10 Flaws Star Trek - USS Enterprise NCC 1701-D

[@petermerchant4439]

"Why are the corridors so wide?" In-Universe Reasons: (a) To make the ship feel more open and help those with claustrophobia. (b) to allow easier movement of things around the ship. Real Reason: To make room for the cameras.

[@elitewolverine]

But also...try to evacuate 1k people that can simply jump out the window of a ship...

[@neptuneplaneptune3367]

Honetlsye for me it makes perfect Sense. It would be near impossible to evacuate all the Poeple ore for cre Members to run fast to there deignatet places doring a Red Alert if the Corridrs where small like on the NX01. They would constantley block each other.

[@purplefish2787]

Voyagers deck 15: laughs in thin sharp corridors

[@Gomezli16]

The ship is supposed to be luxurious because people are basically living long term on it. It has to feel like home.

[@FLAME4564]

Though most luxurious ships actualy were reffited to have that luxury space converted to use for times of millitary use for things such as the Dominian war and battles such as Sector 001 for example battle we see in star trek First Contact.

[@antoniocarlosruizfernandes9575]

If the ship does not had these flaws the show had not the thrill that guaranteed its success.

[@Jordizzan]

Thanks we didn’t know

[@maotisjan]

Technically Enterprise is civilian ship since starfleet isn't military exactly

[@marcrasm]

I am still amazed that Starfleet hasn't invented surge protectors yet

[@you5711]

Marc Rasmussen "I am still amazed that Starfleet hasn't invented surge protectors yet" Voice of Dr Leah Brahms: "It is possible to protect against surged electron flow. The key lies in buffering the phased energy matrix. This modification will be integrated into the next class starship."

[@Ryarios]

Marc Rasmussen or go to low power or intrinsically safe controls...

[@gertraba4484]

they have, DATA puts his body in the energy stream when he and Riker ae in the Jeffrey tube

[@aurorarawlinson7341]

@@you5711 Should have consulted APC or Cyberpower, lol.

[@MothaLuva]

Marc Rasmussen It’s not necessary when you build your ships with bullshittium.

[@dougsmith6262]

I've never understood why Starfleet continues to build their ships with explodium

[@jessstuart7495]

It's their only defense against the Boredoreum Empire!

[@MothaLuva]

Jess Stuart Isn’t that called the Boredomium Empire?

[@battlesheep2552]

Blame Kirk for starting that rumor about Corbomite

[@aksalaheddine78]

And why fill it with rocks?

[@kev3d]

"Captain, incoming photon torpedo that will impact the starboard warp nacelle !" Bridge Consoles 400 meters away: Explode

[@clearspira]

The Galaxy class ship is the equivalent of an ocean liner made during a time where the Federation was top dog in the Alpha Quadrant and had grown fat and soft on the spoils of peacetime. The Klingons were allies, the Romulans were quiet, and the Borg and the Dominion were a distant blip on the horizon. No one else was anywhere near their weight class. And like if you were to strap guns onto an ocean liner and take it into battle, you would find it wanting. Its design flaws aren't really design flaws, its more a case of using the ship in situations that it was not designed to handle. As an ocean liner in the days when only few people were shooting at it it worked beautifully.

[@davidvanvranken1595]

clearspira that’s probably the best way I’ve heard it explained. Since the Borg and Dominion, the ships became leaner and more combat-oriented

[@anamericancelt6534]

How often has ANY ocean liner been hijacked?

[@KuraIthys]

@@anamericancelt6534 Dunno. But Container ships have certainly been hijacked. (there's a film about it.) And quite a few cruise ships have been attacked by pirates, so an attempted hijacking isn't particularly unlikely. Perhaps none have been done successfully... But it's far from impossible.

[@donovanporter4545]

Basically the federation forgot to war

[@commanderknight9314]

@@anamericancelt6534 current ocean liners aren't equipped with state of the art technology and is considered the flagship of its respective faction. That does kind of put a target on your back for criminals. Also a ship by the name of the MS Achille Lauro was hijacked by members of the Palestine liberation front.

[@dankuser8303]

What do Imperial and Federation ships have in common? Exposed Bridges

[@barrybend7189]

At the Star Trek version is flush to the hull unlike the empire.

[@sadturtle540]

Yeah that’s the major flaw it put in danger pretty much all your officers

[@kh29the13]

But to be fair all Star Trek ships there bridges are exposed to hell only the empires bridge in Star Wars is extremely exposed.

[@jozefkozon4520]

Well, In ISD defence, thats one of only thre real flaws with its design (And all of tchem are implementet by tarkin doctrin), and it is made in a way, that negate most angles, that you can hit it leawing onyly straight out front and litle from abowe. In case ISD I that area is mostly ocupied by point defence, so god luck with that.

[@barrybend7189]

@@jozefkozon4520 well in the TNG era most Phaser arrays have good point defence angles.

[@Goatcha_M]

Missed a Huge Flaw: The Brig. Prisoners are secured by a single force field which does not even have a redundant power supply, meaning that it is prone to failure when the ship sustains damage either from an attack or just an anomaly. Exactly the time when you want prisoners running loose. A sensible design if they want to keep the complete lack of privacy for prisoners option would be a Transparent Aluminium wall and door system with a force field on the interior so that the Prisoners can't even attempt to mess with the door unless the power goes down, and if it does come down, they are still locked in a secure cell. Redundant power supply and two guards always on duty would also help.

[@spiffcats]

This one always bugged me. You know that any episode of any series, be it voyager or the next gen, if they picked up prisoners, they were escaping in a few minutes.

[@aquamonkee]

Cells do have independent power supplies see ST:DS9 6x22 for detail

[@Goatcha_M]

@@aquamonkee Is that just on the Cardassian space station, a modification to the Defiant, a wartime addition to the Galaxy class, a retcon or an always was? Irregardless, they still need a wall and door, there are dozens of times the Brig Force Fields fail.

[@bjmaguire6269]

@ValorJ Omega - Exactly, and on diplomatic ships it is 'almost' excusable considering 'other priorities', like not offending an Ambassador(etc.) who committed a 'faux pas' (diplo-speak for violent crime by someone with diplomatic immunity;) by treating him like a 'common' criminal. But there are simply no excuses for such faulty design when every one you're going to detain is likely to be a dangerous combatant!

[@robertagu5533]

An those guards are armed at all times too. Possibly with extra defensive measures hidden or not like in their universe a mini phaser autotune port thing maybe to discourage rescue, riot or escape attempts that can be set to either stun or kill as needed or wanted. Just simple measures people in this era do all the time.. just cuz your 24th century with magic voice controlled machines that do it all for you dont mean you forget EVERYTHING that came before.. like apparently Trek humans have. Especially here in security and war

[@NeilNTR]

The "D" is still my favorite. It reminds me of the late 80's early 90's luxury cars.

[@dgerdi]

NeilTR same with me. It reminds me on my teenage years and the first „woooooow how cool is that“- feeling by seeing this ship the first time. The first love you never forget.

[@CsykKrit]

You like the "D" eh?

[@katey1dog]

It was million ton Lexus.

[@loumorningstar7709]

@@CsykKrit God dammit! Beaten by a whole week?........lol whole week.......is it?

[@bbbmw]

My fave interior design set 🥰 love 90s luxury!

[@anonymousanton8418]

I really wanted to point out everything wrong with this video but so many good comments already. But the one mistake i see no one pointing out is its not just the bridge consoles that are dangerous. All the computers in star trek all have rocks behind them and explode anytime anything happens.

[@zdcyclops1lickley190]

The US Navy liked the bridge layout so well, they considered using it on new ships.

[@MrDarchangelomni]

its all relative to the console explosivity "frequancy".

[@jamerv86]

Well, that’s all just a cinematic effect.

[@jamerv86]

Have people not seen how bridges are set on real ships? They’re in the open. Plus they’re shows, stop being so fucking critical of fiction.

[@pufthemajicdragon]

1. The Galaxy Class starship isn't intended for combat. It's an exploratory vessel, so protecting the bridge during combat is not a high priority. The placement of the bridge is actually a holdover from 20th century naval vessels where the bridge is raised high above the rest of the ship in order to provide a higher perspective for visibility and navigation. 2. This is probably a result of common technological fallacies - the more advanced a civilization gets the more dependent they become on their technology to solve problems. They depend upon their shields and inertial dampeners to protect them. The whole point of science fiction is to be an allegory exploring what happens when that technology fails. 3. All of those hijacking attempts were performed by experts who devoted massive amounts of time to planning and preparing their hijacking, often including long-term infiltration of the security involved. Those "kids" were age "regressed" adult crew members who retained their adult knowledge and experience. 4. The Galaxy class is a SPACEcraft, it's not designed to land. Hence "crash land". The intrepid class is designed to be able to land. Also, the Enterprise was highly damaged during the Generations battle. (Mostly this was just a dramatic choice by the writers so...) 5. Shield modulation is most likely a significant engineering problem that can severely impair shield power and longevity. Static shield frequency is also not a problem until the Borg arrive, and once they arrive the solution is newly invented - and we see this exact solution, automatically modulating shields and weapons, implemented in later ships designed specifically for fighting the Borg. Retrofitting this into older designs is probably a complicated endeavor. 6. Yeah that's a bad design. Blame the intern who helped write the tech manuals. Or in-universe, I'd suspect it was added to the design later, probably as a refit or at least later in the design/construction process when the living quarters on the upper decks were already established. Again, peacetime exploratory vessel, so it shouldn't be a problem. 7. Warp nacells are required to be separated from the living sections due to radiation from the warp plasma reaction. The design of the Galaxy class is mostly modelled after the Constitution class and both were exploratory vessels, so maximizing engine power, efficiency, and safety takes priority over reducing the ship's target profile. 8. It's meant for long term exploration, which actually makes comfort and luxury a high priority for morale. When your crew doesn't get to go outside for months or years at a time, you need a little more breathing space inside. You can also see this same design philosophy in its crew manifest - they have a ships' counselor to help deal with the issues that long-term space travel and "confinement" can have. 9. This seems to be more of a complaint behind Starfleet's design philosophy in a peaceful and peace-chartered Federation focusing on peacetime missions in a relatively peaceful era. And you're comparing this to the design philosophy of the Romulans, The Klingons, and the Borg whose societies all exist in a more-or-less constant attitude of war. Yes, sometimes fighting happens, and Starfleet ships have shields and weapons because this happens. But warfighting is not the intended purpose of Starfleet ships and it is not the philosophical model that the Federation is built upon. 10. Using a touchscreen for steering? Sounds like a lack of imagination on your part. Try playing a mobile game with a touchscreen joystick. And then pretend that same control model was implemented in an LCARS interface. But if you must know, yes, they punch in coordinates for a destination and the ship automatically adjusts course and heading to get them there. All of the actual "fancy maneuvering" is done by the computer under the hood. This is actually the most practical solution when you're navigating a massive starship in 3-dimensions. Joysticks are fun in games and fighter jets, but trust me you'd hate it if you had to steer an aircraft carrier with a joystick - a course change of 10 degrees would have you holding that joystick sideways for 2 minutes. It seems to me that most of your flaws are directly associated with the Enterprise's role as a peacetime exploratory vessel not being optimized for combat effectiveness. For the Enterprise, which being Starfleet's flagship frequently gets placed between a rock and a hard place precisely because they're the best of the best, we see this design philosophy fall short. But even on the Enterprise, it's maybe 1% of her service life and for the rest of the fleet they fulfill their peacetime exploration mission admirably.

[@kawh8719]

Yes, thank you for your thoughtful breakdown. This video should maybe be, 10 reasons why the Galaxy Class was not meant for war. That would at least give more understanding to it's perceived flaws as a warship. It's clear the show designers thought about that during DS9 and the Dominon War. They designed the ships going forward to meet the needs of a more dangerous universe. I wonder how in the next shows, that expand the prime timeline, ship design will be effected.

[@RagicaltheUnhallowedKnight]

Still, they are always in newly explored space, it is their main frontier vessel and their flag ship. While also constantly going into battle, so the design is not well thought out regardless. It really comes across as the federation being too arrogant and just wanted a flashy pimped out prestige vessel, ignoring the obvious and glaring issues. And that's me not even addressing the starboard power coupling😆

[@headrockbeats]

That's a great rebuttal. However the Enterprise-E _was_ meant for warfare, was it not? Surely they could've solved some of those problems, instead of blindly carrying them over. Also, I believe several of the same problems were also present in the Defiant, which was nothing _but_ a warship.

