Poll: Star Trek: Which Enterprise is Your Favorite?

[Mike Richards]

I'm not so sure about that. I remember a TNG episode where scientists were warning that ships traveling at faster warp speeds (the exact figures eludes me) were causing damage to subspace or some such technobabble. Turns out they were right, and Starfleet followed up by issuing a "warp speed limit" that was not to be exceeded except during emergencies. Hence the drop back down to lower warp numbers like 5 or 6. This was also before Voyager broke the fabled warp 10 barrier (and turned Janeway and Paris into Space Salamanders, who promptly spawned Space Salamander babies), so Captain Riker casually ordering "warp 13" in "All Good Things" was a real head-turner at the time.

I seem to recall the issue in that episode was that over use of warp drive in general had the potential to damage subspace. The scientists in question lived on a habitable planet in the middle of the only safe passage through some giant radiation cloud or something, so that area was exposed to far more densely packed warp traffic than most areas of space would be normally. The damage to the subspace barrier accumulated faster with higher speeds but the damage was done with all current implementations of the idea. Star Fleet imposed the speed limit to try and slow down the damage while their scientists looked into a way of repairing it or creating cleaner warp drives, but they never really revisited the idea so who knows how far they ever got.

In any case, if they did readjust the warp scale by the time it got too "All Good Things..." then like I said, I'd assume their definition of Warp 13 would probably be closer to what we'd think of as somewhere in the Warp 6 or 7 range. Just like how Kirk's idea of Warp 7 isn't the same as Picard's idea of Warp 7.

Although Voyager coined the phrase transwarp in its episodes. Micheal Okuda the designer of the Enterprise-E described transwarp as any warp factor beyond 10 in the Enterprise-E technical manual. Which was a bit confusing as warp factor 10 was described as a barrier point of infinite power requirement. But as you noted in "All Good Things" Admiral Riker requests warp 13 be set while they return to federation space.

Exactly, the speed of Warp 10 in the TNG scale is the point at which the concept of warp drive requires infinite power to surpass. To go faster than that speed you need to turn to other mechanisms of FTL: transwarp, wormholes, the Caretaker Array, an Iconian Gate, Coaxial Warp Drive, etc.

In the TOS era they didn't know that warp had an upwards limit, or at least they didn't know for sure where it was, and their ships would never be able to reach it regardless. So warp factors were defined as multiplied factors of speed up from the previous warp factor. Once they reached TNG, they knew what warp's top speed was, so they redefined the scale so that there were just ten warp factors between that top speed and whatever their slowest was. By the time we get to "All Good Things..." they probably just moved the numbers around so there were like 20 warp factors or whatever denominating the space between whatever the slowest speed was and that same top speed.

So Admiral Riker's Warp 13 would be considerably slower then Commander Riker's Warp 10.

 

[Antari]

I'm not so sure about that. I remember a TNG episode where scientists were warning that ships traveling at faster warp speeds (the exact figures eludes me) were causing damage to subspace or some such technobabble. Turns out they were right, and Starfleet followed up by issuing a "warp speed limit" that was not to be exceeded except during emergencies. Hence the drop back down to lower warp numbers like 5 or 6. This was also before Voyager broke the fabled warp 10 barrier (and turned Janeway and Paris into Space Salamanders, who promptly spawned Space Salamander babies), so Captain Riker casually ordering "warp 13" in "All Good Things" was a real head-turner at the time.

I seem to recall the issue in that episode was that over use of warp drive in general had the potential to damage subspace. The scientists in question lived on a habitable planet in the middle of the only safe passage through some giant radiation cloud or something, so that area was exposed to far more densely packed warp traffic than most areas of space would be normally. The damage to the subspace barrier accumulated faster with higher speeds but the damage was done with all current implementations of the idea. Star Fleet imposed the speed limit to try and slow down the damage while their scientists looked into a way of repairing it or creating cleaner warp drives, but they never really revisited the idea so who knows how far they ever got.

In any case, if they did readjust the warp scale by the time it got too "All Good Things..." then like I said, I'd assume their definition of Warp 13 would probably be closer to what we'd think of as somewhere in the Warp 6 or 7 range. Just like how Kirk's idea of Warp 7 isn't the same as Picard's idea of Warp 7.

