Jump to content

Quick Voyager Question


alaska
 Share

Recommended Posts

I read what I read, and that is what I read. If certain people consider me a moron for saying what I read, then so be it.

 

However, I have trouble taking anyone with a pot leaf for an avatar seriously. Not that pot is bad, my friends call me "Billy Burnout" and billy isn't even my name. I just think it is classless to advertise it. (little bit of retribution).

 

I wish I got to read the deleted post, im sure I would have a lot to comment on that.

 

-Drew

Link to comment
Share on other sites

no actually, I wouldnt find it classless. But if you really did apologize in that deleted post, then I do too. Just had to defend myself, you know how it is.

 

But as for the tree man, [now in a friendly tone], c'mon it is classless, thats your personal life, its not something you want to advertise like that. You don't know who will use that against you one day, until they legalize it, keep it to your self. Trust me, I learned my lesson the hard way, I have a reputation for being "Billy Burnout" and now that i've grown up and rather keep what I do in my house (car, fraternity house, bar bathrooms, concerts etc.) to myself...well it kinda sucks, I go to a bar, and chicks say "so your billy....." and they expect something that is not me, they expect what they have heard. Keep the avatar if you want that, its your call.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

no no no no no....in response to the transwarp question. Intrepid class ships were NOT built with transwarp in mind. The Federation obviously did not plan on Voyager getting hurled across the galaxy. And yes, they would have used transwarp to get home faster, but as they said in Dark Fronteir: "We would use transwarp, but we can't replicate coils. If we could get our hands on just one transwarp coil, we could shave 20 years off our trip." That was the whole idea behind boarding the Borg sphere....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

a long long time ago, i read that it had something to manuveribility and efficiency. went alot like what the renegade said, pretty sure he is correct

 

 

As for the Warp 5 speed limit. TNG epsode, while traveling through an area of space, they were contacted by something (cant rememberif its energy, or traditional life) pleading that their area of space was being destroyed by the frequent warp vessels coming through. The crew determined that the area was a weak spot, as there was more. Against the recommendation of picard, star fleet set a speed limit of warp 5. Picard said 2.

 

this is the correct answer as it is explained in the voyager technical manual i saw the TNG ep you are refering to today on spike and yes they were restricted to warp 5 to keep from tearing up the corridor they were traveling through. the title of the ep was "Force of nature"....thank you moo roar moo

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I realized Robert Mcneil who played Nick Lakarno in TNG 05x19 "The First Duty" was turned into Tom Paris in Voyager.

 

Does anyone know what the time difference is between TNG and Voyager?

 

 

The first episode of TNG was on stardate 41153.7 (TNG 1x01 - Encounter at Fapoint)

The last was on stardate 47988.1 (TNG 7x25-26 - All Good Things...)

Mentioned episode TNG 5x19 - "The First Duty" was on stardate 45703.9.

 

Voyager starts at stardate 48315.6 (VOY 1x01-02 - Caretaker) and ends on 54973.4 (7x25-26 - Endgame).

 

So Voyager started right after TNG was over.

 

For what we see on the show, one year is about (or exactly) 1000 units in stardate. So it is easy to count the differential.

 

Also note that TNG crew is still active while Voyager got already back home.

 

By the way, if 1 year is 1000 units in stardate (you can see that by looking at stardates in TNG, DS9 and VOY - 1 year of the show is one year of time that passes in the story, and that is 1000 units of stardate [how call it?]) then that's wrong somehow, because TNG started on about 41000 and TOS finished on 6000 and between them should be 70-year gap. We have 70 years and 35000 units of stardate between them, so it shoulb be 2 years per 1000 units of stardate, and now it is different. Can anyone explain it?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...