Re: what happened to the ISS Defiant?


Chris Basken wrote:
mdicenso@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
Hell, Archer's team got onboard the Defiant and had her up and running
in *minutes*. It's much more akin to the slow, evolutionary

No, that has nothing to do with technology other than to show us that
the operations became simpler. But the technology behind that was still
not something they could just go and duplicate. Again, remember that
innovations like the duotronics aren't available in any form. Even now
we know that phasers and phase cannons aren't the same thing, thanks to
Mirror-Archer's statements about being impressed with a phasers ability
to disintegrate matter on the higher settings. The unprotected hull of

This means that the basic technologies are different. If the basic
technologies are different, how can the interfaces to them be the same?

The interfaces on the ship were obviously simplified, and marked out
for ease operation (Mike Okuda stated that there were labels for the
Defiant controls, but even with HDTV they are are not readily visible).
For example, Archer operating the Defiant's thruster controls at the
helm station is probably not going to be an overly complex thing. Nor
is Reed's finding of the weapons controls, and using them: "Okay I push
this button here that says "phaser power on/off, then push button that
says "fire" after choosing a target on this control panel display...


How would you simplify a 19th-century steamship's engine controls so you
could use them to control a nuclear aircraft carrier's reactor? You're
not even controlling the same *kind* of thing.

Further, if you look at a 19th-century steamship, it's orders of
magnitude *simpler* to operate than a nuclear aircraft carrier. I could
-- being generous -- imagine the nuke ship's crew going back 100 years
and relatively quickly figuring out how to run a steamship. It's inane
to think that steamship crew could come forward and grasp the
functioning of a nuclear vessel without needing to become educated on at
least the basics of nuclear science itself. They certainly couldn't do
it within minutes of stepping onto the ship's bridge.

the Defiant was able to withstand full-powered shots of the NX-class
Avenger without so much as even a scratch. Mirror-Trip was impressed at
the size of the Defiant's warp coils, implying that even the Mirror
Terran Empire had not stolen the technology at that time to make such
large coils.

technological changes between the 1790s and the 1890s than the rapid,
revolutionary changes that happened between the 1890s and the 1990s.

No, because there are clear technological changes that have been
specifically identified. All the changes are "under the hood" so to
speak, and are not readily apparent. Like I said, it's more comparable
to a Nimitz being taken back to the 1890s, and for good reason.

The 1890s guys would blow themselves up, if they managed to get anything
done at all.

If they fiddled with the reactor directly, yes. But if the control
layout available to them lets them turn the reactor on (or bring it up
to full power from idle mode) then they don't blow themselves up.
They'd have more trouble with weapons than the ISS Enterprise crew
because the weapons systems on a Nimitz don't allow quite for the
simple "push button" operation that the Defiant does. Steering a Nimitz
would be difficult for the 1890's crew because they'd not be used to a
ship of that size, but in open water they could still turn the ship's
wheel and put it through it's full paces once they got used to the
controls. Trip is going to be somewhat better off that his 1890's
counterpart because he at least has an understanding of the Defiant's
power source: antimatter-matter, and the use of EPS conduits to carry
plasma around the ship and power it's systems.


The only way IaMD works is if the fundamental technology between
Archer's time and Kirk's time is basically unchanged, and only the
interfaces got simpler. This is *not* akin to 1890-1990. If it were,
it would be the equivalent of Trip trying to understand how to rig the
sails on a nuclear ship -- he'd need to undergo a worldview change
before he could even grasp what's going on with this new technology.

Right, but that also works for the 1890's crew on a Nimitz. Technically
speaking, the basic fundamentals are there for operating and building
ships. There would be things like weapons technology, computers and
such that they wouldn't have the first clue in. But the basics are
still there. Mirror-Trip described what he was seeing in the analogy of
the of Defiant's tech as "the chief engineer on a steamship coming
onboard the first interplanetary transport". Obviously there are some
fundamental differences. But again, you're just agreeing with what I
was saying before. The very basic fundamentals are the same, but what's
"under the hood" making it all work is what is different.
-Mike

.