Although Voyager coined the phrase transwarp in its episodes. Micheal Okuda the designer of the Enterprise-E described transwarp as any warp factor beyond 10 in the Enterprise-E technical manual. Which was a bit confusing as warp factor 10 was described as a barrier point of infinite power requirement. But as you noted in "All Good Things" Admiral Riker requests warp 13 be set while they return to federation space.

Exactly, the speed of Warp 10 in the TNG scale is the point at which the concept of warp drive requires infinite power to surpass. To go faster than that speed you need to turn to other mechanisms of FTL: transwarp, wormholes, the Caretaker Array, an Iconian Gate, Coaxial Warp Drive, etc.

In the TOS era they didn't know that warp had an upwards limit, or at least they didn't know for sure where it was, and their ships would never be able to reach it regardless. So warp factors were defined as multiplied factors of speed up from the previous warp factor. Once they reached TNG, they knew what warp's top speed was, so they redefined the scale so that there were just ten warp factors between that top speed and whatever their slowest was. By the time we get to "All Good Things..." they probably just moved the numbers around so there were like 20 warp factors or whatever denominating the space between whatever the slowest speed was and that same top speed.

So Admiral Riker's Warp 13 would be considerably slower then Commander Riker's Warp 10.

Very true and thats why I said it's rather confusing they never really do explain it properly either on paper or in the episodes. There are some direct contradictions to previous lore. But I can't blame hollywood for throwing speed limits out the window. It's not as if we have a speed gun on a real object. More of an interesting possibility.

 

[Blood Brain Barrier]

I'm going with C. But why is B missing from the list?

 

[Silverbeard]

I'm pretty sure it's because the Jem'Hadar like to attack in very large groups, whilst the Borg tend to only send a singular cube to ruin shit (let's just ignore what Voyager did to the Borg). Given the Defiant's design - read: 'a pair of big guns strapped to an engine' - it always felt like something designed for punching a giant hole in something large, as opposed to dealing with a number of smaller, more maneuverable ships.

If anything, it's more impressive that Ben 'Motherfucking' Sisko manages to blow up so god damn many Jem'Hadar given he's fighting them in a ship unsuited to countering their preferred tactics. But this is the Sisko we're talking about, he straight up kills some Jem'Hadar with his bare hands, using the wrong ship for the job is nothing to him.

Bah. Martok's Rotarran kills more Jemmies (even if it happens off screen) and that was with a Bird of Prey- the overall design of that ship is actually quite similar to the Defiant (forward-facing weapons and cloaking, for example) except that the Rotarran probably had less armor and less offensive punch than the Defiant. One would think that the Defiant, with its disciplined Starfleet crewmen and such could do better than the Klingdon's least powerful warship class.

On an unrelated note, that alone settles the Sisko= Gary Stu argument for me. Martok was the Stu of DS9, hands down.

 

[Major_Tom]

The Sovereign (E). Even though it doesn't actually conform to Roddenberry's wishes, or maybe because of that? I was never really a fan of those thin "necks", I've always preferred Miranda/Soyuz to the Constitution and even Nebula to Galaxy. Excelsior is kinda meh. Ambassador is really nice, I like it more than the Galaxy. NX-1 is fine but it really doesn't belong in a pre-TOS era, what were they thinking? I looks more advanced than the Voyager but it's supposed to be centuries older, WTF?
Oh, and Abrams' Gigantosaurus can go die in a fire.

 

[DefunctTheory]

NX-1 is fine but it really doesn't belong in a pre-TOS era, what were they thinking? I looks more advanced than the Voyager but it's supposed to be centuries older, WTF?

Are you referring to the real screens they have looking more advanced? That's kind of just reality marching on (LCD screens suddenly becoming cheaper then hiring people to do plastic screen cut outs).

I always thought the NX-01 looked more primitive then all the other ships. Small and claustrophobic, with more obvious bulkheads, no effort put into 'prettying up' the inside, and an interior aesthetic that's reminiscent of WWII battleships.