[@morpeusprime3920]

Damn! Good breakdowns!

[@ohauss]

@@leonardogoulart3245 To answer your first question: BECAUSE Starfleet has not a primarily military role and merely doubles up as such in times of need. Having the flagship designed purely for combat would suggest they are about fighting wars. While there may be warrior empires out there, it is equally useful to illustrate to peaceful civilizations that you're not one of those. As for the bridge, if I remember the technical manual correctly, it is a modular design so as to be able to completely swap out the bridge completely and ensure up to date instruments. Also, given that the primary protection of the ship are its shields, not some kind of armor, and given the strength of weapons, whether you put the thing on the outside or inside doesn't make much of a difference.

[@JamesKobera666]

Landing gear wouldn't have helped the saucer section land in Generations because it was thrown towards the planet by the shock wave from the exploding warp core and had it's engines damaged by the close proximity to the exploding core

[@petermerchant4439]

...which is also why they didn't use the escape pods--there wasn't time.

[@lighting1443]

@Stepperot pluss escape pods would probly blow up due to shockwave :O

[@joebama2888]

And the forward velocity would snap the landing gear anyways...

[@MothaLuva]

Jorge Jobs You didn’t see MY landing gear for this

[@bobdoyle5945]

shut up

[@xenomarket]

I like these flaws you notice. But as for the Enterprise needing a joystick or manual control, you have to know that the Enterprise moves and maneuvers at a fraction of the speed of light (when not in warp). No human has those reflexes. The helmsman depends on the artificial intelligence and just selects preprogrammed maneuvers and vectors.

[@smokeyjoe7251]

The nacelles at the ends of the pylons are not engines, they house the warp coils. The warp engine is in the engineering section. Think of the nacelles as the driven wheels of a car. The engine is still in the engine bay and drives the wheels. The placement is so far away from the hull to protect the crew from the effects of the warp field (You want to fold space, not people) Ships that can emit a narrower warp field can have the nacelles closer to the hull. The Nebula class ship you had shown has pylons the same size as the Galaxy class, you got fooled by forced perspective For more details, Star Trek Enterprise Season 2 Episode 12 'The Catwalk' What I find crazy is you missed the most obvious flaw in the Galaxy X-class (Three-nacelled 'Dreadnought' version of the Galaxy class) which had a fixed-position phaser weapon fitted on the underside of the saucer blocking the Captain's yacht from detaching

[@douglashall6326]

Thank God someone pointed this out. I would also like to see seatbelts on the ship but could have done without the "P"comment. I'ld hate to have the ship's console looking like the Atari 2600.

[@kearneyboy]

Outstanding. 👍👏👏

[@stephenlaarkamp7344]

Indeed, but the point still seems to stand. While the nacelles are not the housings for the warp drive itself, the fact that they are essentially the means by which the warp drive transfers it's power to move the ship, like the propeller shafts on a real ship, makes that flaw stand. Disable the nacelles and while the warp drive itself isn't damaged, the ship is still going nowhere, since the energy can't be used for the ship to move, and the relatively vulnerable position that the nacelles are in, especially if she's being pursued makes that possibility more likely than it would otherwise.

[@smokeyjoe7251]

​@@stephenlaarkamp7344 In a space battle you're not going to use warp coils anyway, you'd use RCS thrusters and impulse drive which are located closer to the body of the ship. Shoot the nacelles off and now you have a Galaxy class ship, with full combat and impulse capability, only this time they're even more pissed off than before, and since running away isn't an option, more motivated to turn your vessel into a floating cloud of grease and parts So let the Gorn target my nacelles . . . while they're busy working on that I'm working on turning them into chargrilled chicken nuggets.

[@smokeyjoe7251]

@@douglashall6326 I dunno . . . given the forces involved if the inertial dampeners fail, seatbelts would probably just vivisect you where you were sitting.

[@blancobull]

The Enterprise D isn't a war ship. The Galaxy class is a Science and Research vessel. No need for exposed plumbing.

[@LeonCoretz]

It's not a true science/research vessel. It's an exploration vessel. Picard mentions more than once early on that "Starfleet can send a dedicated science ship to study this whatever".

[@cosmictyger]

... and meant to be in space for longer than a lot of wars. Space keeps humans sane. I’m more surprised at how labyrinthine the quarters appear, for such a civilian vessel. Of course, that’s great to deter a hostile takeover during an invasion, but horrible, if you’re a three year old who gets lost and needs to find the loo!

[@obi-wankenobi8368]

(Science nerd's)

[@blancobull]

@Tildin Han tib tib tibby

[@jaidanielparker]

Only point I disagree with is the "inefficient use of space". Galaxy Class starships can be home for crew for decades. These guys don't go home to a four bedroom two bathroom home with a backyard pool between 6 month deployments. Living in the cramped conditions of a 21st Century naval vessel for a decade plus would be torture and do nothing for the mental health of everyone aboard.

[@asusmctablet9180]

Good point

[@Shuichii808]

That's very true. The Defiant class, which was very space and crew efficient, having only 50 crew and bare bones quarters and mess hall, was only meant for short escort duty or patrols. The Defiant would never be sent on a 2-year exploration mission. Anyone would go nuts on a Defiant-class in a very short amount of time.

[@zdcyclops1lickley190]

Space the final frontier. These are the voyages of the starship Enterprise, it's five year mission... FIVE YEARS. Plus they get shore leave. Have you ever even watched the show?

[@FlamesofJagger]

@@zdcyclops1lickley190 That only applies to the original series Enterprise. The Next Generation intro said the Enterprise D was on a CONTINUIOUS mission.

[@jaidanielparker]

@@zdcyclops1lickley190 This video is about the Enterprise D.

[@MeldedMin]

Number 10. Flaw, no joystick. Next line: Joystick is flawed. Uh. Ok

[@AltoStratusX1]

As someone who has played space and physics flight simulators with Joystick and keyboards I would argue that the touchscreen is 100% better for a ship that large in space as there is probably a large flight assist in operation and the touch screen just manages it through simple input. If there was an emergency the flight stick would be useless anyways because with out a hardwired system when the controls go down so would the flight stick. The flight stick would have to manage a 360 degree thruster system operating in space. The inertia would have to countered etc. Not at all like flying a plane. A joystick would need at least multiple inputs and pedals to be effective. So not at all like the Riker joystick. Maybe include an emergancy one in the battle bridge but imo this isn't really a flaw in the design as a joystick on the console wouldn't really work in an emergancy if at all.

[@ritagomes7838]

@@AltoStratusX1 NEEERRRRRRDDDD!!! - Homer Simpson 2002

[@Swiftbow]

@@AltoStratusX1 I'm guessing you're unaware that actual spaceships are controlled by joystick controls when operating manually (such as docking maneuvers). And they definitely have 360 degree thruster systems.

[@Reactordrone]

One of the biggest design flaws of federation ships are the mysterious beams that fall from the ceiling when the ship is hit, inevitably trapping someone underneath.

[@MichaelChejlava]

I noticed that. WHy couldn't they locally turn off the gravity so they didn't need to lift them up?

[@dtvjho]

That also happened on the Romulan ship in Balance of Terror. Dramatic effect. But I do agree that exploding work stations on the bridge are a farce - it happens only because the scriptwriters want them. As an engineer, "real" consoles would just go out (shut off) or worse, start smoking and perhaps catch fire after a full minute, enough time for crew to move.

[@fadlya.rahman4113]

@@dtvjho Not quite. Sometimes a power surge or short circuit can cause electric fire, or in a very rare case, explosion. Furthermore, Starship in a star trek didn't use electric cable for power. They use EPS conduit which use plasma to transfer power from the warp core to the rest of the ship. This conduit can rupture and release hot plasma.

[@tiagotiagot]

@@dtvjho The problem is all their consoles are powered by Samsung batteries.

[@ciaopps1]

Don’t forget the rocks. Federation ships decks are full of rocks that fall out during attacks

[@papapalpatine8785]

"Klingon sisters with nice jugs... " You just made my day!!!

[@AsylumEscapade]

Too bad they were crazy bitches...

[@insertmemorableusernameher6795]

Weird flex but ok

[@lukasperuzovic1429]

@@AsylumEscapade Most Klingon women are crazy to Human Standards, but the Duras Sisters are crazy even to Klingon standards

[@voldo18]

Just saying, I fapped to em back in the day, and I'm still fappin to this day

[@TheLocutus70]

Dead pool 71, yeah I always liked the Klingon cleavage.

[@thenbagreatteller1855]

Ben is back 😱 😭

[@Mister__Jey]

That the bridge must be on top, is a rule from roddenberry. but you forget: they have shields! and without shields ANY point on or in the vessel will be vulnerable

[@VestedUTuber]

You can follow the Roddenberry rules without being stupid, though. The Defiant class, for example, has an internalized control center on the top deck. While it is at the top of the ship, it is still within the main hull rather than in an external structure at the top like it is on the Galaxy class. Another example would be the Akira class. It has a particularly large bridge structure at the top of the vessel, but it's positioned between the secondary hull structures which actually completely obscure the bridge structure from the side profile of the ship.

[@joewhitfield5561]

VestedUTuber That's the coolest thing a nerd has ever said lol

[@PDYork]

Exactly. Without shields, you're basically done either way. If your bridge is in the bowels, you're just watching the ship explode around you. The bridge is also outfitted with thicker hull plating and specialized defense fields as well as the entire shielding for the hull.

[@FLAME4564]

As interesting as the Nacelle line of sight rule. Though still Not too far on top that it would be an easy target for enemies like aggressive klingons,Borg or Romulans or even certain Cardassians. If i were designing a ship and put a bridge section on top i would have a bridge on top with some layer of armored defense and shielding depending on the century i would involve abaltive armor or 24th century i would involve a combination of sheilding and defensive armor.

[@NP-zt6hy]

Harrison Ford had similar points to the Enterprise flaw#10 on the Millennium Falcon cockpit: "Uh, so George, how do you fly this thing?" "Well...you flip that switch, push that button...be creative, Harry."

[@sanguisdominus]

Most of these points would apply if the Enterprise D was a warship, but it's not, it's an exploration/diplomatic ship. It was built in an era where the Federation was almost untouchable, primarily designed to be used for exploration and transporting diplomatic envoys. It's the equivalent of a private yacht. If you look at the Defiant, an actual warship, a lot of your grievances with 1701-D have been removed for it to function as a warship.

[@FrozenPhoenix15]

Sanguis Dominus “being an exploration vessel” is an excuse for having an exposed bridge? How is that an advantage when all space exploration is sensor-based?

[@spins321]

@@FrozenPhoenix15 The exposed bridge in a spaceship could serve the exact function it's paying homage to the classic design of sea vessels: a raised platform from which the vessel is commanded. This position also allows personnel to be able to observe the area around the vessel to assist in piloting to avoid obstruction. Now... why not make the bridge retractable in combat? Aesthetically, it may look a little weird... but practically, you obviously avoid far more issues. And thinking about it, you could make an argument that even today, modern vessels don't need an exposed bridge, particularly warships. With the sensors and cameras systems that are available, you could conceivably completely remove the superstructure of an aircraft carrier and other combat ships, embed operations somewhere within the vessel, and project imagery through out the room. It's operational in aircraft (F-35). You lower the profile of the ship and keep the command section safe (perhaps even removing other rooms like CIC to combine them with bridge ops).

[@jamoecw]

i know people just don't understand that the defiant can take out a galaxy class starship no problem, after all even the smallest warship can take an exploration vessel. hmmm wait, i think it is the other way around, the defiant gets its ass handed to it by the galaxy class ship. that can't be right if it is a warship built during a time of war and the other one is just an exploration vessel built and designed during an era of extreme peace. i guess it is a warship.

[@SuperWindsage]

that's even worse that its an explore diplomatic ship that keeps on pretending to be a warship that keeps getting dragged into it. part of the problem.

