Windows on space-ships

[JuanBolio]

That's one of the things I like about the new Enterprise design. It always seemed to me the one place you would most want to have a window is on the BRIDGE.

Only place I absolutely would NOT have one (outside of maybe where the torps and antimatter are kept.) If I attacked the -d, I'd come in high and shoot down through the glass dome.

If you're targeting computer is precise enough to put a laser blast into an eight foot window on the relativistically moving target of my starship--while at the same time I am blasting away with my phasers trying to kill you--I dare say, you deserve to win.

More to the point: if your weapons are THAT accurate, you shooting holes in the bridge is the least of my worries.

If you had a window on the bridge, odds are you'd be dead from radiation poisoning long before you had the chance to get into a battle.

 

[trevanian]

That's one of the things I like about the new Enterprise design. It always seemed to me the one place you would most want to have a window is on the BRIDGE.

Only place I absolutely would NOT have one (outside of maybe where the torps and antimatter are kept.) If I attacked the -d, I'd come in high and shoot down through the glass dome.

If you're targeting computer is precise enough to put a laser blast into an eight foot window on the relativistically moving target of my starship--while at the same time I am blasting away with my phasers trying to kill you--I dare say, you deserve to win.

More to the point: if your weapons are THAT accurate, you shooting holes in the bridge is the least of my worries.

Now you're talking about pseudotech as well as real tech. Once you mix 'em, the arguments all become pointless. Transparent medium is more susceptible; that's the point of departure for credibility in a CIC type envion.

 

[DiSiLLUSiON]

No, that's assuming its transparent, which it would need to be to let light through. Light is not just stuff that allows you to see - its also laser beams, gamma rays, cosmic radiation, and all kinds of other things that are really bad for life. Sure, you can lead the window to absorb some of it, but that doesn't work nearly as well as a solid metal bulkhead.

As you probably well know, the visible light spectrum is relatively tiny. It doesn't seem that hard to both 1) block out everything else except that tiny spectrum and 2) to make some sort of polarization filter that, with current applied to it, filters out parts of that spectrum when needed.

 

[Crazy Eddie]

Unless, of course, I actually follow Captain Robau's order to "polarize the viewscreen."

Seriously, we're about twenty years too late to start asking about cosmic radiation filtering in through the windows after the window-happy Galaxy Class and the big picture windows on Voyager and DS9. Obviously, filtering out higher energy radiation from passing through transparent surfaces isn't hard to do; if it wasn't, then no Federation starship would have any windows, anywhere, for any reason.

 

[Crazy Eddie]

Only place I absolutely would NOT have one (outside of maybe where the torps and antimatter are kept.) If I attacked the -d, I'd come in high and shoot down through the glass dome.

If you're targeting computer is precise enough to put a laser blast into an eight foot window on the relativistically moving target of my starship--while at the same time I am blasting away with my phasers trying to kill you--I dare say, you deserve to win.

More to the point: if your weapons are THAT accurate, you shooting holes in the bridge is the least of my worries.

Now you're talking about pseudotech as well as real tech. Once you mix 'em, the arguments all become pointless. Transparent medium is more susceptible; that's the point of departure for credibility in a CIC type envion.

If the bridge was a CIC type environment it wouldn't be in a big dome on the top of the saucer. Actually, the bridge seems to be placed where it is to avoid enemy ships ACCIDENTALLY hitting it. At the top of the saucer you'd have to score a perfect bullseye, while a bridge in the center of the disk could be taken out by torpedo impacts relatively far off center.

 

[JuanBolio]

As you probably well know, the visible light spectrum is relatively tiny. It doesn't seem that hard to both 1) block out everything else except that tiny spectrum and 2) to make some sort of polarization filter that, with current applied to it, filters out parts of that spectrum when needed.

Yes and no. Radiation in the visible spectrum can be deadly too, if it is of sufficient intensity. Screens would simply be far more practical and safer than beefing up hundreds of windows.

Seriously, we're about twenty years too late to start asking about cosmic radiation filtering in through the windows after the window-happy Galaxy Class and the big picture windows on Voyager and DS9. Obviously, filtering out higher energy radiation from passing through transparent surfaces isn't hard to do; if it wasn't, then no Federation starship would have any windows, anywhere, for any reason.

In Trek's case I think function followed form. Windows were cool, so starships have them. Any science-y bits regarding HOW or WHY would strictly be afterthoughts.

