I always wondered about the max speed of the shuttlecrafts on TNG. I never understood why they used one on that flashback episode when Picard went to have his 150k lightyear tune-up on his artificial heart. Figured it was worth a little inconvenience to have the Enterprise drop him off in order being locked away with Wesley for hours (if not days 😟) on a road trip.
@@earlware4322 I think the story mechanism was that the big ship was needed for an extremely time-crucial delivery or relief effort in the opposite direction. But I'm not sure Picard's scheduled service was that time crucial, unless he had a very restrictive warranty.
A note on transporters: Remember that such tech requires a tremendous amount of energy and is demonstrably less robust than other forms of transportation. And, after beaming you over, you are out in the open and have to beam into a room/shelter, or beam over a shelter and take the time, energy, manpower, and resources to set it up. With a basic class B or higher shuttle, you have shelter, storage, carrying capacity, power, and a convenient mode of transportation that doesn't require someone else and a base station to take you a couple more miles... That way. All with similar, or less, energy than using a teleporter. Runabouts are the RVs of the Trek Universe. Not designed for it, but can certainly be used for permanent habitation and use as a run of the mill small ship.
@@krispalermo8133 The first time I saw a Runabouts the first thing to pop into my head was Lone Star and his flying Winnebago - which, itself was a direct parody of Han and The Falcon
@@smallmoe I think that is a little overdramatized, the process takes at worst seconds (aside that it is from an physical point of view hillarious offcourse)} so not going through something natural that hinders it should be pretty easy to avoid...
For any given sci fi universe, the 'Space Vans' are usually the ships I'd actually wish I had in my RL. :) You know, this Veritech fighter I got up on blocks in the side yard is cool but harder to go shopping in. :)
My focus for "ship I actually wish I had in my IRL" is on self-sustainability. Most of these ships are designed to operate in the context of a setting that has tons of other infrastructure that "my IRL" lacks. Anything that requires antimatter or dilithium had better be able to mine or otherwise generate such supplies for itself, or it'll become very useless to me as a ship, very quickly. The ship's AI being fully sapient introduces complications I'd rather not have to cope with (though it's not a deal-breaker if the AI in question is stipulated, as part of what it would mean to "have" the ship, to be loyal to me and of like mind on all the most important philosophies I base my life on), but apart from that, something like the Andromeda Ascendant would be a perfect ship to have "in my IRL", and not just because it's super-powerful: yes, the Andromeda might be difficult to find a suitable parking location for it, close to the doors of my local supermarket, but it's capable of refueling by parking itself for a while in a relatively low solar orbit; it can mostly repair itself (though, I'd want to be careful around things like black holes, lest it end up needing types of repair that require someone with Seamus Harper's skills, which I don't have), and can obtain raw materials for those repairs quite easily from places like the asteroid belt; and if I really, really desperately need to get groceries home and for whatever reason can't do it with other stuff I have so I absolutely have to rely on the ship in question, well, the Andromeda has onboard shipyards capable of fabricating (and even mass-producing) vehicles much smaller than itself. It's very likely that it would be able to provide something in the Space Minivan category, but even if it can't, it can definitely produce slipfighters, which are established capable of both VTOL and SSTO, so definitely have enough thrust to lift a simple metal box strapped to it with cargo straps, that's big enough for all my groceries, and deliver it to my home (and, unlike just getting the slipfighter directly, having the Andromeda, and having it make the slipfighter, means I have a means to actually refuel and repair, or even completely replace, the slipfighter, which I can't do if all I have is the slipfighter itself).
@@OllamhDrab mainly the ability to glass a planet from high orbit. Which isn't something you need to do every day. But it does come in handy sometimes.
the type 4, 6, 7, and 8 shuttles are basically the jeep wrangler of the federation; the body type has persisted for centuries with only minor changes to the configuration simply because they got it right the first time.
I don't recall seeing any types 1, 2, or 3, so I'm going to hazard a guess that they actually got it _wrong_ the first 3 times, and then just kept making versions for a while after.
@@absalomdraconis You can see them in the Enterprise show, you know, Captain Archer, NX-1 Enterprise. That one. I think they had either Type 1 or 2 in that.
I always enjoyed the design of these shuttles. Not just because they seemed like function over form in the most brutal way, but also because it was the first time I realized "wait a minute, they're in space, why does it need to be aerodynamic?!" Of course the shuttles do enter atmo from time to time which is why they don't look like actual boxes (like the Borg), but for something that doesn't need to go far or fast, it just needs to go, it's perfect.
*Trek Nerd Mode: Enabled* Actually, the NCC-1700 series would be the USS Constitution (despite an on-screen kitbash - the USS Constellation -being NCC-1017). The USS Galaxy was actually NCC-70637. Were the Enterprise D not a continuation of the NCC-1701 legacy. NCC-1701-A was also a Constitution Class. NCC-1701-B was an Excelsior class, and should have had an NCC-2XXX number. NCC-1701-C was an Ambassador class, which should have been somewhere around NCC-105XX. *Trek Nerd Mod: Disabled*
IIRC the issue was less the sets (there were enough "big" sets to accommodate shuttles) and more so the issue that a proper shuttle transfer (including shots of it leaving the ship at least sometimes, atmospheric entry, establishing shot and finally landing) was way too costly to produce. Having it landed somewhere would've been doable, but not satisfactory without showing how it got there.
I'm remembering an Enterprise episode where their shuttle did have a docking pressurized ring to get aboard a stranded Vulcan vessel and I remember thinking it was more than a bit suspicious they had them back then, but not later? What if they needed to get aboard that same Vulcan ship later and the transporters were down? Why don't they always wear space suits when in the shuttle knowing there could be hazardous conditions either in descent or on the surface? In any case, the FIRST and best upgrade to any Federation Shuttle Van is a 12v mini fridge. PERFECT for those long away missions where you need to keep the scouting party refreshed with ice cold beverages. Cheers
It always wondered me why Starfleet stopped using life support belts. Well, obviously space suits are safer. The batteries last much longer, since they only have to power the heat and atmospheric recycler and not also a forcefield. Plus even when the energy fails, the suit can keep you alive and conscious for several minutes while the life support belt immediately exposes you to space, even if it just flickers for a moment. But they are great for emergencies. They are easy to put on and don't take up much room.
The thing to keep in mind though is a Galaxy Class doesn't just have one kind of shuttle aboard, you see an older style of shuttle in the early seasons and in the backgrounds of some episodes. The Galaxy class doesn't need a Do Everything Vehicle because it has many hangars with many vehicles, whereas the NX class was much smaller and probably did. Somewhere they have a ship, or a module, or something, in storage, that's more specialised... but a shuttle is for shuttling personel, and occasionally light equipment or supplies, between starbases, ships and habitable planets. That's all it needs to do. And they have a lot of them because they have a lot of personel to shuttle. You don't need a C130 to drop bombs.