[@lukasperuzovic1429]

And it is a terrible design for a exploration and diplomatic ship. Even in modern times today, on military bases with base housing you see a clear and distinct separation between family and civilian habitation and the actual work/mission part of the base. The Part of the Base with Family housing is nowhere near the various operations, barracks, training areas, firing ranges and repair shops of the rest of the military base. Also if this is a deep space exploration vesicle that houses children, families and diplomatic envoys, the ship should never , 1 be the Flag ship for your Fleet, 2 be apart of any defense actions or missions, or 3. near any borders with hostile space faring civilizations. If the Enterprise D is an actual exploration and diplomatic ship it needs to be in assuming safe areas of Space. If you are bringing any ship to a hostile area of Space, it needs to be a proper military ship. Both the Design and Multi purpose role of the Enterprise D comes from pure arrogance and absolute stupidity. Want to see a Proper Space Ship with a civilian population, look at the SDF-1 in Macross Saga (ether the US Robotech or Japanese Macross version). The Ship was retrofitted and repaired Alien ship adapted to be as a prototype military vesicle that just happen to have a whole City's worth of refugees on board, the civilians are there as a matter of circumstance and not design, and the Ship's Admiral did not realize activating the ships space fold engines would take with it all surrounding matter with it as it was the first time the fold engines where ever used.

[@KuraIthys]

Bridge is a known issue. Though how much it matters given how flimsy unshielded ships in Star Trek are in general is hard to say - most don't survive very long without shields, and WITH active shields it really doesn't matter where anything is. Exploding bridge consoles... Yeah, that's just stupid in general and makes no sense. ... Restraints? Oh, you mean like the deleted ending for Nemesis? XD Then again, you'd need those throughout the whole ship; the bridge is no more dangerous than anywhere else, because what throws people around the bridge throws people around throughout the whole ship. (we never see this for some reason though.) The saucer section landing probably could've been better, but that was essentially a completely uncontrolled landing, and they were determined to destroy it - in all honesty if the saucer had been functioning properly it would have remained in orbit, which was vastly more sensible than trying to land it anyway. It's not like the ship's saucer section is in immediate danger just for having separated. It can likely operate for months if not years that way, even if it doesn't have warp drive. A more controlled landing method would've been nice, but the way that film was written they would've crashed it anyway. The shield modulation frequency... Yeah, that's a stupid way of doing things, but it's quite specifically the MODULATION frequency. Eg. the rate at which the shields change frequency. The method could be improved, but the reason (insofar any was given) that ships even have a modulation frequency for the shields is because the shields are bidirectional - you have to drop parts of the shield in a controlled manner on a regular basis just to be able to fire weapons through the shields or even use the sensors. Still, a less predictable modulation method is clearly needed. Torpedo launcher complaint seems like a dumb one. You know there's a phaser array in approximately the same spot right? Besides, torpedos are just empty shells when in storage - you can't just detonate one, because for all practical intents and purposes it has no warhead - arming it by loading antimatter into it is part of the launch sequence. That's no more of a risk than the antimatter pods. For that matter, even if it was a risk, look at where the other two launchers are. The forward launcher is in the thinnest part of the neck, so if you want to blow the ship in half by sabotaging a torpedo, that seems like a much better choice. The aft launcher is also in a place that's both quite close to the main reactor, AND likely would blow the nacelles off if anything detonated there. But this is on par with firing a phaser at the reactor core in terms of sabotage. It's hardly a meaningful flaw. Torpedo casings could probably be transported from place to place inside the ship too if one launcher needs them more than the others. They're empty after all. Moving an empty casing is no huge risk. Warp pylons? Really? The same thing nearly every ship design in existence does? I mean, look at the ships the 'warrior' klingons use... It should be obvious why you'd do this - engine placement is based on a bunch of factors and combat is only one of them. The use of nacelles on pylons is a safety feature, for one, since you can detach a nacelle in an emergency to protect the ship - the closer to the ship's body the nacelle is, the less safety this offers. Secondly, nacelle placement and engine performance are not independent factors. Consider where aircraft engines are placed - there are multiple options, but they all have consequences. This is typical of a mindset that views a starship ENTIRELY through the lens of combat, without considering ANY other factor. Which is a very stupid and myopic way of looking at things. Would you be willing to accept a starship that can go half the speed, at half the energy efficiency solely for the sake of combat effectiveness? Especially when combat is not that ship's primary mission? As for joysticks... Eh. I've used a flight simulator on a tablet PC using essentially only touch controls and it's quite doable. so is using a PC flight simulator with a mouse. A giant starship isn't going to turn on a dime, and the slower the craft you're controlling the less it matters. Plus it's an aesthetic choice, not one based on logic - a keyboard with physical buttons is preferable to touch controls too - yet you don't see any such thing, or even physical buttons in general ANYWHERE. But, given how such a large vessel flies, I really don't think it makes a huge difference. It's not a fighter. You're not going to do an immelman turn while moving your giant-ass 600 metre long starship around in battle. Touchscreens and the like in my experience primarily are lacking for doing fast, frequent course changes, but that barely matters for controlling a vehicle that can't really do such things in the first place. Now, the Defiant could do with a joystick or something similar, but a Galaxy class would hardly benefit that much. Just think of the primary ship's control as being a virtual trackpad, and if you have any experience of using something like that in a flight simulator you'll soon realise it's perfectly manageable if you don't need hyper-fast reactions...

[@piotrd.4850]

It is no issue at all in ST universe and building templates.

[@adm_ezri]

You say that we don't see people being thrown around the ship anywhere but the bridge. I think I remember this happening in a corridor in VOY, and probably in main engineering on several shows

[@adm_ezri]

Other than that though this all makes sense, and to build on the point of the naccalles, their position affects the size/strength of the warp field that can be generated. For example the nebula class shown tops at warp 9.5, but the galaxy can reach 9.8. I'm no warp scientist but as far as I know the defiant broke the previous rules of warp nacelles, in that they need to have nothing between them to generate a field. This explains why voyager's nacelles are raised whenever it goes to warp. Voyager's speed of warp 9.975 is ridiculously fast, however it was the newest, best and fastest ship in Starfleet (because of course the title ship is the best). Overall, there are reasons for nacelles being where they are, and in battleships like the defiant they are less exposed, but as you have said, the galaxy class exploration cruiser is not a battleship.

[@Benjamin0119]

@ValorJ Omega Besides that, the Defiant is ugly anyway.

[@AC-gb7do]

ValorJ Omega Another violator of that “line of sight” rule is the Nebula-class starship, whose nacelle "power combs" are largely obstructed by the ship's engineering hull. The Oberth's nacelles are largely obstructed by the ship's primary hull. The Defiant and the Starfleet scout ship of Star Trek: Insurrection each have two integrated warp nacelles that are fully obstructed by the main hull. Other ships violate this rule as well, including the Romulan scout ship from TNG's "The Defector."

[@dariabusek3566]

8:45 "The Enterprise is actually lugging around 35% more volume..." Hey: Volume doesn't have mass! It's empty space. And comparing to Earth-bound vessels (aircraft carriers or submarines) is fallacious: There's plenty of room in space!

[@BullShitMatador]

It isn't empty space. It's full of gas. Sudden compression can even cause that gas to ignite, such as an external explosion breaching a compartment. Explosive decompression isn't like it is in the movies either. It really is explosive. If there were a fist sized breach in the hull in a compartment, everything in that room would be sucked out into space through that fist sized hole; including human bodies. There is no possibility anyone could hold on, or dramatically reach for the control panel to shut the door or some crap like that. It would take all of about 4 seconds for all the atmosphere to get explosively vented into space; and what remained of human bodies would resemble long strips of frozen chunky pink foam.

[@MarcusSheppard]

Empty space doesn't have mass but you need more wall, floor and ceiling to contain a big empty room than a small one.

[@JoshKaufmanstuff]

@ 01:22 "Picard and Troy were protected by plot armor” LOLOLOL

[@victorhuertas4685]

actually the plot is what causes most of the damage this guys is far fetching at..since given the vastly advanced federation tech. the Enterprise never would find itself without shields or warp capabillity, abd the security issues are just as laughfable since the earth is founding member of the Fed. of Planets..and about 90% of other races could never move againts them with out them realizing probably months in advanced..but people would never really watch a show were then main vessel and race. are so superior to most others except for borg or Q, so all these weakness he talks about are writting in just to have a.......PLOT!

[@victorhuertas4685]

the enterprise was hijacked 1 in season by the binards and then in final season by mercenaries..that hardly constanly..get you facts together before you make farfetched videos..that is like saying NASA is a calamity of a dept. they had 1 fatal mission in all their years.

[@timeliebe]

@@victorhuertas4685 - "Rascals" where the Ferengi took over the ENTERPRISE was Season 6, so that's at least three times the ENTERPRISE was hijacked.

[@StevenErnest]

@@victorhuertas4685 NASA had 3 fatal missions: Apollo 1 was a test on the ground; then the two space shuttle disasters. Statistically that is still very, very few.

[@StevenErnest]

@@victorhuertas4685 In TOS they did get hijacked a lot, mainly with Auxiliary Control being taken over. So by the TNG era they'd learned something. ^_^

[@victorbruant389]

11: Wesley Crusher

[@Niiiiith]

Victor Bruant yeah replace him with Rey! We need a character with flaws

[@TrayTerra]

Bahahahaaa

[@kh29the13]

blackboy923 good joke

[@faltomjager5823]

Victor Bruant 12: families in general

[@phatpigeonii]

Shut up Wesley!

[@satinbarbi]

Duranium used to make hulls is an alloy metal comprised of half Crashium and half Explodium.

[@Kishandreth]

Engines on pylons is an engineering decision to maximize the use of their warp bubble. With their warp harmonics the nascells are in the correct place. Bridge is fine on top. Its the most protected area using the ships shields.

[@TheRazaah]

Best protected Area through shields ? Hmm... Except when the shields fail due to -sustained damage -Cyberwarfare -Frequency Bypass -Bleedthrough Damage -Power failure -shield piercing weaponry (i believe that was a thing in star trek at some point) -Space Anomalies (Nebulas, Singularities, Q) Dont forget the posibility of getting ambushed whit your pants/shields down and sabotage. Those are a lot of points that have their own probability to occur at any time. I would rather hug the warp core.

[@TomDLuv777]

Thank you for pointing that out. I was going to comment on that but then saw your comment.

[@admiralnelson7338]

Aren't warp nessels and the ship engine 2 different things because the engine is in the middle of the engineering hull

[@penguinpie5056]

that dude flying out of the bridge was a timeline of losing consciousness +15 seconds after entering vacuum, asphyxiating at +90s after entering vacuum, and something like +7mins where he could still be resuscitated. If the enterprise crew didn't beam him back on board, especially with the communicator badge signal, they're assholes.

[@darrelcrane5138]

Not so. When you are exposed to the vacuum of space, the cellular destruction with the expanding gases in your cells is like the bends, but beyond belief. You will die within a few seconds, you don't have an intact body that is slowly starving without oxygen. What sort of cellular reconstruction in the Star Trek universe I don't know, but the destruction of the body is pretty extensive.

[@deusexaethera]

@@darrelcrane5138: Incorrect. You don't die within seconds. Your skin stretches taut as your blood tries to boil, and that fucks up your circulation, which is bad if it continues for more than a couple minutes, but it also corrects itself as soon as air pressure is restored around your body. People have actually been exposed to hard vacuum in real life and lived to tell about it.

[@deusexaethera]

@De mon: It's actually even colder than - 270°C in some places, but it doesn't matter, because there's nothing to conduct heat away from your body. (also, fun fact: the few atoms in space are generally _thousands_ of degrees because they're moving so fast, but again there's very few of them so they have almost no effect on the temperatures of solid objects.) Heat loss in space occurs only through thermal radiation, which happens very slowly for an object that is only a few hundred degrees above absolute-zero. Thermal radiation doesn't become an efficient way to dissipate heat until an object gets close to red-hot. I'm sure you've noticed that an iron frying pan will remain hot to the touch for close to a half-hour after you finish cooking, and that's _including_ heat loss from air convection, which obviously doesn't apply in space -- partly because there's no air, and partly because there's no gravity to make convection work. That's why the International Space Station needs enormous radiators, almost as big as its solar panel arrays, to dissipate excess heat. The ISS could use much smaller radiators if they had high-temperature heat pumps to condense excess heat into a small white-hot radiator panel, but that would require more power consumption, and the ISS doesn't have much power to spare since it runs on solar panels and they aren't continuously exposed to sunlight. But I digress. The point is, a human would take hours to freeze to death, even in interstellar space -- suffocation would obviously be a much more immediate problem.