 

[Cary L. Brown]

That's assuming it's glass. Which it's probably not; it's silly to put a weak substance like that on the hull of a spaceship.

And where, exactly, do you get the idea that glass is "weak?"

First off, "glass" is a class of materials. Substitute "amorphous ceramic" for "glass," every time you read it, and you'll be closer to being on-target here.

The truth is that glass has a far higher tensile strength than most other materials. The fact that it's quite weak in flexure is a problem, certainly... that's why glass is seldom used BY ITSELF as a mechanical material.

But many, many real-world structures... from buildings to automobiles to aircraft structures... use "glass" as a structural component. It is not "weak."

It simply needs to be combined, in a composite structure, with other elements which compensate for its less robust characteristics. Which engineers regularly do.

Get this through your collective heads, folks... there's nothing STRUCTURALLY wrong with having windows in a ship... submarine, surface, land, air, or space.

The only real issue is "does it serve a function?"

And a "window" on the bridge of a starship serves no practical function whatsoever. You don't "drive the ship" by looking out the @#$*ing window!

"Windows" can serve a valuable psychological function for off-duty crew, but they serve no practical purpose relating to the function of the ship whatsoever.

 

[Cary L. Brown]

If you're targeting computer is precise enough to put a laser blast into an eight foot window on the relativistically moving target of my starship--while at the same time I am blasting away with my phasers trying to kill you--I dare say, you deserve to win.

More to the point: if your weapons are THAT accurate, you shooting holes in the bridge is the least of my worries.

Now you're talking about pseudotech as well as real tech. Once you mix 'em, the arguments all become pointless. Transparent medium is more susceptible; that's the point of departure for credibility in a CIC type envion.

If the bridge was a CIC type environment it wouldn't be in a big dome on the top of the saucer. Actually, the bridge seems to be placed where it is to avoid enemy ships ACCIDENTALLY hitting it. At the top of the saucer you'd have to score a perfect bullseye, while a bridge in the center of the disk could be taken out by torpedo impacts relatively far off center.

The "school of fish" analogy?

The idea is that in schools of fish, subjected to predatory attacks (say, by a shark), the safest place to be is as far as possible from the center of the school, since the shark swims straight towards the center. Any fish is going to be in the shark's path at SOME point, but those in the dead-center are in the shark's path every single time.

An interesting thought...

Of course, considering the energy of Trek weaponry, there is no "safe" place on the ship whatsoever... not in the "core" and not on the surface. A phaser shot against an unshielded ship's hull will punch through like a hot knife through butter. So will a torpedo. There's noplace "safe." In a situation like that... the only "safety" is to be as far from the point of impact as possible.

If you have magical shields, everyplace is exactly as safe... and if you have no such shields, the safest place is the place furthest from the centroid of the ship.

 

[trevanian]

"Windows" can serve a valuable psychological function for off-duty crew, but they serve no practical purpose relating to the function of the ship whatsoever.

Which ties into Probert's TMP warp sled shuttle, deliberately designed to not have windows.And it isn't just Vulcans, since he intended it was a standard 'fleet vessel.

 

[Myasishchev]

If you're targeting computer is precise enough to put a laser blast into an eight foot window on the relativistically moving target of my starship--while at the same time I am blasting away with my phasers trying to kill you--I dare say, you deserve to win.

More to the point: if your weapons are THAT accurate, you shooting holes in the bridge is the least of my worries.

Now you're talking about pseudotech as well as real tech. Once you mix 'em, the arguments all become pointless. Transparent medium is more susceptible; that's the point of departure for credibility in a CIC type envion.

If the bridge was a CIC type environment it wouldn't be in a big dome on the top of the saucer. Actually, the bridge seems to be placed where it is to avoid enemy ships ACCIDENTALLY hitting it. At the top of the saucer you'd have to score a perfect bullseye, while a bridge in the center of the disk could be taken out by torpedo impacts relatively far off center.

What's the difference? The bridge does blow up no matter where you hit the ship.

 

[Crazy Eddie]

I know, right? For some reason the bridge is the ONLY place on the bridge that suffers from random exploding computer consoles and wanton electrocution of helmsmen... I always thought that when the ship took a hit like that, half the light fixtures in ten forward should have exploded too.

 

[Urge]

I dont like this thing with exploding consols. Its far-off, and impossible to accept as annything more then a drama-effect. Why shouldnt it be enough with the shaking, the alarm and the red lights? Why add exploding consols?