PDA

View Full Version : No, Star Trek was not the inspiration for everything



NEOWatcher
2013-Jul-01, 07:13 PM
As big a fan I am of Star Trek, and as much as I think it contributed to a lot of today's inspiration, I still think a lot of it is undeserved.

Today I ran across a story about the restored Galileo Shuttle (http://www.nbcnews.com/science/star-trek-galileo-shuttlecraft-restored-its-1960s-glory-6C10505410).
This brought me to the story about its recovery. (http://www.space.com/20781-original-star-trek-galileo-spacecraft-where-is-it-today-video.html)
"Yet many today, are unaware that the [Space] Shuttle concept was directly inspired by Star Trek. Before there was Atlantis, Discovery, Challenger or Columbia there was Galileo."

Hold on there a minute. :hand: Long before there was Galileo or Star Trek, there was Dyna-Soar and its direct decendents.
Space.com should know that.

ASTRO BOY
2013-Jul-01, 09:07 PM
I would say that our mobile phones and I-Phones today are far more technically advanced then those used by Kirk and crew in the original Star Trek series........Perhaps even in advance of the next generation.

Swift
2013-Jul-01, 10:00 PM
Hold on there a minute. :hand: Long before there was Galileo or Star Trek, there was Dyna-Soar and its direct decendents.
Space.com should know that.
Yeah, that's just nonsense. The concept of Space Planes of various sorts have been around a long time, and the STS actually bares little resemblance to anything in Star Trek.

iquestor
2013-Jul-02, 12:30 AM
I quit going to Space.com because of the Ads and because of the grand standing. cool video though, Im a big Fan of STTOS.

swampyankee
2013-Jul-02, 12:51 AM
Some people think every sf trope originated with Star Trek. Nope. Just about every one of them was extant in pulp sf for decades.

Solfe
2013-Jul-02, 01:26 AM
I am 99% certain I heard that Enterprise was selected for a space shuttle name because of the TV show, but that is what happens when the government tries to be hip and cool. They "get it", but a decade or so too late.

Tuckerfan
2013-Jul-02, 01:51 AM
I am 99% certain I heard that Enterprise was selected for a space shuttle name because of the TV show, but that is what happens when the government tries to be hip and cool. They "get it", but a decade or so too late.
Yeah, the fans wrote in and demanded that the first shuttle be named Enterprise. Not realizing that the ship would never fly in space. Oops.

Jens
2013-Jul-02, 02:55 AM
Yeah, the fans wrote in and demanded that the first shuttle be named Enterprise. Not realizing that the ship would never fly in space. Oops.

Well who knows, maybe someday some idiot will put a really big bomb under it. :eek:

Ara Pacis
2013-Jul-02, 04:46 AM
Wait, you're saying the Q Continuum wasn't the inspiration for all the gods of antiquity?

jokergirl
2013-Jul-02, 09:53 AM
TOS very often referenced classical myth and other stories, putting them IN SPACE. From a pure storytelling perspective, I think it was quite "normal" sci-fi for the era. The difference is that it was the first that really reached the broad mass as opposed to the minority that already read sci-fi.

Perhaps not all references are caught by those "masses" today (sadly enough), but they are there.

;)

Jens
2013-Jul-02, 12:07 PM
tos very often referenced classical myth and other stories, putting them in space.
;)

tos?

Buttercup
2013-Jul-02, 12:39 PM
Yeah, the fans wrote in and demanded that the first shuttle be named Enterprise. Not realizing that the ship would never fly in space. Oops.

:rofl: Yep.

FarmMarsNow
2013-Jul-02, 12:56 PM
Star Trek wasn't the inspiration, but Science Fiction was. It would be fair to say that.

Gillianren
2013-Jul-02, 02:47 PM
tos?

The Original Series. Which actually once had Apollo as a character on an episode, as I recall.

ToSeek
2013-Jul-02, 03:39 PM
Yeah, the fans wrote in and demanded that the first shuttle be named Enterprise. Not realizing that the ship would never fly in space. Oops.

Actually, it was originally planned for the Enterprise to be retrofitted into a space-worthy vehicle. But it ended up being so different from the final space-worthy design that it was cheaper to build a new one from scratch than to try to do the upgrade.

Glom
2013-Jul-02, 05:45 PM
There's a line in SFDebris's review of 'QWho' [TNG] on the bit where the away team are on the Borg cube in the nursery and Riker has to describe what they're seeing. It unfavourably compares to them to a contemporary teenage girl who in the time it took Riker to describe things would have sent through several photos taken on her phone while simultaneously texting her friends about how this is the worst mall ever.