Wayback in the era of enterprise, they needed a dedicated, engineered pressure ring…By the time of TNG, the federations science have advanced to the point where they can simply use force fields to create an airtight seal on a docking port
8:10 I guess the idea is more that "hey, even if there's not a hangar, you can just get beamed across by the ship or station". The Type 6 I assume has it's origins as a craft that operates from a base, either a station or a ship, so it's unlikely it's going to find itself somewhere with no docking facilities. There's almost always a transporter somewhere nearby when full size ships or space stations are involved. Additionally, I guess it's kind of the "ease of use" aspect. Docking ports might be hard to line up and adjust for, and take more time. Just flying a ship into a hangar and opening a door seems a lot easier.
I remember one episode where the enterprise had to purchase a volatile material, that did not play well with transporters. So they used Data (the irreplaceable android) to ship the materials back and forth in one of the shuttles. Always bugged me that they had really amazing computers, but couldn't just.... make drones controlled by the ship.
I think the Federation has historically had issues with AI-controlling ships going a bit funny. The Original Series also has this weird anti-AI thing going on whenever it came up.
I actually really only like Deep Space Nine, and mostly the first half. Not despite it being so different from the rest of Star Trek, but because of that.
One thing I'm surprised you didn't touch on is the design choice to not have any point of entry/exit in the cockpit. This means your ability to haul goods is limited by needing to get past it to access the controls.
Fun fact the Type 6 shuttlecraft is actually a purely Fusion Powered Shuttle. Its MSD used in TNG labels the main reactor as a Fusion core 😊 No antimatter to go boom. Civilians can get their hands on Type 6 shuttles as Professor Galen owned a Type 7 😉 Later Type 6 shuttles on Voyager had shields, phasers and transporters as standard. The Basic Model topped out at Warp 1.2 but the later versions had Warp 2. They more than likely had a small replicator - Ferengi Shuttles, the Shuttle Nenebok, Type 7 shuttles had a small replicator 😉 It would have a small amount of bulk matter for it (replicators use transporter tech to convert basic raw matter into energy then into foods and items)
Alright Jeremy. Our brief is to design a shuttle for the Feds. Basically we have to design a rather nice if small one room apartment with replicators, emergency transport, comfy coaches and can cram a whole bunch of people in if needs must. Done. It's a space brick with chunky engines and a rather durable design. Literally, these things might actually be more durable than some star ships, provided they aren't deliberately shot at. Banal, but at the same time, one of these is a better living environment for humans than 95% of all 21st century housing.
there are containment fields so for a type 6 there is probably one for the hatch and one for the pilot's area at the nose. but for old school 'move from the ship to an airlock or other place in a hostile environment', i imagine there are at least enough suits under the benches for however many the normal max is, just suit up and depressurize the cabin. not ideal but probably fine all things considered. most of the ships we see are impacted far more by function then i think would otherwise have happened. the tech has counter grav, artificial gravity, small yet powerful drives and thrusters, so they all seem to be bricks with basic streamlining unless higher performance is needed. and considering the presence and capability of the transporters by TNG, i imagine the shuttles not having the ability to dock i think isn't too big of an issue. if they really had to i imagine the method would either use a different type or use eva to cross and force access through an external hatch and either clear whatever is preventing beaming or secure access to a larger hatch or bay for better access. i also figure there are probably a couple of travel pods or other shuttles with a dock, especially on a galaxy class.
Trivia. The only reason the teleporter exists in the Star Trek world is because the shuttle prop wasn't finished in time for filming in the original show, and they needed a quick alternate method of transportation.
Shooting a model sequence for the shuttle, and setting up the full size shuttle along with an extra set that was a docking bay/landing pad/alien planet was ironically more expensive than the show's "teleporter". There is a reason the transporter was used more than the shuttle in the original series: It was literally cheaper to do the special effects for that and have the actors just be in a necessary set for the shot they arrive than all the extraneous stuff you'd need to do for the shuttle. Even if they just shot a sequence of the shuttle leaving and then cut to the next scene, that's model photography that has setup, takes time, people need to be paid, etc. The transporter effect is just the actors sitting still for the special effects people to get a shot and add the effects. It's the same thing on the other end. It's less time and money. Shuttle sequences have the same elements a shot of the enterprise did, which is way more than a transporter effects sequence. So, the transporter won out in the end not because the shuttle model wasn't ready yet, it's because it was cheaper to produce as a special effect, and a fantastical sci-fi tech spectacle for the time which became iconic of Star Trek.
I presume there was a rear hatch module which included an actual airlock intergrated you can walk over the top of. Possibly a fat one, which required another ramp to fold down to give ease of access. Which might be the reason why they rarely bothered to put one on.
The one thing that I never liked about Star Trek is that they had to input all of the ship movements using a touchscreen. That's okay when you're cruising between the stars but when you're in combat two joysticks would be better than hunt and pecking your commands in. Even two cross configurations of buttons would be better.
In truth I would expect anything moving af the speed of a Star Trek shuttle to rely on the human user only fir strstegical choices about the route, and have all the rest completely automated.
If I remember correctly, Tom Paris in 'Voyager' insisted on having stick controls in the Delta Flyer for this very reason. And those touchscreens are terrible in combat situations. I mean, when your hands are holding sticks or HOTAS, chances are good that those sticks are still firmly in your grip after a hit that makes the ship shake. Also, after a good shaking your vision might be blurry for a moment and you might feel a bit dazed, but with a flightstick it is _way_ more easy to remain control over your ship. But try to find the right controls on a panel when you are dazed, your vision is blurry and maybe the panel even flickers after that hit.
To be fair, I don't think they'd need an airlock. A shield could easily be produced to make a pocket on the lowered ramp that acts as an airlock by just using its shields. The transporter would be nice, if just for escaping, though the smaller warp drive does make it a lot more compact. Unless you're sending them out into battle, weapons aren't super necessary. The shields will protect you decently (though that transporter would be nice for escaping if at all possible) And it's just really nice to have a way of sending someone else somewhere that transporters can't reach. If it can really only go right around the speed of light, then interstellar travel isn't possible if you want to arrive without starving to death, but intra-system travel is super convenient without needing to pull the whole ship over just to hop over to the next planet.
This ship reminds me of the Kodiak Drop Shuttle from Mass effect. That vehicle is the Type 6 on steroids and there is no better troop transport in Sifi
You always need a minivan. I LOVE the Danube (especially the combat refit you referred to), Yellowstone, and Delta Flyer for their capabilities/specialties. But the type a, 6, and 8 are just fucking useful.
The Delta Flyer always ran up against my, "Welp, this is just plain /pure/ magic," while the Type 6/8/etc. were... believable. And given what I've talked about before and possibly in the future, me loving shuttles is kind of weird.
@@SacredCowShipyards I personally like the Delta Flyer from a design perspective and how the interior is laid out... ignoring the "even for ST techno-babble techno-babble."
Considering how many times i've shoved a 4x8 sheet of ply or sheet rock or what ever ! I needed in the back of a minivan after taking the seats out ... I feel you entirely. Minivans are Awesome! their better at hauling now days most than most trucks!
