk, adrian@cs.hw.ac.uk (Adrian Hurt) writes:
>
>>I've found
>>that the best way to deal with integrating the movies into the Star Trek
>>universe is to just ignore them.  Treat them the same as the animated series
>>and the novels: lots of fun, but not part of the "real world" of Star Trek.
>
>Right; ignore the films, the novels and the animated series.  All you need to
>do is ignore the TV non-animated series as well and you can have a wonderfully
>consistent Star Trek universe. :-)
>
Hey!  That's a great idea!  If we pick and choose among the episodes we can
probably eliminate all but the 5->10 good New Generation episodes and the 10->20
good Old Generation episodes.  Perhaps we can include the second movie if we 
pretend that there was no Genesis torpedo and ignore the fact that Khan and his
band existed on their planet for 12 years with-out any food!

But, if we did this then we couldn't have any fun explaining away the inconsistencies
between the various episodes, series, and movies; which can be a lot of fun.

steve holland

p.s.  Insert lots of :-) into the above.
From: Andy.Church@launchpad.unc.edu (Andy Church)
Subject: Re: Holodeck
Organization: University of North Carolina Extended Bulletin Board Service
Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1993 13:26:43 GMT

In an article, collofel@envmsa.eas.asu.edu writes:
>In article <24845@galaxy.ucr.edu>, judson@watserv.ucr.edu writes...
>>In article <19246@mindlink.bc.ca> Jeff_Holinski@mindlink.bc.ca (Jeff
Holinski)
>>writes:
>>> 
>>> Of coures I'm still not sure why they have such BIG holodecks instead of a
>>> closet sized unit in every crewperson's quarters.
>> 
>>Because you couldn't fit ten people in a closet.
>> 
>>--
>>If you ever fall off the Sears Tower, just go real limp, because 
>>maybe you'll look like a dummy and people will try to catch you 
>>because, hey, free dummy.
>> 
>>judson@watserv.ucr.edu

>Why put everyone in the same room?  You can't do everything if the other
person
>in the room can always be seen/felt etc. (there are many examples).

  How about this: people who want to use the holodeck together can use
their own "personal" holodecks, and tell the computer to link them up.
Then a lot of people can participate in a holodeck simulation, without
overcrowding a single room.

  --Andy Church

--
   The opinions expressed are not necessarily those of the University of
     North Carolina at Chapel Hill, the Campus Office for Information
        Technology, or the Experimental Bulletin Board Service.
           internet:  laUNChpad.unc.edu or 152.2.22.80
From: gt3716a@prism.gatech.EDU (Josh 'I'd MUCH rather be driving' Freeman)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech
Subject: Re: time travel 2
Date: 11 Jan 93 17:36:48 GMT
Organization: Georgia Institute of Technology

In article <07JAN93.10243612.0077@VM1.MCGILL.CA> CXMP@MUSICA.MCGILL.CA (CXMP000) writes:
>Planck's time is h/Mc^2 == square root of hG/c^5.  It has NOTHING
>apriori to do with electrons.  Really.
>
Actually, I thought that the Plank Time was the amout of time (10^-43 seconds)
after the Big Bang that it took for the universe to cool to a state that is
consistent with and predictable by modern physics

Josh Freeman 


-- 
It could be worse...
I could be a freshman forever!

Joshua Kimbrell Freeman, gt3716a@prism.gatech.edu
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.tech