 

[Major_Tom]

NX-1 is fine but it really doesn't belong in a pre-TOS era, what were they thinking? I looks more advanced than the Voyager but it's supposed to be centuries older, WTF?

Are you referring to the real screens they have looking more advanced? That's kind of just reality marching on (LCD screens suddenly becoming cheaper then hiring people to do plastic screen cut outs).

I always thought the NX-01 looked more primitive then all the other ships. Small and claustrophobic, with more obvious bulkheads, no effort put into 'prettying up' the inside, and an interior aesthetic that's reminiscent of WWII battleships.

No, I'm referring only to the exterior design of the the ship. It basically looks like an Akira, a 24th century ship.

 

[KaraFang]

My personal favorite is the Enterprise-D refit seen in the TNG finale "All Good Things."
Cloaking device. Phaser lance. Warp 13. Badass.

It had a transwarp drive.

I don't think the ship's at that point in the timeline were supposed to be transwarp. I was always under the assumption they redefined the warp factors again, like they did in the years between TOS and TNG. Warp 5 for the NX-01 or original NCC-1701 didn't mean the same thing it did for the D.

Since warp drive had become considerably more precise and using fractional warp factors had become more and more common (we seem to start hearing things like 7.5 and the like a lot more often around this point in the timeline), I think they just changed the scale. Effectively, Warp 10 by TNG's count is still as fast as warp technology is capable of, but now there are more numbers leading up to that so you can more accurately state how fast you're going. So when they say 13 it's probably closer to something like what we'd think of as 6.5 or 7 or something.

But the important part is phaser lance. We need more of those. Like all of them. On everything. Garbage scows and all.

I'm not so sure about that. I remember a TNG episode where scientists were warning that ships traveling at faster warp speeds (the exact figures eludes me) were causing damage to subspace or some such technobabble. Turns out they were right, and Starfleet followed up by issuing a "warp speed limit" that was not to be exceeded except during emergencies. Hence the drop back down to lower warp numbers like 5 or 6. This was also before Voyager broke the fabled warp 10 barrier (and turned Janeway and Paris into Space Salamanders, who promptly spawned Space Salamander babies), so Captain Riker casually ordering "warp 13" in "All Good Things" was a real head-turner at the time.

Yes, they changed the scale of warp drive. Warp 10 is essentially infinite speed requiring infinite energy for the warp drive that is normally used in federation ships. As you get closer to warp 10, the energy requirements increase massively out of proportion to the speed you attain.

This means that when Picard's Enterprise D is travelling at warp 9.96 it is about the same as Kirks Enterprise being at warp 16/17.

The damage to subspace warp was causing in the episode where the alient scientists caused a tear in a heavily used area of space had, by the time of Voyager and the Enterprise E, been negated - as well as increasing the overall speeds of ships again.

Also be aware that new technologies such as Quantum Slipstream Drive may require another warp speed numbers shift in the future OR a different scale.

Transwarp in ST can be used as long as you have anchor points in "normal" space at your starting point and destination. But it's WAY faster than normal warp - In voyager, when they use the delta quadrant transwarp hub to go to the alpha quadrant, it took minutes Vs 70 years at normal warp. (Which is why that something the Borg had was so attractive to the Federation Scientists and they were trying to reverse engineer.)

The transwarp experiment in Kirks time - Excelsior- was to try and use transwarp without needing a point of origin and destination anchor. It killed the test pilot (One of the Dax Hosts) and when they still went ahead and put it into the actual ship it was a massive failure (without killing anyone). As mentioned, in Janeways Voyager, the drive failed again due to it stretching the delta flyer across the entire length of transwarp because it didn't have any point of origin and destination anchors.

 

[DefunctTheory]

Spoiler

My personal favorite is the Enterprise-D refit seen in the TNG finale "All Good Things."
Cloaking device. Phaser lance. Warp 13. Badass.

It had a transwarp drive.

I don't think the ship's at that point in the timeline were supposed to be transwarp. I was always under the assumption they redefined the warp factors again, like they did in the years between TOS and TNG. Warp 5 for the NX-01 or original NCC-1701 didn't mean the same thing it did for the D.