You're thinking of the door as a hinderance, rather than a seven foot long docking lug. Despite the problems I have had with Reboot Star Trek, they did a few things well, and one of them was the use of that big rear hatch (earlier marks of shuttle had them too) as a sort of "docking socket" inside the shuttlebay instead of saying "magic air forcefield keeps us all from dying, lol." This meant that the doors to the shuttlebay were *all* effectively airlocks, and you didn't have to step into the bay to get into your shuttle.
I actually love these shuttles. I think they look sweet&to me, it's kinda crazy we don't see millions of these, everywhere in trek universe. They would seem to me the equivalent of the family car. There isn't much on them beyond their fuel source that is exotic. You'd think.
For the airlock problem, aside from the shield re-configuring, I do believe you can blow the rear hatch right off to then back it up. Although yeah it's kinda canon that there's a shield to keep the life support in.
@@franohmsford7548 Maybe the seats are an upgraded version of the ones you see on modern airplanes today. But instead of the cushions coming off to become a flotation device, they lift up to provide access to a dilithium powered toilet bowel with a disco ball amount of 23rd century flash lights, and a talking AI to run the power conduits that make it all work. :)
@@BonannoCM Still means having to take a crap whilst sitting in between two people you barely know with no barrier between you and them. And ooooh THE SMELL!
This was just the problem with cheap props. The drop down hatch on an armored personnel carrier has a hatch on it. The type 6 could use a couple more doors, anyway.
I would assume that the lowly type-6 carries half a dozen or so emergency EVA suits in a locker under the bench seats just-in-case. That way you could always depressurize and do an EVA transfer to board a ship without a hangar bay. I always thought the nacelle pods on these looked particularly cheap like the budget ran out.
Both TOS and TNG were constantly subject to the whim of budgetary limits- apparently the only reason for the transporters to be introduced in TOS is that they were cheaper to do with effects than shuttles were with props.
@@absalomdraconis Yep. Sometime having ridiculous budget limitations can force you to come up with really clever solutions like the transporter and original Jeffery's tube, and having too much money allows you to go absolutely insane like the bridge and corridors in Discovery. I absolutely hate the Discover sets. They are at least 3 times too big and way too "Look at me!" flashy. Don't even get me started on that turbo-list scene in discovery that went on for 4 minutes flying through a void bigger than 20 Borg cubes materializing transport rings just ahead of the of the flying transporter!!! It was like: how can we waste $3 million on a scene to try and create tension to distract for an awful script? Then there was that supposed "computer core" room.
I have a buddy with a honda odyssey with air suspension, it can drive lowered and look good or go up and have more ground clearance than stock. I drive a wrx..and I'm kinda jelly of his van sometimes
I think you should also look at Voyager and it shuttlecraft not to mention specifically the later episodes I think it's in season 6 5 or 6 with the the Delta flyer
Phaser banks, now that's how you sell minivans. Honestly, it's the forcefields I've always had the biggest problem with. I still don't understand how light and sound "sometimes" penetrate it. It will stop a laser but you can still see through it? Yea, square that circle.
Minivans are like more economic SUVs/ crossovers. People always think a 5 door or crossover provide a bunch of space but they really don't because they are still on sedan chassis. Minivan might be on actual van or truck chassis. SUVs have gone from covered trucks to status symbols. I respect minivans on the road more than the crossovers and SUVs I see.
You know I always had a thing for them … the type 6shuttle sleek shape looks like it belongs in Star Trek the runabout looks jaggedly and cobbled together more like a star wars ship ……..my first major toy purchase ……and to this day I still have it……..
The lack of storage bothers me, they are using the shuttles to lay mines in one episode and they literally have sensitive explosives that could take out a ship just lying against the bench/couch in the rear free to roll around. The design would be 100x better with a small air lock at the rear instead of the ramp, a tiny bathroom/medical kits/emergency supplies and equipment and real seats in addition to some modular storage areas. Really maximise all the overhead space too.
You are kind of right in asking why bother with a shuttle, any and all times the transporter couldn't work in an episode, the shuttles couldn't be used either for usually the same reason...
I couldn't convince my wife to get a lift kit on her minivan... An awd minivan can do way more of the actual things that people need to do than a small 4x4 suv, speaking from experience. We went from a forerunner to a sienna and have done way more work with the van.
Basically, the engineer was given a list of requirements, and they just built that. Nothing it didn't need, no attempt to force multiple roles on the platform, no flashy complicated designs. Just a piece of equipment designed to do it's job.
I have an idea of taking the story line of the A Team type group with the federation. A shuttle is moded to be like the A Team van. This includes the rear wing that allows weapons, etc. Higher warp speed (something like putting in a 5.0 supercharged v8 from smaller displacemt engine. And painted in the iconic GMC van. It will be "borrowed " and changed as needed. Basically, star fleet chasing this small band of people that do things a bit more directly them star fleet rules allow. Just my thought.
I know I'm late to the party. But if you find the time and inclination to look at another workhorse of a setting. I recommend the warhammer 40k Arvus Lighter, also known as "the flying Pig". Should be great fun for you. You can even compare it to the Aquila Lander from the same setting.
Convergence in design happens. My shuttles are very similar to Trek shuttles, but with less payload, more maneuverability, and somewhat higher speed. The rear is a vertical double door hatch shielded by fuselage/nacelle pilons. They are 4 passenger. Now, I do have larger variants, used for medical emergency, police vehicles, and other special duties. No teleportation. Those are self bye bye (RUclips..ugh) booths... However, other tech is very possible, if you had a mathematician that was able to come up with some formula that predicted quantum behavior, and other sequences and series...
Type 7 was the original TNG shuttlecraft. Too expensive to make the 1:1 mockup at the time though, so it got canned in favor of more angular designs. I miss it. It was a bit bigger and nicer for extended trips at low speed. The front entrance ramp was cool but never actually made it to the show.
These are miles better looking that those little shuttle pods that look like a kid made them out of refrigerator boxes. But I'm pretty sure the engine nacelles aren't even attached, they just lay them down next to the shuttle-craft on the set!
I love the Type 6. I bought Eaglemoss' shuttle figurine pack, kept the Type 6, and sold the rest. Also, I love the idea that you drive a lifted AWD minivan. I bet that confuses the hell out of all the penis-truck manly-men on the road.
I see the Type 6 as something needed. Transporters in TNG are not that common. They are not everywhere and they have a finite range and like to have a nice pad to pad for the best results. Site to Site functions but they are not as good as pad to pad. So a shuttle goes further carrying many people or cargo and yeah. Being a mini-van. (I drive one as well. Though mine is not lifted.) The one that I think does this better than a type 6? Oddly the Discovery shuttles. The back hatch has a ramp to come down. And the back area is a Starfleet standard docking ring. So they took the type six and patched up the few flaws you stated here.