[@theldraspneumonoultramicro405]

@@darrelcrane5138 incorrect, in 1966 Jim Leblanc was testing a spacesuit in a vacuum chamber and was exposed to a complete vacuum for several seconds and survived without any damage at all, he only had a earache from the very rapid re-pressurization, it normally would have taken over 30 minutes but it was done just under 90 seconds, he lost his consciousness only briefly, we have since done more controlled tests with animals and have a pretty good understanding on how it works, and yes, we had a very good understanding of surviving in vacuum well before they even started filming star trek tng, it takes around 90 to 180 seconds for your heart to stop in vacuum of space, as far as testing goes, it is impossible with current tech to revive someone after that happens, so let's just apply the same rule here for the sake of simplicity, so they had at least 90 seconds on them to beam him back, and around 180 seconds at most. and sure, the guy will feel like shit, in fact, he will projectile vomit, pee himself and shit himself out there, and let's hope for his sake he was not exposed to the systems sun, that would be.. unpleasant... he would survive, sure... but i'm not so sure he would WANT to survive with the kind of sunburn you would get from direct sunlight in space, once back inside he will be temporarily blind and wont be able to move for a while, he will lose any sense of taste for a few days and he will have the mother of all earaches due to the extremely rapid change in pressure, but other then this he'll be just fine and back on duty within 24 hours. (unless his sense of taste is somehow vital for his duty, then it would take upwards of a week for him to get back, but i somehow doubt you need a sense of taste to be on the bridge)

[@davidrotheram3648]

but the transporters go down after they take a scratch and geordie aint going to do some magic for a red shirt

[@telengardforever7783]

I always thought the biggest flaw was that they never learn from the past or improve. For example: If an aircraft crashes anywhere in the world, the Aviation Safety Board investigates the issue and gives recommendations. All current aircraft are retrofitted and new aircraft will have it built-in. Starfleet never bothered to investigate why the bridge touch screens blow up like little bombs with shrapnel -- no matter how many times they blow. OR.. they flat out refuse to learn from the past. For instance: On the series 'Enterprise', there was a detachment of Marines even though it wasn't a battleship. Why did they drop that? In Star Trek: The New Generation, there is always some ship-based combat or hand-to-hand combat. Where were the Marines? I get that they didn't want the Marines at first because they were all about 'peace,' but come on!! You'd think after all firefights and the 100's of away missions that necessitated opening fire, you'd think they'd re-instate the Marines.

[@robinlillian9471]

If they stopped things from exploding where would they get the dramatic effect? What fun would that be? Since when are movies and television shows supposed to make sense?

[@azazelzel6954]

Star Wars had the same problem with an always exploding Death Star.

[@orionantares]

Clearly the answer is better training and equipment for the security personnel.

[@yosefmacgruber1920]

@@robinlillian9471 Maybe they want to keep CinemaSins busy/employed. It is free publicity after all. I love to hear the 100+ flaws in my favorite movies.

[@MichaelSuperbacker]

2:53 you are incorrect. The kids are the Adults, haha . but they were changed in a transporter accident! and about the saucer section.... i am pretty sure the explosion damaged the thrusters and impulse drive of the saucer section!

[@Eremon1]

Yes and yes. Added to the fact the saucer has extremely limited power given the warp engine is in the secondary hull.

[@KRAFTWERK2K6]

@ Michael Superbacker: It did. if he had watched the movie again they even STATE that the stability tech of the saucer section had been damaged and the ship was pretty much not controllable as they were pushed towards the planed after the Enterprise Warpcore exploded. Without the Planet nearby they might have had drifted around space for a while till they could have fixed it and stabilize the ships controls and maneuvering.

[@AJB2K3]

Agreed, his analysis is flawed.

[@bostonrailfan2427]

The explosion was also why they didn't use escape pods, there wasn't enough time and landing intact on the hospitable planet made it moot

[@mnementh2000]

The Technical manual stated the procedure for landing the saucer as a 'best' case scenario, which the movie most assuredly was not. The saucer relies on backup power for maneuvering and propulsion, which was damaged, and usually is provided power by the engineering hull. Also, the structural integrity field was not truly designed with atmospheric entry in mind. It was only as a last resort, and assumed the worst to begin with - that being the total loss of the ship. Again, the design of the saucer itself was not meant to include atmospheric flight for more than an emergency landing, unlike the Intrepid class.

[@nephetula]

"What other vehicle sticks it's engines out on a pylon???" Uhh...just most all large jets and airplanes.

[@drewjeers3301]

Donny Hinson yea I agree. The A-10 Warthog design purposely extends them so if one blowes up somehow it won't be as likely to damage rest of plane. And one may still be left in tact working

[@xxhellspawnedxx]

Many aircraft these days, and especially military aircraft, actually has most of the engine integrated in the main body of the ship, rather than having them hang off of the wings. Large jets tend to not integrate the engines, but for a good reason: It would take an absolutely humongous single engine to fly a 747 or the like, and most large jets are passenger planes besides, and need that space for people, luggage and so on. So there's a practical reason there. In the trek universe, however, we have several ships of varying sizes, with warp nacelles that are more or less integrated into the hull, or at least protected by it from most angles. Even just having them sitting directly on top of the hull makes more sense than having them jut out on struts, for no discernible reason. So it's a bit of an apples and oranges comparison there.

[@franklindavidson9193]

@@xxhellspawnedxx It would stand to reason that they're out on pylons to aid in fuel collection by the bussard scoops at the front of the nacelle. If you put them out of the ships slipstream (since they talk about spacial distortions when ships move) they can collect more fuel.

[@TheThomasites]

Plus, those aren't engines. They are equivalent to wheels on a car.

[@douggale5962]

Leave it to humans to assume they know more about where to place a warp engine than the engineers that designed the ship, while having next to zero knowledge of the subject. Something tells me you can't just throw them anywhere, most likely it takes an incredible amount of computation just to get the warp field to be compatible with the hull at all. Knowing engineering, there would be a trade-off, perhaps adjacent surfaces reduce efficiency or response time or something. There are probably failure modes where a damaged nacelle can throw off fields or debris which would be far less tolerable at point blank range.

[@wolfhunter98]

Omg finally someone brought up the lack of these crazy things call "Surge protectors".

[@BammerD]

The reason the saucer section crash landed was because the shock wave from the warp core breach caused it to. There was no time for the crew to get to the escape pods at that point.

[@Dream0Asylum]

I thought it was because the producers were tired of using cumbersome practical models.

[@Amyrayanne]

It would of taken at least 20 mins for it to impact though they had plenty of time its just plot device

[@AngelusClawtooth]

@@Amyrayanne The escape pods lacked the speed capability to get clear distance from the drive section before it blew. Had they gone to the escape pods, they would have died from the shockwave anyway hence why they weren't used.

[@Amyrayanne]

@@AngelusClawtooth you eject after it exploded geeze

[@jasonowens1551]

The saucer crashing they were gonna use for an 8th season episode they already had the art work for it paramount decided they needed more treak movies so they ended tng TV and began tng movies and reused the saucer crash landing for the first movie

[@alexbacon1444]

Have you looked at where the bridge is on current war ships and aircraft carriers?

[@dennisbode6106]

Current ships are not fighting in close combat. You can not aim for the enemy's bridge and think that you will hit it. We are shooting shells over a distance of several kilometers onto a moving target. Well, in an actual space battle the distance would be far greater, but in the Trek universe, the space ships are fighting close combat with near lightspeed particle weapons. They should hit where they aim.

[@Tinfoil_Hardhat]

@@dennisbode6106 You're still thinking of two battleships fighting each other. A modern navy battle would not be like that. Most ships carry smaller, higher velocity guns, along with a bunch of missiles. Aiming at a bridge with modern advanced targeting systems wouldn't be difficult at all.

[@jakehayes1998]

To be fair there is a internal control centre for the weapons aboard a ship.

[@Barnacules]

I love how the joystick came out of the floor also to control the ship while in a standing position completely unbraced. Would have made more sense for it to pop up out of the seat so he was atleast stationery during flight. I gotta give you that one.

[@battlesheep2552]

Well it wouldn’t be a problem if the inertial dampeners actually did their job

[@josephlewis347]

InstaBlaster...

[@EtwasMartin]

I'm not a fan of defending my fandom til death but you did overlook some things here. a.) The position of the bridge doesn't matter cause there are shield. Once the shields are gone, those weapons are going to tear apart a metal ship no matter what. Even the Duras Sisters know that... b.) Same goes for the Warp nacelles c.) The saucer section is capable of an emergency landing. That's it. Using the pods wasn't an option as the warp core breach was imminent and most people were already inside the saucer section. Also a pod wouldn't hold up that well against that shockwave. And the saucer section already took some heave damage from the fight and got tossed into the atmosphere by the shockwave. So making it that far is quite alright. d.) The Enterprise was a science and diplomacy ship planned in a time of peace. There was no real threat from the Klingons or Romulans at the time so the approach of building a massive ship for a long term mission with families on board wasn't seen as that big of a risk. So having big hallways and huge spaces helped to not have people feel cramped into a tight space. It really just shows hoch far Starfleet and the Federation have come. But Starfleet learned, Starfleet adapted, as you said yourself. e.) Yes, the Enterprise "carries" 35% of unused space but just look at past designs of earlier ship classes. The Constition class had to get a huge and several minor refits to keep up the with new technologies. The Excelsior class was already a step in the right direction but also got some big refits. So why not take the idea of planning ahead to the next level? That empty space wasn't meant to stay this way forever. I'd say: great design.

[@jacquesb5248]

actually there was a reason for warp nacelles being out like that on earlier designs. there was one class that was more battle than ship....was very very fast with little crew comforts

[@ndi4926]

One would imagine that the exterior engines are more efficient, thus the open design for the peace time vessel, more compact design for the fighters, _however_ , as Martin noticed above, it is canon that the vast majority of the defense is the shield and you were not supposed to run out. Another point (I am not familiar with the lore) is that they can "divert energy to structural integrity" which suggests that it is not made of dead structure and that it has an active components (shields? Compression? electro magnetic or dampening?) and, since in a battle all the energy would go into the shield, the structure would be compromised when it failed. Since one would assume that 1 Watt in shields is ALWAYS better than 1 watt in structural integrity, one would assume that once the shield failed the systems would essentially be drained. Thus, there is little reason to plan for complete failure when it is way better to plan for it not to fail. We have seatbelts and airbags because we crash, like, a lot. But an Enterprise class ship was never meant to be shaken, they have labs and children on board, it was probably designed to never fail. We know from the show that there are secondary and tertiary backups for all critical systems, what would be the point of seatbelts when you have an entire second ship dedicated to safety and if that fails it's essentially curtains? We don't have parachutes in commercial airplanes, we do in military. Commercial aircraft is designed to essentially not fail rather than fail gracefully.

[@Dancer-ms3me]

EtwasMartin : whoa, hold on. Not all what you say is correct. a) Yes it does matter, because Star Trek has had their fair share of battles in all time-lines, so making a bridge easy to target is a dumb move. To survive a battle requires command function of the ship and even though they were supposed to be explorers, ensuring they survive, as best possible, any confrontation means the bridge should have been moved, that even with shields gone (and that seems to happen a lot in the many episodes) the bridge should always be hard to destroy. b) Same goes for warp nacelles. They were very vulnerable. c) Your speaking of specific episodes and story lines that dictate events, so why make a ship totally useless? My understanding of Star Trek producers is they tried to make the show as scientifically accurate as possible. So why make a ship, even a saucer section useless, with the technology they had? I am sure they can figure out different drama storylines that fit the technology. I believe they were just friggin lazy. My understanding of what Generation Tech is talking about is the common sense design, the practical design, the functional design, the defensive and offensive design flaws that, irrespective of episode drama, should have been made. d) Again the drama element. So please stop trying to make sense of a drama storyline that had nothing to do with common sense and had everything to do with sensationalism. Any good captain would not take a ship, filled with families, to places of danger, yet Picard did and for Star Fleet to order a ship filled with families to danger spots shows a clueless command structure. .. but then again, I guess clueless politicians survived to the 25th century too. Hail Trump! :/ e) Think about it. 25th century technology cannot engineer a design that is similar to modular systems where they can remove a section and replace it with one that has new tech added, yet the ship maintains a solid (integrated) structure as a whole, ...really.