Since warp drive had become considerably more precise and using fractional warp factors had become more and more common (we seem to start hearing things like 7.5 and the like a lot more often around this point in the timeline), I think they just changed the scale. Effectively, Warp 10 by TNG's count is still as fast as warp technology is capable of, but now there are more numbers leading up to that so you can more accurately state how fast you're going. So when they say 13 it's probably closer to something like what we'd think of as 6.5 or 7 or something.

But the important part is phaser lance. We need more of those. Like all of them. On everything. Garbage scows and all.

I'm not so sure about that. I remember a TNG episode where scientists were warning that ships traveling at faster warp speeds (the exact figures eludes me) were causing damage to subspace or some such technobabble. Turns out they were right, and Starfleet followed up by issuing a "warp speed limit" that was not to be exceeded except during emergencies. Hence the drop back down to lower warp numbers like 5 or 6. This was also before Voyager broke the fabled warp 10 barrier (and turned Janeway and Paris into Space Salamanders, who promptly spawned Space Salamander babies), so Captain Riker casually ordering "warp 13" in "All Good Things" was a real head-turner at the time.

Yes, they changed the scale of warp drive. Warp 10 is essentially infinite speed requiring infinite energy for the warp drive that is normally used in federation ships. As you get closer to warp 10, the energy requirements increase massively out of proportion to the speed you attain.

This means that when Picard's Enterprise D is travelling at warp 9.96 it is about the same as Kirks Enterprise being at warp 16/17.

The damage to subspace warp was causing in the episode where the alient scientists caused a tear in a heavily used area of space had, by the time of Voyager and the Enterprise E, been negated - as well as increasing the overall speeds of ships again.

Also be aware that new technologies such as Quantum Slipstream Drive may require another warp speed numbers shift in the future OR a different scale.

Transwarp in ST can be used as long as you have anchor points in "normal" space at your starting point and destination. But it's WAY faster than normal warp - In voyager, when they use the delta quadrant transwarp hub to go to the alpha quadrant, it took minutes Vs 70 years at normal warp. (Which is why that something the Borg had was so attractive to the Federation Scientists and they were trying to reverse engineer.)

The transwarp experiment in Kirks time - Excelsior- was to try and use transwarp without needing a point of origin and destination anchor. It killed the test pilot (One of the Dax Hosts) and when they still went ahead and put it into the actual ship it was a massive failure (without killing anyone). As mentioned, in Janeways Voyager, the drive failed again due to it stretching the delta flyer across the entire length of transwarp because it didn't have any point of origin and destination anchors.

When it comes to 'trans' is Star Trek, one is better off just ignoring it all together. The word 'Transwarp' has been used over the years to describe a variety of completely unrelated technologies and physical properties, so much so that all it really means is 'faster then typical warp speeds of the era.' Multiple attempts to look back and try to thread all the instances of the words usage together (Usually thrown around willy nilly by authors who, honestly, probably didn't care about the technobabble) have largely been for naught.

I also think you're misunderstanding what happened to to Tom Paris (Also, it wasn't the Delta Flyer he was in. Threshold happened years before the Flyer was designed). He reached maximum velocity (Warp 10), meaning he essentially became the galaxy/universe for a mere moment. Borg transwarp conduits still operate at below Warp 10 equivalents (Whether Warp 'speeds' apply to objects not technically operating a subspace warp field is a weird subject), just at ridiculously long decimal points - Warp 9.9999999 or something similar.

Also of note, Threshold has essentially been cast out of canon, forever to be ignored because it was terrible and made no sense. The writers hated it, the producers and directors hated it, several actors didn't even understand what the hell was supposed to be happening (Including the guy playing Paris), and I think it's probably the most fan hated thing of every single Star Trek series/movie ever. Probably more widely hated then then new movies, in fact. It would be the worst sci-fi thing ever put on any screen ever, if it wasn't for SG-1's 'Hathor.'

 

[Zenja]

Enterprise E, 'cause its so kewl!

Also ST: Beyond is a ridiculous movie. RIDICULOUS and not in a good way.