Pretty much this, i always understood transporters as being near line of sight and severely range limited, plus things like shields and weird atmosphere and planitary atmosphere effects being a problem so a shuttle being a way around that
I grew up with the Original Series and thought of the shuttles as small space busses. The Next Gen shuttles reminded me more of an APC or Huey. But minivan works too.
I get where you're coming from, but I would contend that the Runabout family is a /much/ more APC-type small craft, even though they're basically miniature starships in their own rights.
Seems to me the shuttle was designed more for the needs of filming a tv show rather than any actual practicality in real life. Always a consideration when designing these things for tv & movies I guess.
I think I remember a short story, though I can't remember the source and canonicity is questionable, where a shuttle with a ramp backed up the edge of the ramp against a ship's hull and the shuttle then projected a force field tunnel to seal itself against the ship, after which the crew made an ad-hoc entryway in the hull.
@@absalomdraconis Yes. I would also like to see more redundant engineering like the airlocks in 2001 Space Odyssey and 2010. On the other hand, wasn't there a scene in ST: First Contact where Picard showed someone an outside porthole that was just a forcefield? That would point to highly reliable tech.
@@absalomdraconis I think the advantage of the ramp was that the prop department could pull that off easily without complex mechanics, and having it work in a scene as practical effect would be easier to film. Once you enter "shuttle docking a starship" territory, you already know you gonna need the VFX deparment to pull off that scene.
I figured that a Runabout is the equivalent of a winnebago RV. In civilian non starfleet service, a type six would be operated by a "white-van-man". I believe Star Trek had a few airlock shuttles. It's not a mini-van ITS JUST A VAN!
If there isn't a hanger avaialable. theres usualy a few space suits stuffed under the bench seating or in the storage boxes. put on the space suit, depersureize, open the door.
guess you could argue that in the case of needing to pick up people on a planet with a hostile or non existent atmosphere, the crew would be suited up and the internal environment vented and replaced once the passengers were aboard and the hatch closed.
For Trek when it comes to shuttles they are there for various reasons, besides just minivan cargo. One big thing is when Transportors can not be used. This is do to either natural phenomenon or technological interference. Which would lead to mutilated people or things, or just plane disintegration into particals of matter. Someone here noted the episode of Data using the shuttle to transport a highly unstable substance that doesn't play nice at all with the transporters. Going onto technological means usually its shields that block transporters (borg exceptions). But very dense material or say devices specifically designed to disrupt transporters can and do exist in Trek. I could see a starfleet vessel using a shuttle to comply and appear less threatening with it vs a 600m long Galactic behemoth ship to negotiate with less advance civilization that is skittish.
Hey now, Enterprise is my 3rd favourite trek after DS9 and TNG. Definitely better on rewatch. Also best sets on any of the shows IMO. Yeah, I always thought star trek did a pretty good job on it's shuttles(except those horrible shuttlepod boxes). But my favourite would have to be the type 11 from Insurrection. It's got WAY more space so you don't go crazy on long trips, 4 phaser strips giving omnidirectional coverage, transporters, most likely replicators, a proper docking collar, and while I can't find any official number it can likely maintain a decent warp factor. The type 9 in voyager could do warp 4, so I wouldn't put the type 11 past being able to hold warp 6. Plus it's just a sexy shuttle. All sovereigny and shit.
Yeah, Enterprise was good, and got very good in 3 and 4 season. Then Frakes got onto the set and murdered it, not even letting Archer have his final word. The only other time I felt similar pain was when Game Of Thrones got murdered by the Dumb and Dumber, but with Enterprise the pain was greater, because it was a good Star Trek, and you dont get these very often :/
The runabout can go at high warp.
The shuttle craft can only go, "Hi, Worf!"
I always wondered about the max speed of the shuttlecrafts on TNG. I never understood why they used one on that flashback episode when Picard went to have his 150k lightyear tune-up on his artificial heart. Figured it was worth a little inconvenience to have the Enterprise drop him off in order being locked away with Wesley for hours (if not days 😟) on a road trip.
@@earlware4322 I think the story mechanism was that the big ship was needed for an extremely time-crucial delivery or relief effort in the opposite direction.
But I'm not sure Picard's scheduled service was that time crucial, unless he had a very restrictive warranty.
A note on transporters: Remember that such tech requires a tremendous amount of energy and is demonstrably less robust than other forms of transportation. And, after beaming you over, you are out in the open and have to beam into a room/shelter, or beam over a shelter and take the time, energy, manpower, and resources to set it up. With a basic class B or higher shuttle, you have shelter, storage, carrying capacity, power, and a convenient mode of transportation that doesn't require someone else and a base station to take you a couple more miles... That way. All with similar, or less, energy than using a teleporter.
Runabouts are the RVs of the Trek Universe. Not designed for it, but can certainly be used for permanent habitation and use as a run of the mill small ship.
Runabouts are about the same length of the Millennium Falcon.
@@krispalermo8133 The first time I saw a Runabouts the first thing to pop into my head was Lone Star and his flying Winnebago - which, itself was a direct parody of Han and The Falcon
plus porters are a to b, you can not see what is in between, so exploring becomes an problem, kinda.
@@pouncepounce7417 That and the right kind of storm can spread your molecules from one end of the galaxy to the other if you try to beam through it.
@@smallmoe I think that is a little overdramatized, the process takes at worst seconds (aside that it is from an physical point of view hillarious offcourse)} so not going through something natural that hinders it should be pretty easy to avoid...
For any given sci fi universe, the 'Space Vans' are usually the ships I'd actually wish I had in my RL. :) You know, this Veritech fighter I got up on blocks in the side yard is cool but harder to go shopping in. :)
"When You Want to Get Stuff Done."
Then get it up off blocks. Like now.
😁
My focus for "ship I actually wish I had in my IRL" is on self-sustainability. Most of these ships are designed to operate in the context of a setting that has tons of other infrastructure that "my IRL" lacks. Anything that requires antimatter or dilithium had better be able to mine or otherwise generate such supplies for itself, or it'll become very useless to me as a ship, very quickly. The ship's AI being fully sapient introduces complications I'd rather not have to cope with (though it's not a deal-breaker if the AI in question is stipulated, as part of what it would mean to "have" the ship, to be loyal to me and of like mind on all the most important philosophies I base my life on), but apart from that, something like the Andromeda Ascendant would be a perfect ship to have "in my IRL", and not just because it's super-powerful: yes, the Andromeda might be difficult to find a suitable parking location for it, close to the doors of my local supermarket, but it's capable of refueling by parking itself for a while in a relatively low solar orbit; it can mostly repair itself (though, I'd want to be careful around things like black holes, lest it end up needing types of repair that require someone with Seamus Harper's skills, which I don't have), and can obtain raw materials for those repairs quite easily from places like the asteroid belt; and if I really, really desperately need to get groceries home and for whatever reason can't do it with other stuff I have so I absolutely have to rely on the ship in question, well, the Andromeda has onboard shipyards capable of fabricating (and even mass-producing) vehicles much smaller than itself. It's very likely that it would be able to provide something in the Space Minivan category, but even if it can't, it can definitely produce slipfighters, which are established capable of both VTOL and SSTO, so definitely have enough thrust to lift a simple metal box strapped to it with cargo straps, that's big enough for all my groceries, and deliver it to my home (and, unlike just getting the slipfighter directly, having the Andromeda, and having it make the slipfighter, means I have a means to actually refuel and repair, or even completely replace, the slipfighter, which I can't do if all I have is the slipfighter itself).
