About my starships
RULE NUMBER FOUR: “COMMON SENSE”
The way I see fiction is in 2 parts: There’s a primary part, and a secondary part. The primary part is for example, I can say that starships are purely fictional. But I will also say that a starship needs to make some degree of sense. That’s the secondary part. These two can seem to be in conflict with each other.
Almost every show that has been on television and movies, including the ones that are supposed to be factual, and the ones that seem very realistic, are a bunch of phony-baloney nonsense, and I can pick them apart.
For me, “ Fiction“, although I know it is only really fantasy, needs to make a certain degree of sense, or else it is not entertaining. And there needs to be something really neat about it. This is why I don’t like most shows. Especially comedies, monster shows, zombie and vampire shows, ghost shows, killer/murder shows, crime drama, aliens shows, nature shows: all a bunch of crap, mostly—as far as being realistic.
The Star Trek Starship is purely fiction, a fantasy, but it if it made no sense at all with its design as a spaceship, then I could not pretend that it was. So there should be some sense to it.
To a smart person like me, when I analyze it, the Star Trek Starship makes no sense at all as a real spaceship. To start with, it's design is mass wasting to the extreme, and if it got anywhere near a planet's atmosphere, it would be very front/top heavy, and so would drop like a rock. It’s a bit like the theory of evolution; like the Star Trek Starship, on the surface, it can seem like it might be plausible. If one doesn’t think too much about it, one could think; it might happen.
Sometimes when I’m watching a crappy show, and they are saying; this creature evolved…, or this creature adapted…if I put my mind in neutral, it can seem like it could have happened that way. Sometimes I need to snap myself out of it, a bit like Spock being slapped to come out of a trance, because when I use my mind and think about it, it becomes obvious that evolution could never ever have happened. There are far too many facts to the contrary. By the way, if you believe in the theory of evolution or reincarnation or numerology and the like, then I can tell you about a group of beautiful women who are living on the moon desperately waiting to have sex with you. I can tell you their exact location and sell you plans of how to build your very own space ship out of cardboard.
To digress a bit more, the most bizarre thing about this, is that many of the people who do believe in evolution, are the sort of people who see facts, as the only things that are important. And yet these people are ignoring a huge bunch of facts in order to believe in their fantasies. But these people actually believe in these fantasies, or else they are simply turning a blind eye to all those facts. But when I watch something that I know is fantasy, there’s such a thing called “suspension of disbelief.” But if it’s too crazy or stupid, I can’t pretend. So with a starship, it must be not too much far off, so that I can pretend that it’s a real spaceship. This is where using some common sense should come in.
A real spaceship does not need to be aerodynamic at all – there’s no air out there! And the Star Trek Starship is to never land on a planet, and is not meant to fly through a planet’s atmosphere, and so it does not need to be aerodynamic – but despite this it does have a certain sleekness to it. So for this reason, starships should have a certain sort of sleekness to it, as opposed to being brick-like. This also relates to my rule number one: There needs to be some degree of sleekness or aerodynamics applied, to make it more attractive, despite the fact that it can never fly.
But there is a reason to have the primary hull to some degree aerodynamic: In Star Trek they never got around to showing it because of lack of money and time, but the primary hull is supposed to be able to separate from the rest of the ship, and to be able to land on a planet. Therefore it has landing gear to do so, to land, and take off again, and re-join with the ship if it can. Matt expertly designed the first 2 parts of the landing gear -- the triangles on the bottom side of the primary hull -- and they work, and work good -- I've tested them out, but he did not complete the third part for the 3 point landing gear -- I think because he did not know how it would be done, and doing so would have been going way beyond what was needed at that point. But I've worked it out, and it's different than most people would think if they came to doing it. The primary hull is not meant to crash land. In history there’s very few vehicles made that was meant to crash land. But a Star Trek like starship has no need of airfoils, and things like that. The main part of the ship is not meant to fly through an atmosphere, but the primary hull “has been designed” to do so.
So although your design should be purely fiction, it needs to seem like some sort of ship, that one could imagine could fly through space, and that you and others could be in it, traveling with you. So the shaping of the three main parts, and their placement, and the way that they are connected together, should make some sense. Make sense, like the Star Trek Starship seems to make sense. If you don’t think about it too much.