NEOWatcher
2013-Jul-02, 05:51 PM
Star Trek wasn't the inspiration, but Science Fiction was. It would be fair to say that.
They go hand in hand. It's been a slow process of inspiration back to the days a human looked up at the heavens and wondered.

When did it become Sci-Fi? Who knows. I agree that Sci-Fi helps you envision the possibilities that make that inspiration seem easier to achive, but I think it's a chicken and the egg type of situation between inspiration and technology advances.

starcanuck64
2013-Jul-02, 07:45 PM
I think it's a constant feedback with life inspiring art which influences life.

For instance the work of Fritz Lang inspired Werner von Braun to think about the possibilities of the future and the US space program inspired a lot of enthusiasm and imagination towards science and exploring the universe.

KaiYeves
2013-Jul-02, 09:16 PM
This (http://www.collectspace.com/news/news-051613a.html) collectSPACE article suggests that Star Trek may have popularized the use of the word "shuttle" for a vehicle traveling between a planetary surface and space and thus encouraged the choice of that name for the real-life vehicle, although it also points out that the word was used in that sense in the Colliers magazine series from 1952, long before the debut of Star Trek.

FarmMarsNow
2013-Jul-02, 11:30 PM
Star Trek gave me my first dose of Philosophy and Polemic. My own school system didn't teach me those things, so it was better than nothing. One might say it helped me to be more scientific in my thinking.

NEOWatcher
2013-Jul-03, 06:45 PM
This (http://www.collectspace.com/news/news-051613a.html) collectSPACE article suggests that Star Trek may have popularized the use of the word "shuttle" for a vehicle traveling between a planetary surface and space and thus encouraged the choice of that name for the real-life vehicle
Of course that is quoting people considered "Star Trek Superfans". I'd say their interpretation could be just a wee bit tainted .
And they back it up with an uncited Wikipedia entry that could very well have been put there by a superfan.

Now Shuttlecraft might be coined by Gene and popularized by the show, but the term shuttle for going from a base to a craft has been around for a long time. Shuttle boats and Shuttle buses come to mind.

Besides, STS whas not Space Shuttlecraft System. It was just called Space Shuttle System.

So; the fan popularity may have given incentive for the name, but it certainly is not something started by Star Trek.



although it also points out that the word was used in that sense in the Colliers magazine series from 1952, long before the debut of Star Trek.
Yep.

Glom
2013-Jul-03, 10:41 PM
STS stands for Space Transportation System.

NEOWatcher
2013-Jul-05, 05:10 PM
STS stands for Space Transportation System.
:doh:Ouch, that's two mistakes with the same initials.
1st, I forgot "Transportation", 2nd I got an "S" wrong.
At least my point still stands. In fact, it's even stronger now.

Now I wonder if shuttle was ever an official word to use.

Ara Pacis
2013-Jul-05, 11:16 PM
:doh:Ouch, that's two mistakes with the same initials.
1st, I forgot "Transportation", 2nd I got an "S" wrong.
At least my point still stands. In fact, it's even stronger now.

Now I wonder if shuttle was ever an official word to use.

And to add insult to injury, the Shuttle wasn't called the Shuttle, it was called the Orbiter.

I wonder if Star Trek got the idea from the earlier capsule designs, which had been described as resembling shuttlecocks, IIRC.

Noclevername
2013-Jul-07, 12:35 AM
A few years back I was reading a series of scathing and funny reviews of the awful film Battlefield Earth, and noticed that almost every reviewer thought the teleporter was ripped off from Star Trek's transporters. They did not seem to realize that the concept was around long before Gene Roddenberry's heyday. In SF it goes back to 1877, with Edward Page Mitchell's story The Man Without a Body. In mythology and fantasy, it's much older.

NEOWatcher
2013-Jul-09, 04:41 PM
And to add insult to injury, the Shuttle wasn't called the Shuttle, it was called the Orbiter.
No insult or injury to me. That's exactly what I was questioning.
I have heard NASA types refer to the orbiter or even the entire stack as the shuttle, but I don't know how common within NASA that would be, nor if it was even specifically addressed in some PR circles.

Shuttlecock? Not that I reject it, but I do find it quite a stretch.
Like I said before, the term shuttle already had a long history that also fits nicely into the context of spacecraft.

I vaguely remember a Popular Science issue from the 70's showing the orbiter bay configured with seats like an airliner.

KaiYeves
2013-Jul-09, 07:35 PM
No insult or injury to me. That's exactly what I was questioning.
I have heard NASA types refer to the orbiter or even the entire stack as the shuttle, but I don't know how common within NASA that would be, nor if it was even specifically addressed in some PR circles.