[@lenzielenski3276]

Incorrect. The nacelles have to be separated. Warp speeds are achieved by TWO over lapping but asymetrical fields (like the uniform emblem on TOS).

[@TheSeeker2013]

@@lenzielenski3276 : Let me guess, you are clueless and don't watch much Star Trek. You forget that there were MANY ships that have NO nacelles like the Enterprise design and still travel at warp. One such famous ship was the USS Defiant in the Star Trek "Deep Space 9" series. Then, there was the famous Borg cubes, traveling at warp chasing Enterprise and winning the chase. Need I say more?

[@liamrichardson98]

Ben is back!!!!!! Woohoo!!!!!!!!!!!!

[@ratbat1072]

*British Ben

[@themaverickprepper8690]

It's the Klingon ships that only have one bathroom. Why do you think they always look so angry and constipated?

[@SweetBearCub]

@trha2222 Damn people, can't we enjoy non-political stuff without bringing political references into it?

[@tomservo5347]

I could imagine their bowel movements are like their mating rituals-lots of screaming involved and smells that would make a human pass out.

[@kev3d]

Eat a bad serving of Gagh and it feels like Kahless and Morath having a bat'leth tournament in one's guts.

[@gb1701]

This would be especially tragic since Klingons (or at least Worf) are fond of prune juice. But I imagine since elimination makes one vulnerable (just observe how animals try to find a spot away from predators), Klingons likely see defecation as a sign of weakness and thus dishonorable.

[@Karen1963Yorks]

On the old enterprise there was a toilet for every crew member. That way they could go boldly where no man had gone before.

[@Bit01]

10:05 That cross shape next to Data's hand is a basically a flat touch screen joystick for manual maneuvering. Also a lot of the maneuvers are pre-programmed into the navigation system so a good pilot could just select one and hit execute on the panel. The ship will fly itself through the complete maneuver while the pilot/Captain observe the tactical situation as it changes and plan their next moves.

[@battlesheep2552]

Yeah, bridge placement never made sense. What’s the point of putting it on the exterior of the ship if you’re going to use viewscreens for everything?

[@after_midnight9592]

Same shit as the Star wars ISD. Dig the bridge deep into the belly of the ship. FFS, how hard is that?

[@battlesheep2552]

After_Midnight at least ISD makes sense, because they do seem to use the windows, but Federation starships just have a skylight.

[@rickyhall7514]

It's because the bridge is traditionally in the top deck. Taken from centuries of sea vessels, the belief is the bridge looks over and protects the rest of the ship. And although it doesn't make much sense for a starship, there is cannon which stated the bridge is the most protected place on the ship.

[@Scripture-Man]

I like the Bridge being on top, and I'll give you seven reasons why… 1. Having the Bridge on the ship's hull is dramatically better as it means we can always see the Bridge when the ship flies past the camera. 2. It would seem wrong for command to be in the middle. Command is always "top down" - just like your head sits at the very top of the body. 3. The Bridge actually did have a window. Plus, there was a window in the Ready Room, and many windows in the Observation Lounge (clue in the name). You wouldn't get any of those windows if the Bridge had been deep inside the ship. 4. The Bridge may be an "easy target", but so are most of the ship's other vital systems. The fact is that a direct hit _anywhere_ is bad. That's why they have shields. (And it wasn't primarily designed for combat.) 5. In the Star Trek universe, almost all ships follow the convention of travelling along the galactic plane, which means ships always encounter one another from the side rather than from above or below. This actually puts the location of the bridge at a hard-to-reach location, since enemy weapons will typically eminate from _below_ the saucer section. 6. Common sense states that during combat with an enemy ship, the Enterprise will always be positioned with the ventral side (weapons) toward the enemy, rather than the dorsal (top) side. This actually puts the Bridge as far away from the enemy as possible. 7. Just because the Bridge sits on the hull, that doesn't mean it's easily damaged. Presumably, the bulkheads enclosing the Bridge (including the transparent alloy windows) would be extremely thick and robust - specially designed to resist heavy attack. The principle is that if you secure your Bridge well enough, it shouldn't matter _where_ you place it. And this proved to be true, since we saw countless attacks on the Enterprise D but never saw a hull breach on Deck 1. So I like the Bridge being where it is! :)

[@after_midnight9592]

@@Scripture-Man Thanks, great info. Yeah, with 1 on 1 ship positioning, you can always keep your enemy in front and below. Strafing and funneling in all three dimensions gives many tactical options in space dogfights.

[@Znarfman]

8:50 Real UFO's, had me actually laughing.

[@FabledGentleman]

Well they are. Those object in those images aren't identified. Thus they are Unidentified flying objects ^^

[@falselysuspended8085]

Me too. Those verified and real UFOs with their efficient and economical designs. Speaking of effeciency; the warp core, nacelles and ward fields don't seem to have a problem with all that dead space. My manual got stolen years ago but wasn't cruise speed 9.97?

[@HuntingTarg]

@@falselysuspended8085 No, maximum cruise speed (that could be sustained indefinitely until fuel exhaustion) was 7 or 7.2 . Speeds of warp 8 and above were limited to the effectiveness of the Warp Core / Plasma Conduit coolant system. This comes up in "Yesterday's Enterprise" and "Best of Both Worlds" part -one- two.

[@HuntingTarg]

@De mon "UFO" /= Extraterrestrial craft. However any commercial pilot who actually reports a UFO (yes, there is a report form for that) is effectively ending his career and credibility. 'We are humans!, we know everything about our planet!'

[@falselysuspended8085]

HuntingTarg yeah I googled after posting the comment and immediately felt like an idiot. I think I was confused by Star Trek Online which is an appalling thing to admit to.

[@mustang6172]

The "Manual Steering Column" is a Gravis Blackhawk. I know because I had one when I first saw the movie. When I saw that being used to steer the ship I thought, "That is dumb." I was 13.

[@BlitzvogelMobius]

One thing I really liked about Gundam was that crews aboard large ships would often go into combat wearing space suits incase of a hull breach. Granted they didn't have force fields of the likes of Star Trek, but it always confounded me that other shows didn't follow suit.

[@dochtuirrussell]

Looking forward to your "Klingon Sisters with Nice Jugs" tee shirt

[@pbcoop62]

Klingon Kleavage!

[@310McQueen]

[Panel on the bridge explodes] Fuses, people! Fuses are your friends! Use them!

[@_WillCAD_]

Fuses? How about something from the 20th century, like circuit breakers.

[@KRAFTWERK2K6]

Resistors are futile.

[@Karen1963Yorks]

@@KRAFTWERK2K6 Sorry I have no capacitors for humour.

[@bostonrailfan2427]

@@Karen1963Yorks watts the matter? That gave me a spark of humor, ohm telling you that's funny!

[@PhilJonesIII]

Keep it down you guys: We will have the transformers next.

[@1701spacecadet]

Bridge position: bridges are a modular unit. When upgrading the systems Starfleet simply unplugs it, removes the whole bridge, then slots in the new one. Space: the crews and passengers could be on the ship for months or years. Starfleet vessels are roomy to keep morale up and prevent psychological claustrophobia developing.

[@richardscathouse]

Better yet! Leave the snowflakes (and Westley) HOME!

[@snonsig2688]

@@richardscathouse *SHUT UP WHESTLEY* That's why i love jake and nog so much. Jake suprised everyone by becoming a writer and not joining SF and nog (also suprising everyone by joining) actally had some difficulties in the arcademy unlike westley who was pretty much just 23rd cent. Albert einstein that makes stupid decitions here and there

[@yunofun]

You can still have a modular bridge unit while burying it in the hull of the ship, just have to remove a bit of armor first...

[@762rk95tp]

It also has lot to do with Gene Roddenberry demanding to make TNG Enterprise twice as long as TOS Enterprise. That increased internal volume a lot, eight fold when compared to original. While the crew also was bigger, they weren't allowed to have as big crew as increased internal volume would have allowed, just twice as big crew. As result every crew members quarters is actually a like three room apartment and there are recreational lounges everywhere. Main shuttlebay is big enough to make idea of federation having dedicated carriers completely redundant. Main shuttlebay was never shown in the show because it would have been way too expensive to build the set even partially and using matte painting as background.

[@skybattler2624]

The last part is actually problematic... The same problem is observed in nuclear subs but how did they fight it? Add entertainment luxuries in it.

[@senseweaver01]

Easy to steal? You'd need to deal with 1,600 crewmembers, bypass ever security code, unlock the control mechanisms, and hope that no one decides to lock you out remotely. What are you talking about?

[@barrybend7189]

Ten Flaws with the Battlestar Galactiga.

[@indianajones4321]

Barry Bend that could be a whole series with also Cylon ships

[@anamericancelt6534]

First Cylon War or Second Cylon War? If second, my first one would be that she's missing much of her armor plating.

[@barrybend7189]

@@anamericancelt6534 that's because she was getting mothballed and through partial decommissioning. It was being converted to a museum ship at the time the Cylons attacked the 12 colonies.

[@casbot71]

The Pegasus, now that was a ship. Although not just pure battle ship as it also had fighter manufacturing faculties and a training simulator for teaching new pilots. So a pure combat vessel of the same size could outdo it. Unfortunately it's armour wasn't as good, lacking "plot".

[@markplott4820]

TEN flaws of Space Battleship Yamato.

[@R17inator]

Still a less exposed bridge than the ISD's.

[@Jfk2Mr]

Yet ISD and SSD (or other Kuat warship) bridge is not dangerous place to serve unlike Federation designs

[@kh29the13]

Kuba Król yes there is a big pit for the commander to fall in if he trips and the pit is full of hard pointy metal objects. Perfectly safe

[@commanderknight9314]

@@kh29the13 it is not that high a fall. Also star wars ships don't shaken about the same way star trek ships do by anything and panels don't randomly explode.

[@snonsig2688]

@@Jfk2Mr *cough* executor *cough*

[@casbot71]

@ValorJ Omega Ah yes, Jar Jar Trek. It was set in a alternate timeline, unlike episodes 7 and 8… …

[@juiceski30]

Yeah, no seat belts is a big oversight considering how many people I have seen die, just on ships named enterprise.

[@SWIFTO_SCYTHE]

I dont see seatbelts on actual warships like world war 2 or modern ships. Of course these are naval vessals and star trek is 360 degree XYZ 3d space combat but still...

[@deusexaethera]

@@SWIFTO_SCYTHE: Submarines are the closest comparison we have, and they all have seatbelts on the bridge.

[@CyberlightFG]

Don't wear a red shirt. You'll be safe.

[@jetjazz05]

I'd like to see the inertial dampeners fail just once when they're flinging that ship around, everyone would liquify and ooze into the walls lol.

[@joshuaknight6551]

Why is tactical STANDING !?!?!

[@senseweaver01]

You don't keep torpedoes loaded in at all times. They might have ten loaded at most at a time. Like you don't have all your assault rifle clips stuffed into the magazine at the same time, you have the extra clips kept elsewhere. So their losing ten torpedoes. If you need to use hundreds of torpedoes to kill a ship, you won't win with ten more.

[@jdysay]

I would argue the saucer section didn't have a controlled landing in Generations because its primary systems were damaged from the warp core explosion. P.S. I'm excited Ben is back!

[@DaKidSiriusBlak]

Im surprised no one else realized that

[@jimtilley1158]

@@DaKidSiriusBlak Data ealized the second he lost control LOL Oh Shit!!!

[@Someone-ci8wf]

But even the manual (Which he showed) says it should land like this. Or did I miss something?

[@DaKidSiriusBlak]

Doesn't really matter... Regardless of how it lands, it won't be going back up again.

[@Killerspieler0815]

@J. Dyson Saylors - YES & also because 1701-D destruction & disaster was needed for ST7

[@OneKindWord]

5:04 Correct spelling is "frequency" 8:00 Two spelling errors in the same word! Correct spelling is "inefficient" 9:02 Two spelling errors in the same phrase! Correct spelling is "equals" and "inefficiency"

[@batmanlaughed800]

You’re kind of an asshole aren’t ya?