@@JohnDoe-nq4du What about that doesn't say 'Space Van?'
@@OllamhDrab mainly the ability to glass a planet from high orbit. Which isn't something you need to do every day. But it does come in handy sometimes.
the type 4, 6, 7, and 8 shuttles are basically the jeep wrangler of the federation; the body type has persisted for centuries with only minor changes to the configuration simply because they got it right the first time.
I don't recall seeing any types 1, 2, or 3, so I'm going to hazard a guess that they actually got it _wrong_ the first 3 times, and then just kept making versions for a while after.
@@absalomdraconis You can see them in the Enterprise show, you know, Captain Archer, NX-1 Enterprise.
That one. I think they had either Type 1 or 2 in that.
Id say more like the Jeep Cherokee. Space SUV. O.o
I always enjoyed the design of these shuttles. Not just because they seemed like function over form in the most brutal way, but also because it was the first time I realized "wait a minute, they're in space, why does it need to be aerodynamic?!" Of course the shuttles do enter atmo from time to time which is why they don't look like actual boxes (like the Borg), but for something that doesn't need to go far or fast, it just needs to go, it's perfect.
*Trek Nerd Mode: Enabled*
Actually, the NCC-1700 series would be the USS Constitution (despite an on-screen kitbash - the USS Constellation -being NCC-1017). The USS Galaxy was actually NCC-70637. Were the Enterprise D not a continuation of the NCC-1701 legacy. NCC-1701-A was also a Constitution Class. NCC-1701-B was an Excelsior class, and should have had an NCC-2XXX number. NCC-1701-C was an Ambassador class, which should have been somewhere around NCC-105XX.
*Trek Nerd Mod: Disabled*
Fun fact: the reason for the transporter on star trek was that it was a cheaper alternative to marking sets that could accommodate the shuttle in it
IIRC the issue was less the sets (there were enough "big" sets to accommodate shuttles) and more so the issue that a proper shuttle transfer (including shots of it leaving the ship at least sometimes, atmospheric entry, establishing shot and finally landing) was way too costly to produce.
Having it landed somewhere would've been doable, but not satisfactory without showing how it got there.
Defiant: Pimp Hand of Cisco
Your minivan: Pimp Hand of Sacred Cow Shipyards
Minivan... That has to be the best description for the standard Starfleet shuttle. Thank you random squishy hating Dock-master.
So a runabout is an SUV? Or a RV?
I'm remembering an Enterprise episode where their shuttle did have a docking pressurized ring to get aboard a stranded Vulcan vessel and I remember thinking it was more than a bit suspicious they had them back then, but not later? What if they needed to get aboard that same Vulcan ship later and the transporters were down? Why don't they always wear space suits when in the shuttle knowing there could be hazardous conditions either in descent or on the surface? In any case, the FIRST and best upgrade to any Federation Shuttle Van is a 12v mini fridge. PERFECT for those long away missions where you need to keep the scouting party refreshed with ice cold beverages. Cheers
It always wondered me why Starfleet stopped using life support belts.
Well, obviously space suits are safer. The batteries last much longer, since they only have to power the heat and atmospheric recycler and not also a forcefield. Plus even when the energy fails, the suit can keep you alive and conscious for several minutes while the life support belt immediately exposes you to space, even if it just flickers for a moment.
But they are great for emergencies. They are easy to put on and don't take up much room.
The thing to keep in mind though is a Galaxy Class doesn't just have one kind of shuttle aboard, you see an older style of shuttle in the early seasons and in the backgrounds of some episodes. The Galaxy class doesn't need a Do Everything Vehicle because it has many hangars with many vehicles, whereas the NX class was much smaller and probably did.
Somewhere they have a ship, or a module, or something, in storage, that's more specialised... but a shuttle is for shuttling personel, and occasionally light equipment or supplies, between starbases, ships and habitable planets. That's all it needs to do. And they have a lot of them because they have a lot of personel to shuttle.
You don't need a C130 to drop bombs.
@@AvalonRegarnished You don't need a C-130 to drop bombs, that doesn't mean the C-130 is the wrong vehicle to drop bombs out of (MOAB)
@@inventor121 more that most vehicles designed to drop bombs aren't made with that monstrosity in mind
Wayback in the era of enterprise, they needed a dedicated, engineered pressure ring…By the time of TNG, the federations science have advanced to the point where they can simply use force fields to create an airtight seal on a docking port
8:10 I guess the idea is more that "hey, even if there's not a hangar, you can just get beamed across by the ship or station". The Type 6 I assume has it's origins as a craft that operates from a base, either a station or a ship, so it's unlikely it's going to find itself somewhere with no docking facilities. There's almost always a transporter somewhere nearby when full size ships or space stations are involved. Additionally, I guess it's kind of the "ease of use" aspect. Docking ports might be hard to line up and adjust for, and take more time. Just flying a ship into a hangar and opening a door seems a lot easier.
The Type 6 Shuttle: If you're a civilian, it's awesome. If you're an officer, you're about to crash into a planet or get kidnapped.
I remember one episode where the enterprise had to purchase a volatile material, that did not play well with transporters.
So they used Data (the irreplaceable android) to ship the materials back and forth in one of the shuttles.
Always bugged me that they had really amazing computers, but couldn't just.... make drones controlled by the ship.
at lease they didn't use a red shirt to pilot the shuttle.
The Federation, and Star Trek in general, was always really, really, really weird about how it treated things like automation.
I think the Federation has historically had issues with AI-controlling ships going a bit funny. The Original Series also has this weird anti-AI thing going on whenever it came up.
"DS9, i adore and Voy, i suffered through" My man!
I actually really only like Deep Space Nine, and mostly the first half. Not despite it being so different from the rest of Star Trek, but because of that.
Voyager, The Trek series that makes all other Trek series look absolutely stunning
@@Puma1Sunfire1 I don't know, disco is making voyager look pretty nostalgic.
One thing I'm surprised you didn't touch on is the design choice to not have any point of entry/exit in the cockpit. This means your ability to haul goods is limited by needing to get past it to access the controls.
Fun fact the Type 6 shuttlecraft is actually a purely Fusion Powered Shuttle. Its MSD used in TNG labels the main reactor as a Fusion core 😊 No antimatter to go boom. Civilians can get their hands on Type 6 shuttles as Professor Galen owned a Type 7 😉 Later Type 6 shuttles on Voyager had shields, phasers and transporters as standard. The Basic Model topped out at Warp 1.2 but the later versions had Warp 2. They more than likely had a small replicator - Ferengi Shuttles, the Shuttle Nenebok, Type 7 shuttles had a small replicator 😉 It would have a small amount of bulk matter for it (replicators use transporter tech to convert basic raw matter into energy then into foods and items)
Alright Jeremy. Our brief is to design a shuttle for the Feds. Basically we have to design a rather nice if small one room apartment with replicators, emergency transport, comfy coaches and can cram a whole bunch of people in if needs must.