Shuttlecock? Not that I reject it, but I do find it quite a stretch.
Like I said before, the term shuttle already had a long history that also fits nicely into the context of spacecraft.

I vaguely remember a Popular Science issue from the 70's showing the orbiter bay configured with seats like an airliner.
At Space Camp, our counselors told us that to only refer to the full stack as the shuttle, and the orbiter as-- the orbiter.

Tuckerfan
2013-Jul-10, 02:18 AM
No insult or injury to me. That's exactly what I was questioning.
I have heard NASA types refer to the orbiter or even the entire stack as the shuttle, but I don't know how common within NASA that would be, nor if it was even specifically addressed in some PR circles.

Shuttlecock? Not that I reject it, but I do find it quite a stretch.
Like I said before, the term shuttle already had a long history that also fits nicely into the context of spacecraft.

I vaguely remember a Popular Science issue from the 70's showing the orbiter bay configured with seats like an airliner.
It was also shown that way in the movie Moonraker.

Ara Pacis
2013-Jul-10, 04:09 AM
I vaguely remember a Popular Science issue from the 70's showing the orbiter bay configured with seats like an airliner.

It was also shown that way at the Great America Space Shuttle experience and ride.

NEOWatcher
2013-Jul-10, 12:57 PM
It was also shown that way at the Great America Space Shuttle experience and ride.
That one makes sense. How else can you give someone that kind of experience when you are among a bunch of other people?

I tried looking for the picture, and can't find it. I could have been remembering something else. Maybe references to the "bus sized" payloads.
But; what I did find was interesting. Verner von Braun himself was writing articles for Popular Science, and he used the term Shuttle. I find it unlikely that he was a big Star Trek fan, only because he wouldn't have had the time or personality to watch popular TV.

http://books.google.com/books?id=tE0idc3G364C&pg=PA70&lpg=PA69&dq=popular+science+space+shuttle
http://books.google.com/books?id=-wAAAAAAMBAJ&printsec=frontcover&hl=en&sa=X#v=onepage&q&f=false

One of those even mentioned the $10.5 million per launch and the 725 launches over 12 years. (less than one per week).

publiusr
2013-Jul-12, 10:03 PM
Now we actually came close to having something that looked like a shuttle craft actually fly.

It was called "Tacit Blue:"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northrop_Tacit_Blue
http://www.nationalmuseum.af.mil/factsheets/factsheet.asp?id=353

Just look at the nose on that thing. Even that scoop up top looks a lot like the scoop we see on the top of the shuttlecraft. The AMT model was all boxy and wrong. The sides of the shuttle were almost like fins on a caddy, they just didn't rise. Hard thing to model.

Solfe
2013-Jul-17, 02:44 PM
Nerdy tangent, both Enterprise and Battlestar Galactica pranked the fans by showing images of real things that were named from earlier versions of the show.

Enterprise has an image of the orbiter Enterprise in the credits and several times in BSG the F-16 is shown as a type of Viper.

KaiYeves
2013-Jul-17, 03:37 PM
Is prank the right word for that or is it just an Easter Egg?

NEOWatcher
2013-Jul-17, 05:28 PM
Is prank the right word for that or is it just an Easter Egg?
I thought the same thing.

To take it even further, Star Trek is supposed to be a future of today, so I don't even think Easter Egg is valid in that context.

We have Enterprise today, so why wouldn't it naturally be referenced in the show.
The shuttle was in various Star Treks (at least I remember it in ST-TMP) and the carrier was a big part in ST-TVH
I also think I remember seeing the old sailing ship too.

Solfe
2013-Jul-17, 06:06 PM
I don't know if that word is right. Now it doesn't seem quite right.

HenrikOlsen
2013-Jul-17, 07:57 PM
I thought the same thing.

To take it even further, Star Trek is supposed to be a future of today, so I don't even think Easter Egg is valid in that context.

We have Enterprise today, so why wouldn't it naturally be referenced in the show.
The shuttle was in various Star Treks (at least I remember it in ST-TMP) and the carrier was a big part in ST-TVH
I also think I remember seeing the old sailing ship too.

In TNG the ready room(I think it is) has a display panel of historic ships called Enterprise.

ToSeek
2013-Jul-18, 03:33 PM
In TNG the ready room(I think it is) has a display panel of historic ships called Enterprise.

Including, I think, the space shuttle that was named Enterprise because of the TV program. That gave my wife a headache.

HenrikOlsen
2013-Jul-18, 04:16 PM
Yep, that's one of their weirder time/causality loops, and most people don't recognize it as one.