[@zdcyclops1lickley190]

The purpus of language is communikashun. “It is a damn poor mind that can think of only one way to spell a word.” Andrew Jackson. You are laboring under a misapprehension. There is NO SUCH THING as correct spelling. There is no authority that decides how words are spelled oir what they mean. The compilers of dictionaries list the most common meanings and spellings.

[@ouroboris]

Many of the "flaws" are necessary to allow cameras and production crews access to the interior of the ship set and to create exciting visuals, something that wouldn't be possible if the ship was designed to your exacting, if sensible, standards. But I laughed hard at the "landing just like Voyager" bit. Touche.

[@markplott4820]

Actually the Ent D and other Starfleet vessels are a Efficient use of Space, the Corradors have Hidden Behind them , all the plumbing, power distribution, communications and the Backup systems , as well as Emergency Survival Gear. and some Corradors lead to the Escape Pods.

[@BlackEpyon]

In the movie, "K19: The Widowmaker," they just ran a raised pipe the entire length of the corridor, so they could just run the camera along on a trolley, and it looks like part of the rest of the plumbing.

[@annoyed707]

@@BlackEpyon Exactly. How many successful navy movies have been made that never suffered from their realistic use of ship space?

[@ErzengelDesLichtes]

“Even my car has airbags” Yet in movies, cars don’t have airbags, and seatbelts just serve to trap people inside a car while it catches fire and explodes. If it weren’t for rule of drama, the bridge would be a lot safer.

[@0Deimos0]

and if you compare the speeds a space vessel like the D reaches.. if your dampers are failing your seat belts wouldn't help when you are accelerated that fast only a pile of organic matter would remain :D

[@indianajones4321]

British Ben is BACK!

[@Marcus51090]

His life as an MI6 spy takes him a far

[@math3000]

@@Marcus51090 you mispelled Imperial Naval Officer

[@michaelstark8720]

I thought that Allen found out that Ben is Alien that mimic humans so he make sure that Ben was not found. It would be reasonable with Allen "humanity first" policy

[@indianajones4321]

Michael Stark lol

[@Marcus51090]

Michael Stark he’s a founder lol

[@Shadowofwampyre]

The next Star Trek ship should be "USS Defiant 1 and 2" in Star Trek: Deep Space 9

[@casbot71]

Thought that as soon as Ben mentioned the exposed bridge. It was buried in the hull and as for the Nacelles … I read somewhere that it was to usher in a new design paradigm for the Federation with future ships having internal bridges, and Nacelles blended into the hull similar to the Steamrunner and Sabre classes. But that was at the end of the movie/TV production and before Star Trek Online came along and decided to use the same old designs with sleeker angles. It would have been interesting to see the Defiant layout upscaled for larger multirole ships in the future. While there would have been outrage from the base and casuals, imagine if the Sovereign class had been a streamlined larger saucer with the Nacelles blended in armoured housings on the sides. It's how Starfleet would 'realistically' build a dedicated large warship post Dominion war. Just and phaser cannons in turrets. After all the Defiant is really just a compacted version of the standard setup, everything is brought in to the main body.

[@ceilyurie856]

@@casbot71 according to the technical specs, the Defiant does have ohaser arrays, 4 type IX or X.. Two on the nacellses, two below, and positioned so they can fire aft. Even though that thing is manueverable like a fighter craft...

[@casbot71]

@@ceilyurie856 The phaser cannons in turrets (or at least aimible mounts) was for a theoretical large warship based on a scaled up Defiant, where aiming something Sovereign sized would be difficult no matter how maneuverable. Of course this same ship would have standard phaser strips as well, plus a fuckton of torpedoes and missiles and maybe other goodies. As for the actual Defiant, best footage of the phasers in action was the mirror universe defiant taking on a Klingon heavy cruiser in close straffing runs. 🖖

[@martinhanke1670]

Don't forget, the defiant also had cloaking. It kicks ass.

[@lukasperuzovic1429]

The Defiant was supposed to be a short range Escort ship, such as a corvette to protect the flanks of fleet formations and to provide additional security to more valuable and target prone asset ships. It was never intended to be a destroyer which they ended up using it as in DS9.

[@lucianoduarte891]

British Ben, you're alive!!

[@dominichoughton8119]

Video asks what puts their engines out on pylons. Answer: Most large planes, including military transports.

[@Shadowbat.o_O]

Good response.

[@Shadowbat.o_O]

That also encompasses the vulnerability of an exposed bridge on modern naval warships.

[@UkrainianPaulie]

The guy who made the original models was told by Gene that if one nacelle exploded it didn't take out the other one.

[@Shadowbat.o_O]

@@UkrainianPaulie That's like driving a Corvette and suddenly four cylinders stop working

[@target844]

@@Shadowbat.o_O The bridge on a modern naval warship is exposed because people look out trough the windows. Observation of the surrounding with eyes and binoculars is still done. But ship also have a Combat information center (CIC) that is less exposed where radar and other sensor system are used. In Star Trek they use viewing screen for external observation and not the windows in almost all cases so they should put it like you put a CIC on a warship. When you bild warships with armor like old battleship there was thickly armored inner part in the conning tower and on the Iowa class it had 17 inch armors. So warships today are not build as stupid as the one in Star Trek. The bride is exposed because that windows and a high observation position is useful and used in a way it is not in Star Trek.

[@nunyabeeswax303]

Having wide corridors on a ship you may be on for 5 year missions would be helpful with crew comfort and mental health stability. The bridge positions dont really matter once shields are gone the ship is lost. Same with the warp nacelles its not really going to matter after the shields are gone the ship is toast! Do need seat belts to ensure that the loss of inertia damping system does cause people to become missiles.

[@Custerd1]

Nun Ya Beeswax And realistically, the wide corridors were necessary so that the camera dollies could fit...

[@TheRezro]

"Having wide corridors on a ship you may be on for 5 year missions would be helpful with crew comfort and mental health stability" That alongside the fact that spongy construction of Federation star-ships was in fact a advantage, as any hit make 50% less probable to destroy critical equipment (what commonly happen on crawdad Klingon ships). It is why they could be such damage sponges. That beside fact that those Cruisers were designed as explorers, so they need space for storage and modulanty. Edit: I should clarify also that it is mostly due to Federation regulation, as it in fact resembled post World War Europe with different parts of it being paranoid over militaristic intentions of other members. Especially humans and they Starfleet what push regulations to they limits, as humans in fact were militaristic in nature what terrified other members (what wasn't unjustified fear as that is exactly what happened with Terran Empire in alternative universe.. though repainted designs have no sense). Later it become irrelevant with Starfleet traditional role as space police, especially in relations to outside threats. "he bridge positions dont really matter once shields are gone the ship is lost" Still bad argument. Sometimes damage breach shield and position of the bridge make it susceptible to coincidental damage. What as we do know was in fact common. Considering that they have huge monitor, there was no reason to keep bridge on top. It should be in deepest place possible. What I would place of top would be a recreation area. Good view and good dummy target. "Do need seat belts to ensure that the loss of inertia damping system does cause people to become missiles" Or at least magnetic locks or independent inertia system for bridge (and I know that is for purpose of drama). After all command crew was most important part of the ship. Though if you ask my I still don't get why they didn't give personal shields to a crew? That would explain why they run in pajamas in hostile planets so easily and in fact was a thing in Star Trek Online.

[@Tilion462]

The Bridges of Federation Starships were commonly designed to be a replaceable module so that key upgrades could easily be made to the most critical systems. In addition, the early bridges (and top couple of decks) of new Galaxy-class ships were a self-contained lifeboat for the shakedown crew to live in and if need be, escape to safety.

[@LieshaCichol]

Body motion trace system to pilot a ship? Are you expecting Enterprise D to go Macross assault mode or something? (meanwhile aboard Macross, they were using track ball to control pin point barrier)

[@LieshaCichol]

@@DarkAlex1978 Starfleet Gundam Fight! in other words, it's Macross Fight :-p

[@oaktree2406]

That's Robotech, get it right! 😜

[@DarkAngelGuyver]

@@oaktree2406 They did get it right ;)

[@dankuser8303]

Many of these flaws such as the bridge, security, etc, are probably because the Enterprise (and most other Starfleet ships) weren’t warships.

[@snonsig2688]

How would it not being a warship explaim the bridge?

[@bjmaguire6269]

@@snonsig2688 - In diplomacy it could be important for highly hierarchical or symbolism centric cultures to observe that the Captain is enthroned at the highest part of the ship and that all are below. For that reason I would expect to see the Captain's quarters to be on the same or higher level than the diplomatic guest's quarters, and all the crew's quarters below that. Or of course...TRADITIOOON, tradition...

[@willstikken5619]

@@snonsig2688 It doesn't but naval or in this case star fleet tradition does. Unless you're in the JJ verse where they still rely on windows the bride placement doesnt make sense on most star trek ships regardless of era.

[@richardbale481]

True Republican. Which is why, in modern naval vessels, command during battle is transferred to a more protected Combat Information Center.

[@jeremypnet]

@@bjmaguire6269 Well it's a flaw, not so much of the Enterprise but of the whole Star Trek universe, that space ships have such a concept as "high up". There's no up in space and there's no reason to design a space ship as if there is.

[@dtsdigitalden5023]

Good lord man. What's with the spelling? Loved the video, but this kept happening: 5:03 "frequancy" 7:59 "Ineficent" 9:02 "Equels inficiency"

[@ssranon]

Hookd on Foniks werked grate fer them.

[@jasondecyk6361]

"obsturcted" in the thumbnail The frequancy of ineficent spelling equels a highly obsturcted ability to enjoy this video. Unacceptable!! Dislike!!

[@doug2060]

Dude can't even spell, yet talks shit about ship design.

[@jamespescatore7786]

Prometheus Multi-vector (prime) and the Icarus class (from sto)

[@adm_ezri]

Icarus is basically just a non canon slightly zoomier defiant with slightly less actual info about it, so I would expect even if non canon ships were to be critiqued, it'd be something more unique. The Prometheus however, I'd love to see on this show.

[@dgenem007]

You did overlook some major engineering problems. Season 2, episode 11 "Contagion" it is stated the computer automatically dumps the antimatter to prevent a containment breach, saving the ship. That is true with the emergency warp core ejection as well. These systems NEVER seem to work! In Generations, they both fail. You do not even hear them mention an attempt to try either. Just, "Oh well, that last torpedo killed it. We give up." In many TNG episodes involving alternate timelines and realities, they fail. Are all the emergency systems out of order in engineering LaForge? Why is it sparks fly out everywhere during the slightest hit? It is like there are very weak, poorly insulated, and exposed high power conduits running everywhere on the bridge. It makes zero logical sense to have that much power running through it. If anything, the bridge in the future should have very little power actually going through it. If we can run touch screens off 5 and 12 volts of DC, I am pretty sure they can run the controls and lights with the same or likely less power than today. So why is there so much power running everywhere through it? And that also leads to the exploding consoles. I think everyone agrees on that one the most! We have surge protectors today. Our touch screens do not explode either, with the exception of defective lithium-ion batteries in some cell phones or laptops. In the future. it is like they explode if somebody sneezes on them! Are they made out of recycled TOS red shirts or Storm Trooper armor? You are right. The nacelles, while not technically the engines are seriously flawed in design. They should have some beefed up armor or protection, as well as the bridge. As we saw when the Boseman just lightly brushed the starboard nacelle and ended up destroying the ship. Seriously? Do they not have some sort of surge protection or cutoffs or for warp plasma? Then the emergency warp core shutdown fails. That is like not being able to shut your car off when you have a damaged tire and your car explodes. The warp core ejection system never seems to work. And then again, the antimatter dump failed. It is like all the engine safety protocols do not work!

[@kev3d]

I think the only system that works with any consistency is gravity control. Lights flicker, panels explode, the Holodeck becomes lethal, the fire suppression system fails, the replicator screws up orders, life support stops working, shields get penetrated, the computer contracts a virus, and the warp core doesn't eject. But gravity? That shit is tight.

[@AJB2K3]

The system was damaged rendering both auto and manual release impossible.