Done. It's a space brick with chunky engines and a rather durable design. Literally, these things might actually be more durable than some star ships, provided they aren't deliberately shot at.
Banal, but at the same time, one of these is a better living environment for humans than 95% of all 21st century housing.
As a kid we always called the shuttles Pickard's minivans
there are containment fields so for a type 6 there is probably one for the hatch and one for the pilot's area at the nose. but for old school 'move from the ship to an airlock or other place in a hostile environment', i imagine there are at least enough suits under the benches for however many the normal max is, just suit up and depressurize the cabin. not ideal but probably fine all things considered.
most of the ships we see are impacted far more by function then i think would otherwise have happened. the tech has counter grav, artificial gravity, small yet powerful drives and thrusters, so they all seem to be bricks with basic streamlining unless higher performance is needed.
and considering the presence and capability of the transporters by TNG, i imagine the shuttles not having the ability to dock i think isn't too big of an issue. if they really had to i imagine the method would either use a different type or use eva to cross and force access through an external hatch and either clear whatever is preventing beaming or secure access to a larger hatch or bay for better access. i also figure there are probably a couple of travel pods or other shuttles with a dock, especially on a galaxy class.
Hell yeah, fellow minivan driver! I drive a Toyota Sienna older than some coworkers I've had and love it.
I remember the first time I saw a mini van. First thought was, It looks kinda like a space shuttle...
Trivia. The only reason the teleporter exists in the Star Trek world is because the shuttle prop wasn't finished in time for filming in the original show, and they needed a quick alternate method of transportation.
Shooting a model sequence for the shuttle, and setting up the full size shuttle along with an extra set that was a docking bay/landing pad/alien planet was ironically more expensive than the show's "teleporter". There is a reason the transporter was used more than the shuttle in the original series: It was literally cheaper to do the special effects for that and have the actors just be in a necessary set for the shot they arrive than all the extraneous stuff you'd need to do for the shuttle. Even if they just shot a sequence of the shuttle leaving and then cut to the next scene, that's model photography that has setup, takes time, people need to be paid, etc. The transporter effect is just the actors sitting still for the special effects people to get a shot and add the effects. It's the same thing on the other end. It's less time and money. Shuttle sequences have the same elements a shot of the enterprise did, which is way more than a transporter effects sequence. So, the transporter won out in the end not because the shuttle model wasn't ready yet, it's because it was cheaper to produce as a special effect, and a fantastical sci-fi tech spectacle for the time which became iconic of Star Trek.
The Jumper from Stargate Atlantis resembles the Type 6 shuttle only cooler.
I could see an optional ramp with a built in docking collar.
I could see it being standard, with some sort of roll-up protection to protect it from debris.
The puddlejumper from Stargate: Atlantis seems to be the same size craft and usefulness.
it has the extra utility that you can use the rear compartment as an airlock if you don't need the space for people.
Also the shuttle from Stargate universe looks close to the type 6
I used to drive a minivan, there's nothing to be ashamed of. It's great for having when your workplace needs to haul stuff constantly.
I presume there was a rear hatch module which included an actual airlock intergrated you can walk over the top of.
Possibly a fat one, which required another ramp to fold down to give ease of access.
Which might be the reason why they rarely bothered to put one on.
I never knew how much I wanted a shuttlecraft shaped van until I saw that one at the end.
You're driving a Minivan? What a shock!😱
As a dedicated mini-vaner, I thank you.
The one thing that I never liked about Star Trek is that they had to input all of the ship movements using a touchscreen. That's okay when you're cruising between the stars but when you're in combat two joysticks would be better than hunt and pecking your commands in. Even two cross configurations of buttons would be better.
WASD and a mouse ?
It was designed by an original quake player there is probably some sticky tape over the mouse look button .
Am I showing my age ?
In truth I would expect anything moving af the speed of a Star Trek shuttle to rely on the human user only fir strstegical choices about the route, and have all the rest completely automated.
in fight they call up predefined maneuvers afaik, and that is sensible
If you look at the control panel of the helm, it does have two crosses.
If I remember correctly, Tom Paris in 'Voyager' insisted on having stick controls in the Delta Flyer for this very reason.
And those touchscreens are terrible in combat situations. I mean, when your hands are holding sticks or HOTAS, chances are good that those sticks are still firmly in your grip after a hit that makes the ship shake. Also, after a good shaking your vision might be blurry for a moment and you might feel a bit dazed, but with a flightstick it is _way_ more easy to remain control over your ship. But try to find the right controls on a panel when you are dazed, your vision is blurry and maybe the panel even flickers after that hit.
To be fair, I don't think they'd need an airlock. A shield could easily be produced to make a pocket on the lowered ramp that acts as an airlock by just using its shields. The transporter would be nice, if just for escaping, though the smaller warp drive does make it a lot more compact. Unless you're sending them out into battle, weapons aren't super necessary. The shields will protect you decently (though that transporter would be nice for escaping if at all possible)
And it's just really nice to have a way of sending someone else somewhere that transporters can't reach. If it can really only go right around the speed of light, then interstellar travel isn't possible if you want to arrive without starving to death, but intra-system travel is super convenient without needing to pull the whole ship over just to hop over to the next planet.
“I’m terrified of this mini-van now”
-sacred cow shipyards.
TLDR: This is the perfect family car to cruse around the solar system from planet to planet. Just don't do out into the wildernes with it.
This ship reminds me of the Kodiak Drop Shuttle from Mass effect. That vehicle is the Type 6 on steroids and there is no better troop transport in Sifi
You always need a minivan. I LOVE the Danube (especially the combat refit you referred to), Yellowstone, and Delta Flyer for their capabilities/specialties. But the type a, 6, and 8 are just fucking useful.
The Delta Flyer always ran up against my, "Welp, this is just plain /pure/ magic," while the Type 6/8/etc. were... believable.
And given what I've talked about before and possibly in the future, me loving shuttles is kind of weird.
@@SacredCowShipyards I personally like the Delta Flyer from a design perspective and how the interior is laid out... ignoring the "even for ST techno-babble techno-babble."
Considering how many times i've shoved a 4x8 sheet of ply or sheet rock or what ever ! I needed in the back of a minivan after taking the seats out ... I feel you entirely. Minivans are Awesome! their better at hauling now days most than most trucks!
You're thinking of the door as a hinderance, rather than a seven foot long docking lug. Despite the problems I have had with Reboot Star Trek, they did a few things well, and one of them was the use of that big rear hatch (earlier marks of shuttle had them too) as a sort of "docking socket" inside the shuttlebay instead of saying "magic air forcefield keeps us all from dying, lol." This meant that the doors to the shuttlebay were *all* effectively airlocks, and you didn't have to step into the bay to get into your shuttle.