Sent from my GT-I9100 using Tapatalk 4 Beta

SeanF
2013-Jul-18, 04:38 PM
Including, I think, the space shuttle that was named Enterprise because of the TV program. That gave my wife a headache.
Nope. The shuttle Enterprise was not included in the TNG conference room (not ready room) display. It was, however, included in the rec deck display in Star Trek: The Motion Picture, and there was a drawing of it in Captain Archer's office on the show Enterprise.


Yep, that's one of their weirder time/causality loops, and most people don't recognize it as one.
One of the novels indicated that, in the Star Trek world, one of the engineers who worked on the shuttle design had a relative who was killed while serving aboard the aircraft carrier Enterprise in WWII, and that's why the first shuttle was named that. :)

NEOWatcher
2013-Jul-18, 04:41 PM
Yep, that's one of their weirder time/causality loops, and most people don't recognize it as one.
Even weirder is that Enterprise was never a space capable shuttle.

KaiYeves
2013-Jul-18, 05:43 PM
Even weirder is that Enterprise was never a space capable shuttle.

That wouldn't stop it from being part of a display of earlier ships with the name, though.

NEOWatcher
2013-Jul-18, 06:00 PM
That wouldn't stop it from being part of a display of earlier ships with the name, though.
No; It's just ironic that it is the only one of a set that isn't a space vehicle showcased as if it were space capable.
(Yes; they don't say it's a space capable vehicle, but I think many people watching the show get the impression that it is)

Solfe
2013-Jul-18, 09:43 PM
Is prank the right word for that or is it just an Easter Egg?

I know where I got the word "prank" from... In BSG, there is commentary on the Viper/F-16 thing, which segues into comments why the picture, books, and paper have no corners in the series.

I have listened/read the various reasons why. The only one that makes any sense is that the producers on the original TV show asked the staff to cut corners, so that's what the artistic staff did as a prank. It was repeated in the new series to keep that joke alive. It's even stranger in the new series because you can see that they use tractor feed paper, which happens to have no corners after it is pulled off. I should make up some weird in-universe reason for that and put in on my blog just to see if anyone bites. :)

Delvo
2013-Jul-19, 01:13 AM
What was the on-screen F-16 reference in BSG?

Solfe
2013-Jul-19, 02:42 AM
What was the on-screen F-16 reference in BSG?

In the miniseries, Adama has a framed picture of an F-16 on his desk with him standing in front of it. It is the scene where Adama and Col. Tigh discuss what to do with Starbuck after she punched Tigh in the face. Later Starbuck has a Topgun mug with an F-18 on the top.

BSG was notorious for failing to understand what a camera can see (things like people on occasion), but in these two instance some made a picture of an F-16 then made a mug with an F-18 and Topgun logo.

publiusr
2013-Jul-19, 09:41 PM
In TNG the ready room(I think it is) has a display panel of historic ships called Enterprise.

And what was supposed to be the Enterprise-C in that looked nothing like what we saw in yesterdays Enterprise

Probert's version
http://www.trekplace.com/l1d_probertambassador.html http://www.probertdesigns.com/#!
http://www.treknology.org/new/council-jef1.jpg
http://www.ex-astris-scientia.org/articles/ambassador.htm


Even weirder is that Enterprise was never a space capable shuttle.

I think that--in-universe--Enterprise was Columbia breaking up...therefore pointing to what we saw in STIII

NEOWatcher
2013-Jul-22, 02:11 PM
And what was supposed to be the Enterprise-C in that looked nothing like what we saw in yesterdays Enterprise
I don't understand what you are saying here.
You say "supposed to" but I don't see a clear definition of what was aired and if it was an inconsistancy.
I mainly see a discussion between E-C and another ship of the same class and some other random information.



I think that--in-universe--Enterprise was Columbia breaking up...therefore pointing to what we saw in STIII
Could you explain that thought? I don't recall what was in STIII to relate to that statement.

publiusr
2013-Jul-22, 11:12 PM
Well, had the first real shuttle been named Enterprise, then that meant Columbia would have been a test article and Enterprise would have borken up. In Star Trek history (fictional) it would have been Enterprise that broke up over Texas in the 2000's long before what we saw above the Genesis planet. Foreshadowing.

Solfe
2013-Jul-24, 01:37 AM
It kind of bothers me that I know that the Shuttle Enterprise was supposed to be named Constitution for the sailing ship and would have rolled out in late 1976. The Enterprise from Star Trek is a Constitution class ship. Obviously, this is coincidence and my brain still coughs up the information.