[@Cramblit]

@@AJB2K3 yea but even todays passenger liners, and airplanes have back ups to back ups, and that's before you even get to government vehicles, and the military, which normally have complete fail safes incase all 3-4 back ups fail.. To think that the USS Enterprise would go out into those situations, and supposed to be deep exploration to boot and a scientific ship exploring god knows what, with virtually no backs ups to any of its system is just asinine and ridiculous lol.

[@AJB2K3]

@@kev3d you can have 20 backups but if the mechanical releases are jammed (fused in this case) all backups are pointless.

[@gargoyles9999]

Daniel Miller I think Voyager had the worst where the Manual Override to open the doors goes offline with the rest of the ship

[@cherubin7th]

I disagree 3 things: - In 24 you would use computer AI to maneuver and not faulty human joy stick control. - Space is cheap in 24 century, especially if it is not a war ship and the Enterprise is non. - Why is there an apple monitor in the background? Didn't Star Trek teach you anything about moral economics?

[@mrduckman225]

Lol good burn with the Apple comment

[@sarahmosbey8256]

"A bunch of kids" who included the captain, another bridge officer and a 100 year old El-Aurian!

[@TheBioWanderer151]

LOL the USS Enterprise NCC 1701-D only flaw/weakness is plot convenience =P

[@rco1430]

Finally someone made a video talking about the biggest flaw in federation vessels- the fact that they use nitroglycerin in their control panels. Heck if they accidentally scratch the paint getting out of spacedock some panel would probably explode somewhere killing a dozen crew members. If the Federation switched to LCDs they would save hundreds of millions of lives a year. This would be the greatest lifesaving measure the federation undertook since they decided to stop having lower ranked away team members wear red shirts. Putting an extra couple of layers of security on the holodecks saftey overrides might not be such a bad idea either.

[@richardrobinson1651]

Exploding controls are never fully explained; [Picard] "'Commander Data, take the con. Ensign Nobody, stand next to those pyrotechnics'".

[@sloggnznorgin6285]

Richard Robinson Only so many fuses and redundancies to repel all that energy being flung around I guess. I remember when my house was struck by lightning once, half the lights and electronics on one side of the house were wrecked. Some bulbs actually exploded.

[@morxas1513]

"Brisge is an easy target" hmmm show me any naval ship of todays era that hasn't got an exposed bridge...

[@finnl6887]

Or any era. Sailing ships didn't keep their officers below deck

[@ninofromkitchennightmares1497]

Because today we don’t have the tech to allow people to be in a Secure area while control a ship

[@minecat1839]

Imperial Star Destroyer

[@MrDemon700]

Battlestar galactica

[@dataexpunged3914]

Show me a naval ship that's suitable for space combat

[@TruePacifist201]

Ben. You're back!

[@billmilligan7272]

1:44 - "inertial DAMPERS". You got it right. On behalf of all humanity, thank you for not calling them "dampeners".

[@cozmothemagician7243]

I am NOT going to make a pun about Pampers.. I PROMISE.. I WILL NOT. Not even going to mention diapers. (; /snark

[@Perktube1]

@@cozmothemagician7243 you read my mind. I was thinking that before I read the replies. Im used to dampeners.

[@joshuaewalker]

Literally and grammatically both are correct. It's just that one can also mean "to make wet". No big deal since inertia is not something that can be made wet so, in context, there cannot be any confusion using "dampener" instead of "damper".

[@linuxoperatingsystem6402]

10 Features that made the TIE Defender the best TIE.

[@Uzzy66]

RE: The Joystick. In my experience in maneuvering industrial robots, I much prefer the 12+ button set-up of Fanuc robots over the joystick set-up on ABB robots. Jus' sayin'.

[@perryrhodan2037]

It doesn't matter where you put the bridge. Especially in ST, where the most stuff is treated with the shields, but hey, just the same old thing - brought up every time ^^

[@76TomD]

Exactly, you lose shields, it doesn't matter where on the ship the bridge is. Torps and energy weapons easily carve up any hull

[@magnvss]

"Real UFO's" lol, don't know if that was an inside joke.

[@alex_saint-matthews]

magnvss it could have been a joke, but as Neil De Grasse Tyson would remind us, the ‘U’ in U.F.O. stands for ‘Unidentified.’ So , it could be real, could be fake, could be alien, could be terrestrial, we simply don’t know because it’s unidentified.

[@andrewholdaway813]

Pretty sure it was

[@Scripture-Man]

The joke is that he's speculating on the "design" of UFOs - if you know they're spacecraft, then they're no longer UFOs. That's the "joke". Whether it was a joke or not, I'm not sure. UFOs are certainly a real phenomenon, but I find it unlikely that they're ET spacecraft.

[@Miss__Understands]

> don't know if that was an inside joke. Never attribute to subtle highbrow humor anything that can be explained by stupidity.

[@Bynk333]

Hes known more as he says. :-)

[@DimitryRotstein]

They don't need efficient UI/UX ship controls, if only because the ship has a super-advanced voice-operated computer. Moreover, after centuries of space operations almost any conceivable maneuver has been pre-programmed into the autopilot. All they need to do is to specify which maneuver to use and the ship will fly itself. And that's exactly what they do - Picard and Riker say things like "attack pattern Delta", "dispersal pattern Sierra", or simply "evasive maneuvers". The pilot only has to press one button and the ship will do the rest. Yes, in some ludicrously unusual situations you need to adjust the maneuver, like rolling the ship sideways to fly through a narrow opening in the Dyson Sphere, or to carefully navigate manually through a complex maze like tunnels inside an asteroid or a space mine field, but even then buttons are better - they are more precise than an analog joystick. In any case, such a huge ship can't be maneuverable enough to respond to a joystick. The joystick use in "Insurrection" was a stupid cop-out.

[@annoyed707]

Sure, rely on 'Commander Cortana' to interpret your instructions. What could possibly go wrong...

[@DimitryRotstein]

If you watched any episode of TNG, you should know that they fixed voice control. Well, after 300 years of additional development, what did you expect?

[@CathrineMacNiel]

Also those directional pads on the lcars interface are more than enough to fly manually.

[@theexchipmunk]

@@DimitryRotstein Its already getting there. Give it another decade and text to speech and voice recognition is going to be so good you will have trouble to differentiate between machine and human.

[@RagicaltheUnhallowedKnight]

Well as long as Cortana, Google Girl and type-correction are changing my ducks into fucks, I'll remain skeptical😅

[@stevenwilliams1805]

All pretty good points, some of them funny. But I have to say my second favorite Federation ship, next to the Voyager.

[@HappisakVideos]

Plot armour always wins. How many videos, discussing, talking etc about various spaceships from various franchises miss that one vital thing. If it cant work within the confines of artistic license, then common sense will fail. :D

[@KnightMage]

In regards to the unused space this could be a nod to someone in starship design that thought ahead. Should the ships ever be needed for war, and they were and after the war with the Dominion started the Galaxy class did preform well. That extra space could be used to redundant power relays to the phasers, extra torpedoes; and with a little internal redesign the sections could be placed near each other and have life support cut off to them - machinery doesn't need life support - and life support could be returned for repairs. That could be a whole deck with out life support during battle, saving power for the ships other systems. That space, could also be split between extra power needs, extra storage, and extra medical facilities or crew facilities. Just because the explorer doesn't need that space, doesn't mean it can't be upgraded when needed.

[@theexchipmunk]

Most Star Fleet vessels were canonically highly modular. Thats also the reason why ship classes that by the time of TNG were about 100 years old were still used.

[@trueshy]

On several episodes of Voyager they use extra space/ cargo bays for everything under the sun. They turn extra space into a holodeck or for refugee quarters. Extra space is a needed tool when you are faced with the unknown & no one around that wants to or can help you. It's literally helped saved lives on various ships in there various series. I don't know why you are knocking it if you've seen even one of the series.

[@Riceball01]

Built in extra space is something that they do with real world warships and is perfectly logical and smart thing to do. The reason for extra space is to expand the lifespan of the ship, the extra space is there for the addition of new, unforseen tech to be added to the ship as needed. This way, if you come up with a new widget that's part of either a new class of ship or just a newer version of an existing class, you can add this same widget to these older ships to keep them more up to date. It's also there in case a new version of an existing system comes out but is larger than the older, existing version, extra space would allow you to install this new system without having to worry about where you would get the needed space. It's because of extra built in space that the USN has been able to keep the Burke class destroyers in service for so long and it's because they've started to run out of extra space, along with their age, that the USN is looking to replace the Burkes. The same thing happened with the 688 Los Angeles class subs, they, as a class, are not only old but they've ran out of room for further upgrades; as it stands there's not even enough room left for every crew member to have their own bunk and the lower enlisted actually have to share bunks with fellow crewmates with each sailor assigned to a bunk taking turns sleeping in it.

[@Chrontius]

Even in the future, VLS cells would serve the ship well.

[@dastaube1700]

Please do 10 great things about the Enterprise E!

[@c4vengineering]

Same

[@snonsig2688]

Like: as many decks as you want!

[@Calm_Energy]

great video, I never realized many of the flaws you pointed out. Also loved the Mac with the "passing through the stars" screensaver in the background

[@sinonkryze3638]

hey generation tech you should next give us the types of crew in the ship and the diff color uniforms mean in the starfleet navy and which is the better fleet star warsverse or star fleetverse type of fleet?

[@danielrenner9597]

simple: redshirt means blood stai- I mean expendable security, Yellow means incompetent/ reckless officer such as captain Kirk, Blue means medical/ science related. Various exceptions apply such as Lt Uhura. Daniel Renner does not take credit for the information above, all credit goes to JT Kirk recording studio and Spook recording studio

[@Jfk2Mr]

Star Wars - in case of the Empire generally olive green or gray uniforms were for army and navy, black was for fighter corps, stormtroopers and ISB soldiers/NCO while white for ISB officers. White uniforms with gold details - grand admirals. However there are very many inconsistencies in rank indications. Also Rebels animated show is very inconsistent in who has which uniform colour

[@sinonkryze3638]

thanks for the reply guys and by the way anyone know the list of ranks of the jedi order and classes

[@adm_ezri]

TOS: red is engineering, security, operations Blue is medical & science Gold is command & helm personnel TNG: red is command Yellow is engineering, operations & security Blue is medical and science. I think the TNG scheme applies in VOY and DS9 (as they're in the same era). I don't know about ENT. In DSC they all wear very similar uniforms, but a black badge denotes specops (a mix between security and M.A.C.O.) and a white/silver uniform is worn by medical personnel. The stripes down the side of the uniform in DSC show the wearer's rank, as well as pips on their badge. (Note that in DSC the badges are not commbadges). The stripes also show their field: Gold for command Silver for science Bronze for operations If you're wondering anything else about the uniforms for trek I'll try and answer, but for star wars I know little, yet here goes... Stormtroopers always wear the white armour, but different types have different features, such as air filters on a sandtroopers back, or specialist helmets for snow troopers. Some troops on tatooine are shown with coloured cloths on their shoulder, these can be orange or white, and they denote rank, however all stormtroopers are NCOs (non commissioned officers). The actual officers don't get armour but a grey uniform with a badge that shows (iirc) their rank, however it looks like this may also show any commendation stripes (effectively, it's a different system but that's what it looks like). The imperial navy wears black uniforms, from pilots of tie fighters with their black spacesuit to navy officers with a black uniform. Navy troops wear a lighter black armour/uniform, with a black helmet comparable to the helmets worn by rebel soldiers. Grand admirals (like Thrawn) wear white, with gold trim (such as their gold epaulettes). They also wear the rank badges, not that they need them imo. As for jedi ranks: Newest recruits are known as younglings. They are young children that rarely leave the temple for most of their time in this position they only have a training lightsaber which is significantly less dangerous. They then progress to be a padawan, which is like an apprentice to one of the following ranks, learning in the field with their own lightsaber. Jedi knights make up the majority of jedi. Anakin was a knight, but he was given a seat on the council, this was unusual and done to help spy on Sheev. Jedi masters are members of the council, the are experienced and wise. Grand Jedi master was the head of the council, a position held by Yoda (though he is often referred to as simply 'master yoda' often). The colour of the lightsaber does not represent rank, the colour just depends on the type of crystal used to create the lightsaber. In old canon, some colours could be used to broaden the blade, to help with blaster bolt deflection. The purple lightsaber simply uses a rarer crystal (AFAIK). I hope this answers everything :)

[@simonwinn8757]

@@adm_ezri ds9 and voy, green was medical.