There will always be need for utility craft.
I actually love these shuttles. I think they look sweet&to me, it's kinda crazy we don't see millions of these, everywhere in trek universe. They would seem to me the equivalent of the family car. There isn't much on them beyond their fuel source that is exotic. You'd think.
For the airlock problem, aside from the shield re-configuring, I do believe you can blow the rear hatch right off to then back it up. Although yeah it's kinda canon that there's a shield to keep the life support in.
I bought the Goddard made of terminal blocks! Splendid!
Specifications
Capacity: 2 crew, 2-6 passengers.
Speed: warp 1.2 for 48 hours, warp 2 for 36 hours.
Maximum speed: warp 4.
Cruising speed: warp 3.5.
Armaments: none (standard), 2 type-IV phaser emitters (optional)
Defences: deflector shields.
Toilet: None Existent!
Who wants to be in a box for 36-48 hrs without a toilet!?!
@@franohmsford7548 Maybe the seats are an upgraded version of the ones you see on modern airplanes today. But instead of the cushions coming off to become a flotation device, they lift up to provide access to a dilithium powered toilet bowel with a disco ball amount of 23rd century flash lights, and a talking AI to run the power conduits that make it all work. :)
@@BonannoCM Still means having to take a crap whilst sitting in between two people you barely know with no barrier between you and them.
And ooooh THE SMELL!
This was just the problem with cheap props. The drop down hatch on an armored personnel carrier has a hatch on it. The type 6 could use a couple more doors, anyway.
Space Above and Beyond had the best troop transports of any Sci-fi
I live in a minivan and yeah, they're amazing and underrated vehicles.
I would assume that the lowly type-6 carries half a dozen or so emergency EVA suits in a locker under the bench seats just-in-case. That way you could always depressurize and do an EVA transfer to board a ship without a hangar bay. I always thought the nacelle pods on these looked particularly cheap like the budget ran out.
Both TOS and TNG were constantly subject to the whim of budgetary limits- apparently the only reason for the transporters to be introduced in TOS is that they were cheaper to do with effects than shuttles were with props.
@@absalomdraconis Yep. Sometime having ridiculous budget limitations can force you to come up with really clever solutions like the transporter and original Jeffery's tube, and having too much money allows you to go absolutely insane like the bridge and corridors in Discovery. I absolutely hate the Discover sets. They are at least 3 times too big and way too "Look at me!" flashy. Don't even get me started on that turbo-list scene in discovery that went on for 4 minutes flying through a void bigger than 20 Borg cubes materializing transport rings just ahead of the of the flying transporter!!! It was like: how can we waste $3 million on a scene to try and create tension to distract for an awful script? Then there was that supposed "computer core" room.
I have a buddy with a honda odyssey with air suspension, it can drive lowered and look good or go up and have more ground clearance than stock. I drive a wrx..and I'm kinda jelly of his van sometimes
This shuttle pretty much defined the layout for them in science fantasy. Even Stargate Atlantis uses the same layout for the Puddle Jumpers.
I think you should also look at Voyager and it shuttlecraft not to mention specifically the later episodes I think it's in season 6 5 or 6 with the the Delta flyer
Yes I really love the Typ 6 and later Typ 8 shuttles
Looking at what the shuttle lacks shows just how much utility was designed into the millennium Falcon. Airlock and Freight mandibles!
Phaser banks, now that's how you sell minivans.
Honestly, it's the forcefields I've always had the biggest problem with. I still don't understand how light and sound "sometimes" penetrate it. It will stop a laser but you can still see through it? Yea, square that circle.
Something, something, exponential reactions.
Minivans are like more economic SUVs/ crossovers. People always think a 5 door or crossover provide a bunch of space but they really don't because they are still on sedan chassis. Minivan might be on actual van or truck chassis. SUVs have gone from covered trucks to status symbols. I respect minivans on the road more than the crossovers and SUVs I see.
I once saw a Tran Sport minivan painted to resemble a Star Trek shuttle.
If type 6 is the minivan, type 7 is the full size conversion van. Type 15 is the little roadster 2 seater.
For all the grief people give star trek:enterprise it nailed down the development of the cannon for the federation
You know I always had a thing for them … the type 6shuttle sleek shape looks like it belongs in Star Trek the runabout looks jaggedly and cobbled together more like a star wars ship ……..my first major toy purchase ……and to this day I still have it……..
I wish to see a picture of your Monster Mini-van.
You do make a good point. I never would have thought of that. But I can't argue with it.
Mini vans are a highly underrated vehicle
The lack of storage bothers me, they are using the shuttles to lay mines in one episode and they literally have sensitive explosives that could take out a ship just lying against the bench/couch in the rear free to roll around. The design would be 100x better with a small air lock at the rear instead of the ramp, a tiny bathroom/medical kits/emergency supplies and equipment and real seats in addition to some modular storage areas. Really maximise all the overhead space too.
Yes it's a very beautiful simple easy going shuttle I did have a random what do you take on The last Starfighter one of my personal fav syfi
I love the comparison to a Minivan. So accurate. Well a short range minivan.
and the type 15 shuttlepod is the smart fortwo of star trek
You are kind of right in asking why bother with a shuttle, any and all times the transporter couldn't work in an episode, the shuttles couldn't be used either for usually the same reason...
I couldn't convince my wife to get a lift kit on her minivan... An awd minivan can do way more of the actual things that people need to do than a small 4x4 suv, speaking from experience. We went from a forerunner to a sienna and have done way more work with the van.
they even looked like the minivans that we had during the original run
Aerostar FTW.
ST shuttles are no more than they have to be - a box with an engine. Utility is its best quality and what makes it the definition of “shuttle.”
😁
Basically, the engineer was given a list of requirements, and they just built that. Nothing it didn't need, no attempt to force multiple roles on the platform, no flashy complicated designs. Just a piece of equipment designed to do it's job.
Minivans are -hella- somewhat fast lol
I've always wanted an offroad van too
I have an idea of taking the story line of the A Team type group with the federation. A shuttle is moded to be like the A Team van. This includes the rear wing that allows weapons, etc. Higher warp speed (something like putting in a 5.0 supercharged v8 from smaller displacemt engine. And painted in the iconic GMC van. It will be "borrowed " and changed as needed. Basically, star fleet chasing this small band of people that do things a bit more directly them star fleet rules allow. Just my thought.
I know I'm late to the party. But if you find the time and inclination to look at another workhorse of a setting. I recommend the warhammer 40k Arvus Lighter, also known as "the flying Pig". Should be great fun for you. You can even compare it to the Aquila Lander from the same setting.
Did you know that some car companies doesnt sell anything smaller than station wagons in sweden? We totally get your minivan love.
Well that's awesome.
