XPost: rec.arts.sf.tv, rec.arts.tv   
   From: ANIM8Rfsk@cox.net   
      
   in article R66dnc1S6f3nl_3eRVn-oA@comcast.com, Ken from Chicago at   
   kwicker1b_nospam@comcast.net wrote on 10/26/05 4:00 PM:   
      
   >   
   > "Paul Vader"  wrote in message   
   > news:11lvtrbgi0u4193@news.supernews.com...   
   >> ANIM8Rfsk  writes:   
   >>>> What part of "geosynchronous orbit" don't you understand?   
   >>>>   
   >>>> -- Ken from Chicago   
   >>>>   
   >>> The TOS ship is NOT in geosync.  Transporter range is well below it.   
   >>   
   >> Ha! It's iffy on TNG and beyond too - 40,000km is what memory alpha says.   
   >> So much for that fanwank.   
   >>   
   >> On the other hand, TOS era ships are so overpowered that you wonder why   
   >> they bother going into orbit at all - they could just hang there in the   
   >> same way that bricks don't. *   
   >> --   
   >> * PV   something like badgers--something like lizards--and something   
   >> like corkscrews.   
   >   
   > But they hadn't planned it out then. The tech and science of TOS was, er,   
   > um, indistinguishible from um, mmmm-, er mmmmmmaaaaa-, ...   
   > mmaaaaaaaaaaaagggg-, mmmmaaaaaaaaggggg   
   > ick.  There. I said it, loud for all the world to here.   
   >   
   > -- Ken from Chicago (who said it because it would be prudent at this   
   > juncture, and read my lips, new taxes)   
   >   
   >   
   It's unclear if they'd planned it out or not.  The 16,000 mile transporter   
   limit appears in the writers guide that was written before the series went   
   on the air; and I see no reason for that number to exist at all except that   
   it kept the ship from being in a stable orbit.   
      
   --   
      
   You Can't Stop the Signal   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)