Why does everyone love the original TOS Enterprise so much?

[LaughingCheese]

Don't turrets by definition rotate?

Good point...

Its always been labeled as a turret in all of the drawings, but it has not been mentioned specifically as a turret in any movie.

That's why I called it a turret; I must've seen it called that on a drawing a while ago.

But yeah, if it doesn't rotate, why is it called a turret?!

EDIT: Holy cheese, this is my first intro thread to reach EIGHT (8) pages!!!

I love you guys.

[Sionnach Glic]

It may be that the exterior parts we can see don't rotate, but the tube itself does inside the casing. Observe the following picture, stolen shamelessly from earlier in the thread:


Look at the picture, specificaly the black line thing on the front of the pod. That line is where the torps come out of. It's possible that the tube that fires them can rotate within its housing to fire out from any angle allowed by that line, as shown below:



The tube inside may be able to rotate along the red marks.

[Captain Seafort]

The problem with that is that that black line thing is a probably a hole. Compare these two consecutive images:




I think it's there to provide a line of sight from the yacht's cockpit, which lines up exactly with the hole when the yacht's docked.

[Sionnach Glic]

Hm, fair point.

[LaughingCheese]

So, where exactly IS the yacht?!?!?!?

YARRRRRRRRRRRRRRR!!!!!!!!!!!

Actually, I don't think that people realize that Federation starships are built in a modular fashion. On the large scale, we see it in the form of the Primary/Secondary hull configurations (saucer section/stardrive).

On a smaller scale, I believe I recall reading in the TNG tech manual that the bridge is a moduel itself and can be replaced for the mission at hand/upgraded.

I'm guessing the QT pod/turret is also a module, that is, and this is the crucial part, either a QT launcher OR a yacht dock.

Its been a LONG time since I've seen Insurrection, actually I think I may have seen it only once in the theatre, but, if memory serves, I don't think we saw the QT pod fire at all during that movie.

[Sionnach Glic]

I think the launcher was established to be there in FC. That would mean they originaly built the ship with the launcher, took it out and replaced it with a yacht, and then put it back in again.
While it's possible, it seems a little unlikely. Surely they could place the captain's yacht somewhere where it didn't require the most powerful weapon on the ship to be removed.

[LaughingCheese]

I think the launcher was established to be there in FC. That would mean they originaly built the ship with the launcher, took it out and replaced it with a yacht, and then put it back in again.
While it's possible, it seems a little unlikely. Surely they could place the captain's yacht somewhere where it didn't require the most powerful weapon on the ship to be removed.

Agreed.

[Mark]

Of course, these are Trek writers we're talking about to, so...................

[LaughingCheese]

Of course, these are Trek writers we're talking about to, so...................

LOL

[Mark]

The sad thing is that it HAS become a joke

[stitch626]

If only they had moved the QT launcher a bit closer to the saucer, then we wouldn't even be discussing this.

[LaughingCheese]

Now that we have blasted off topic(like 4 pages ago), should the title of the thread be changed?

[Tsukiyumi]

Now that we have blasted off topic(like 4 pages ago), should the title of the thread be changed?

Nope.

[stitch626]

No. Changing the title of a thread every time we changed topic would be insanity... and futile.

[Captain Seafort]

And in clear violation of the TR-116 principle upon which the whole ethos of DITL rests.