Convergence in design happens. My shuttles are very similar to Trek shuttles, but with less payload, more maneuverability, and somewhat higher speed. The rear is a vertical double door hatch shielded by fuselage/nacelle pilons. They are 4 passenger. Now, I do have larger variants, used for medical emergency, police vehicles, and other special duties. No teleportation. Those are self bye bye (RUclips..ugh) booths...
However, other tech is very possible, if you had a mathematician that was able to come up with some formula that predicted quantum behavior, and other sequences and series...
Type 7 was the original TNG shuttlecraft. Too expensive to make the 1:1 mockup at the time though, so it got canned in favor of more angular designs. I miss it. It was a bit bigger and nicer for extended trips at low speed. The front entrance ramp was cool but never actually made it to the show.
These are miles better looking that those little shuttle pods that look like a kid made them out of refrigerator boxes. But I'm pretty sure the engine nacelles aren't even attached, they just lay them down next to the shuttle-craft on the set!
If you have Transporter technology and realize that a large electromagnetic storm can spoil the fun... Get out the Minivans. 😄
I love the Type 6. I bought Eaglemoss' shuttle figurine pack, kept the Type 6, and sold the rest.
Also, I love the idea that you drive a lifted AWD minivan. I bet that confuses the hell out of all the penis-truck manly-men on the road.
There is a lot of utility in a truck too. That most owners don't get much out of.
I drive a minivan too , it gives you the most space for crap and space for people .
I see the Type 6 as something needed. Transporters in TNG are not that common. They are not everywhere and they have a finite range and like to have a nice pad to pad for the best results. Site to Site functions but they are not as good as pad to pad. So a shuttle goes further carrying many people or cargo and yeah. Being a mini-van. (I drive one as well. Though mine is not lifted.) The one that I think does this better than a type 6? Oddly the Discovery shuttles. The back hatch has a ramp to come down. And the back area is a Starfleet standard docking ring. So they took the type six and patched up the few flaws you stated here.
Pretty much this, i always understood transporters as being near line of sight and severely range limited, plus things like shields and weird atmosphere and planitary atmosphere effects being a problem so a shuttle being a way around that
I love my mini van. Wish mine was lifted!!!
Now, you do realize that you must cover the Borg Cube (and then compress it). :)
OK, I get you like minivans ;). And RVs? Is there a chapter dedicated to the Eagle 5's Lone Star somewhere?
Runabouts are close to the same length of the Millennium Falcon.
I grew up with the Original Series and thought of the shuttles as small space busses. The Next Gen shuttles reminded me more of an APC or Huey. But minivan works too.
I get where you're coming from, but I would contend that the Runabout family is a /much/ more APC-type small craft, even though they're basically miniature starships in their own rights.
Space minivans..I see you are also a man of culture.
Seems to me the shuttle was designed more for the needs of filming a tv show rather than any actual practicality in real life. Always a consideration when designing these things for tv & movies I guess.
I think I remember a short story, though I can't remember the source and canonicity is questionable, where a shuttle with a ramp backed up the edge of the ramp against a ship's hull and the shuttle then projected a force field tunnel to seal itself against the ship, after which the crew made an ad-hoc entryway in the hull.
Sadly, they could have just designed a fold-down or slide-down docking collar, and gotten the same without the need for working forcefields.
@@absalomdraconis Yes. I would also like to see more redundant engineering like the airlocks in 2001 Space Odyssey and 2010. On the other hand, wasn't there a scene in ST: First Contact where Picard showed someone an outside porthole that was just a forcefield? That would point to highly reliable tech.
@@absalomdraconis I think the advantage of the ramp was that the prop department could pull that off easily without complex mechanics, and having it work in a scene as practical effect would be easier to film. Once you enter "shuttle docking a starship" territory, you already know you gonna need the VFX deparment to pull off that scene.
I figured that a Runabout is the equivalent of a winnebago RV. In civilian non starfleet service, a type six would be operated by a "white-van-man". I believe Star Trek had a few airlock shuttles. It's not a mini-van ITS JUST A VAN!
I always loved these Shuttles. If anything, in my imagination world I would love to have one instead of a car.
If there isn't a hanger avaialable. theres usualy a few space suits stuffed under the bench seating or in the storage boxes. put on the space suit, depersureize, open the door.
I always wondered what Scotty did to "trick out" the shuttle that he got from Picard.
Knowing Scotty, "Whatever he wanted."
Mini Van's are definitely the Type 6 shuttle of cars
Looks good.
Now slap a manned phaser turret on it that only points backwards.
Type 6: the trim level is important.
Ied say the Runabout (the type seen in DS9) is the upgrade of the type 6, I guess the downgrade would be the worker bee.
That is why my favorite and only car choice is a 1988 Toyota Hi-ace.
guess you could argue that in the case of needing to pick up people on a planet with a hostile or non existent atmosphere, the crew would be suited up and the internal environment vented and replaced once the passengers were aboard and the hatch closed.
For Trek when it comes to shuttles they are there for various reasons, besides just minivan cargo.
One big thing is when Transportors can not be used. This is do to either natural phenomenon or technological interference. Which would lead to mutilated people or things, or just plane disintegration into particals of matter. Someone here noted the episode of Data using the shuttle to transport a highly unstable substance that doesn't play nice at all with the transporters.
Going onto technological means usually its shields that block transporters (borg exceptions). But very dense material or say devices specifically designed to disrupt transporters can and do exist in Trek. I could see a starfleet vessel using a shuttle to comply and appear less threatening with it vs a 600m long Galactic behemoth ship to negotiate with less advance civilization that is skittish.
Hey now, Enterprise is my 3rd favourite trek after DS9 and TNG. Definitely better on rewatch. Also best sets on any of the shows IMO.
Yeah, I always thought star trek did a pretty good job on it's shuttles(except those horrible shuttlepod boxes). But my favourite would have to be the type 11 from Insurrection. It's got WAY more space so you don't go crazy on long trips, 4 phaser strips giving omnidirectional coverage, transporters, most likely replicators, a proper docking collar, and while I can't find any official number it can likely maintain a decent warp factor. The type 9 in voyager could do warp 4, so I wouldn't put the type 11 past being able to hold warp 6.
Plus it's just a sexy shuttle. All sovereigny and shit.
Yeah, Enterprise was good, and got very good in 3 and 4 season.
Then Frakes got onto the set and murdered it, not even letting Archer have his final word.
The only other time I felt similar pain was when Game Of Thrones got murdered by the Dumb and Dumber, but with Enterprise the pain was greater, because it was a good Star Trek, and you dont get these very often :/
@@Reynevan100 Uhh, that's not how TV production works. Frakes was an actor doing a job. That one is on the writers.
I didn't mean that literally
@@Reynevan100 Frakes was never in Enterprise. The Final episode was Terra Prime after all.
What you're now telling us, it's a porche mini van 😆😆😆😆
Well, no, because that idea is heinous to the idea of a Porsche, but also yes.
Minivans made station wagons cool again, and compact SUVs are making minivans cool again.