We knew that was probably what was going to happen when they rewrote it because "it was too Star Trek-y". They said that right after Abhrams left to do Star Wars. They turned it into an action flick, which I am OK with because it is Kirk, but the dialogue is cringe worthy at times. All characterization was thrown out the window in favor of... I have no idea. I guess they had to establish Jayla, which they didn't do fully. Spock had his little dilemma but they didn't pay it any real in depth thought, apparently having a dilemma at all is thought provoking enough according to them. I don't mind cutting down on the philosophy for action in the case of Capt. Kirk or Capt. Archer as they have characteristics that favor such stories.

I am disappointed in Beyond, but honestly, I felt it was OK if you enjoyed the first 2 movies. It could have been MUCH better but they wasted a lot of time on filler junk in the movie. That part where Spock warps out on McCoy? Anti-climatic and could even be deleted from the movie and not matter. Much of their time on the planet could be deleted and it wouldn't effect much of the plot. The ending of the movie has very little to do with the hour and 15 minutes it took to get there. I can only think of 2 parts that have any relevance to the final battle where they defeat the bad guy and the happy ending moment that follows. It's like an hour and 15 minutes of action filler, then battle and a happy ending with lose callbacks to small moments in the hour and 15 minutes you just sat through, most of which - the movie ignores at the end. (It doesn't contradict its story at least - it just doesn't go anywhere with anything.)

EDIT: But I also can side with the idea that it was junk. It really is just a big ball of nothing. Its a movie that really went nowhere. It is just a bunch of shallow filler with a typical hero ending.


OT: 1701-D. I just loved that show and what it was all about. I loved the exploration angle and the way they stood strongly beside the Prime Directive. I want more of that flavor of Star Trek so bad.

 

[Wereduck]

-snip-
It would be the worst sci-fi thing ever put on any screen ever, if it wasn't for SG-1's 'Hathor.'

Thank you for mentioning that 'Theory.

I was a little bummed that the crapsack galaxy class seems to have tied with the sovereign but it brightens my evening to know that even after all these years there are other people out there who appreciate how awful Hathor was.

 

[Erttheking]

I'm hard pressed to think of anyone who would pick C, considering that it was only in one episode.

D. I like Picard, I like the TNG crew, and D just got so much freaking down. I only saw a few episodes of TOG, E was only in the movies, the reboot has so many lights they freaking assault me and NX-01 was decent but didn't have the same charm. Also I just like the look, it really did look more advanced than TOG ships and like it was a big meaty ship. The type that was meant to explore but could still get into a thrash with Klingons and come out on top.

EDIT: Also just to throw it out there, Trek is wildly inconsistent for how effective its ships are, stuff like this is why the Enterprise A was crippled after one volley in the Search for Spock, despite taking a heck of a lot more damage in Khan. It's why the Borg could take on the Defiant but not Voyager.

Try to get any consistent read on a ship's effectiveness in Star Trek is like trying to scoop up water with a strainer.

 

[Laughing Man]

but they never really revisited the idea so who knows how far they ever got.

The variable Warp Nacelles on Voyager were meant to be a solution to that problem, allowing the ship to go faster without causing damage to sub space.

Enterprise A was crippled after one volley in the Search for Spock

Enterprise A wasn't in search for Spock but the reason behind it only taking one hit kind of adds up. It was already pretty badly damaged and was being manned by six people not the usual 300 trained techs and personnel. I agree the ships take as much damage and stand as much ground as is needed by the plot but that was a pretty poor example since Wrath Of Khan and Search fro Spock lay the ground pretty well for how badly the Enterprise is damaged. Remember the reason they take Khan in to the Mutara Nebula at the end of Wrath is to level the playing field.

I even really love the Kelvin-Timeline version, in no small part because it's engineering decks actually look like engineering decks, not just a room with a couple more monitors then usual.

Or a beer factory because that's exactly where the Engineering stuff was filmed, in a Budweiser Beer factory.

As for my vote it goes for the Enterprise E

The first time I saw her jump in to warp, shortly after Picard says fuck it I am going to kick some Borg ass I knew they finally had a ship that wouldn't get destroyed by a motherfucking 80 year old D12 Bird of Prey.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8d10vQHbZQU