[@rudeboysouljah1912]

"Wrong clip" Best joke of the year, so far.

[@TheBigExclusive]

Perhaps the location of the main bridge is actually the most protected part of the ship. In the middle of the Saucer section is probably where there is the most overlapping shield grids, and shield generators. Sure it may "look" exposed, but that is incredibly deceptive. It is ultra defended. Plus, the Federation design philosophy is that they do not hide. Once shields are down, then it really doesn't matter.

[@henrytjernlund]

@TheBigExclusive. Exactly. Similar to the post I just made. The shields are stronger than the hull material. I don't see why the shields can't be double, tripled, or simply more powered over a part of the hull. Unless you can have shields inside the ship, then the outer hull is the best place to protect the bridge. I figured this out half a century ago watching the OS as a kid. Sometimes the "obvious" is not.

[@tomatodamashi]

You can't use Discovery tech and say "100 years ago, they could do this..." Discovery IS NOT canon, it's from a (vastly inferior) rebooted timeline. Their tech is MORE ADVANCED than star trek has ever shown to be.

[@NeovenatorRex]

The Bridge on the Enterprised is still placed better than the bridge of most Star Wars Ships lol

[@iowaclass5657]

Neovenator Rex “Aim for the bridge!” “Where’s the bridge?” “It’s the giant tower at the back.” To be fair though, supposedly the shields for the bridge are the thickest. The covenant from Halo has the best bridge locations though, they’re all in the center of the ship.

[@AlexanderCheff]

@@iowaclass5657 That has the trade off of command staff having poor access to escape methods. I think a Star Wars EU novel covered a ship design that was unpopular with officers because they tried doing a command bridge deep inside the ship for exactly the reason you stated and they didn't get easy access to escape pods.

[@lmethom]

Is the center of a bullseye really the easiest part of a target to hit? If it were the easiest, why do you get the most points for hitting it?

[@gb1701]

At the opposite end of the spectrum would be Battlestar Galactica, especially the reboot series. Being in the center of the colonials' Battlestars is the most protected location and much more realistic, even to the point I imagine any serious damage to it would likely mean the entire ship's already a goner.

[@NeovenatorRex]

A interesting story is that the designer of the Enterprise D actually wanted the Bridge to be in the centre of the ship, but the producers sais, it would be a part of a Star Trek ship to have an exposed Bridge.

[@Lord_Buckles]

Voyager is one of the earliest designed ships for atmospheric landing, and discovery doesn't count cause well.. it's discovery

[@a.morphous66]

The USS Shenzhou is incapable of landing on planets, only of atmospheric flight. There’s a pretty big difference.

[@dlpetta]

Discovery is SJW shit

[@samuellawrencesbookclub8250]

One's opinion on it is irrelevant, it is a part of the official canon. It has been recognized by the owners of the Star Trek license as canon to the Prime time-line, therefore Discovery is undebatably canon.

[@henkman00]

@@samuellawrencesbookclub8250 objection noted. and ignored. 😜

[@samuellawrencesbookclub8250]

@@henkman00 I suppose that's the charm of true hatred, the capacity to conveniently ignore anything which might contradict your narrow view, even certain facts which are staring you in the face., and all the while twisting even the smallest rumours to fit you belief.

[@NavyCuda]

Anything from Discovery and JJ Trek doesn't count.

[@Demiurge13]

this right here

[@FirePoo]

Exactly! Prime timeline FOREVER!

[@michaelm1]

Yes! Absolutely! I do indeed concur! Wholeheartedly!

[@FloodclawKupo]

@Supraman, Discovery is in the Prime timeline. Or, rather, takes place before the timeline split.

[@SweetBearCub]

@@michaelm1 A simple yes would have sufficed.

[@ZacharyHarper]

As someone whos played Star Trek VR the touchscreen controls actually work pretty good

[@redshirtveteran5688]

And that circle is indeed the control

[@mcflyboarder9537]

Yeah, my wife would comment about seatbelts. Every. Single. Episode.

[@Digikidthevoiceofreason]

THat's when you use DUCT TAPE on her mouth. LOL!!!!!!

[@Popdaddy88]

"And that's when I lost it, your honor....."

[@klein2042]

ITS SPACE. YOU DON’T NEED SEATBELTS IN SPACE

[@sir_chris]

The extra 35% space is needed for all the rocks that flies out when something blows out. Great job at analyzing the ship.

[@LeoH3L1]

I kind of disagree about the stick not being enough for roll and pitch controls, it doesn't have to be anything special to do that. What it lacks though is yaw and throttle controls, if you're going to have a stick, you really either need it to have twist for yaw, and a throttle, or a set of pedals and a throttle too, also probably some lateral and vertical thruster controls.

[@MatthewHendrickson]

The computer is likely very automated where someone just punches in a command a direction, and the computer computes yaw, pitch, and roll based on what sensors tell it, and what space the ship needs to clear any obstacles the sensors detect.

[@LeoH3L1]

@@MatthewHendrickson Such a system would never get past a safety review, it would not allow fine control, and especially would not allow for user intentions outside its scope of its programming, and it fails because of that last bit you mention.... obstacles the sensors detect.... what if they don't or are faulty, or someone hacks the computer to fool them? Manual by safety necessity control needs to be as direct as possible.

[@stevenschwartzhoff1703]

Seatbelt may seem a good idea, but travelling at thousands of km an hour if the inertial dampeners do not save you, you are throughly screwed far beyond what a seatbelt can save you from.

[@hebemis]

So why not employ some sort of a dedicated gravity/damper for the seats? Or external force field generator to hold you in place? The answer is that it wouldn't be fun to see them all handling ship-rocking blasts with grace, we want to see people flying around. The same reason those consoles explode from overloads and hits other sections of the ship.

[@HuntingTarg]

@@hebemis The Inertial Dampening system is triply redundant; the computer controlling it operates from within a subspace field that causes effective FTL computational rates, so the vast majority of the time the system compensates exactly for anticipated stresses. When the 'unplanned' happens (as it often does, else you have a plotless show), there can be microseconds of delay between an inertial event and the system's compensation. But only microseconds. Enough to cause dramatic loss of balance and injury, but not (direct quote from the Technical Manual) "...enough to turn the crew into chunky salsa."

[@Anon-s8n]

Velocity is irrelevant, it's acceleration that counts. ;)

[@dgerdi]

Steven Schwartzhoff jep! A seatbelt can be a great tool to cut someone in half if the right power is used. Remember: A high speed uncontrollable reduced to full halt doubles the bridge crew. Somehow.

[@wilFluffball]

um Anthony velocity is very relevant. having them fail when the ship decelerating can cause major issues also.

[@AdeptPaladin]

Volume is meaningless in space, only mass matters. Your beef with that is based on travelling through a physical medium like water or air, where volume contributes to resistance in movement in the form of friction. There is no friction in space.

[@komkwam]

@@DarkAlex1978 But money is no issue anymore.

[@Riceball01]

@@DarkAlex1978 Unused volume allows you to future proof your ship to a certain degree. It's about leaving room for anything new that might come along that they haven't currently thought of and/or aren't capable of making yet. For example, let's say that around season 5 of TNG Federation scientists and engineers design a new sensor that will detect cloaked ships, and let's say that this new sensor doesn't replace any of the existing sensors but is a whole new system that will be included on all new ships. With the extra space older ships like the Galaxy class can be (relatively) easily retrofitted with this new sensor because the designers thoughtfully left extra spce for just this sort of thing.

[@AdeptPaladin]

DarkAlex1978 No, he clearly meant performance efficiency which is why he cited the military examples of oceangoing vessels where they are constrained by the fact that due to gravity there is an upper limit to how big a vessel can be. There, size absolutely impacts performance because volume adds additional structural stress and additional resistance to movement. These don’t apply in space. The additional costs to add empty space as a future proofing measure are nonexistent compared to the costs of actually building a ship, even for a society that doesn’t value currency like the UFP

[@AdeptPaladin]

DarkAlex1978 astronomical? Nah. Given that they have mastered matter manipulation in the form of replicators, building a starship should actually be quite cheap. The materials cost would be essentially free - any unused raw material could be reprocessed into the exact piece needed at the right time needed most of our construction costs come from the need to mine, refine, and prototype. A starfleet shipyard can do that in less than an hour, including determining the final part needed and installing it. The most labour intensive part would be the power systems as replicators can’t do that... meaning the warp core and the dilithium itself.

[@reh3884]

You think that volume contains no mass?

[@goatismyname]

How about the Defiant? 10 great things about the USS Defiant!

[@weldonwin]

Hmmm? Oh, you mean the USS Ben Sisko's Mother F**king Pimphand

[@BennyLlama39]

Riker: "Tough little ship." Worf: "Little?"

[@weldonwin]

@@BennyLlama39 Well, it is technically accurate, seeing as the Defiant is TINY compared to almost any other class of Starfleet vessel from that period, yet is crazy overarmed and powered, punching way above its weight

[@AsylumEscapade]

@ValorJ Omega Lemme guess; Maquis Forever?

[@Sidekick_Snowman]

I'd like to see the Defiant too

[@HerrRadar]

The consoles explodes becuase of that the damage makes a feedback in the EPS/plasma wich overloads the console

[@HenryLoenwind]

Nah. They just didn't want to spend the money to build sets for the sections of the ship that actually were hit, so the consoles are proxies for that.

[@FukkitBukkit]

On top of that, at 2:07 it looks like the weapons fire hit in the general vicinity of Engineering, and if I'm not mistaken, the console shown exploding on the bridge is connected directly to Engineering. Sure looks like an overloaded plasma conduit or something similar.

[@laurentecrivain6944]

And no engineer ever suggests surge protectors.

[@MichaelPohoreski]

clorox bleach unboxed Did ANY of the shows _every_ explain what EPS stood for? I assumed _Energy/Electrical Plasma System_ but don't recall anyone ever saying?

[@HerrRadar]

Michael Pohoreski hello, while they never really say it outloud becuase of unknown reasons, we do however still know from schematics and texts etc that the eps is a power management and distrubution system Like you said. I currently dont have much time to look up some websites that has facts about the eps system.

[@nathanjohnplatt]

Most of theses are reasonable, however the Warp Pylons had to be there for a few reasons. 1. The size of the ship requires a larger warp field to encompass the entire ship, hence having them spaced further from the hull they are able to create a larger bubble. Page 66 of the TNG TM says; Third, the shape of the starship hull facilitates slippage into warp and imparts a geometric correction vector. The Saucer Module, which retains its characteristic shape from the original concept of an emergency landing craft, helps shape the forward field component through the use of a 55° elliptical hull planform, found to produce superior peak transitional efficiency. The aft hull undercut allows for varying degrees of field flow attachment, effectively preventing pinwheeling, owing to the placement of the nacelles off the vehicle Y-axis center of mass. During Saucer Module separation and independent operation of the Battle Section, interactive warp field controller software adjusts the field geometry to fit the altered spacecraft shape (See: 5.1). In the event of accidental loss of one or both nacelles, the starship would linearly dissociate, due to the fact that different parts of the structure would be traveling at different warp factors. 2. Referring back to the TNG Technical Manual, the reason for the Pylons being situated where they are: The emergency separation system would be used in the event that a catastrophic failure occurred in the PIS, or if a nacelle damaged in combat or other situation could not be safely retained on its support pylon. Ten explosive structural latches can be fired, driving the nacelle up and away at 30 m/sec This means if the pylons where closer to the ship then the chances are those explosive bolts might cause additional damage to the ship and increase the chance of the warp field colls exploding near the ship, either destroying it or causing serious damage. Since the warp colls are (according to the diagram in the TNG TM) are 7 decks bit, that's one piece of the ship i want as far away as possible 3. Bussard Ramscoop collectors Page 70 of the TNG TM, look at the graphic Other than that, I think everyone here has good points. All ships in the Star Trek galaxy except the borg have exposed bridges, but since the future tech is so dependant on shields they never consider it a flaw. Even the defiant, a ship made for combat has a easy to identify bridge