Talk:USS Voyager

From Memory Alpha, the free Star Trek reference.

Contents 1 2378? 2 Stardate Year 3 novelization information 4 Voyager's route home? 5 Background Information 6 Crew Complement 7 We come in peace (shoot to kill, men) 8 Speculation 9 More specifics 10 Casino? 11 EMH an enlisted? 12 landing 13 Tom Paris 14 Sidebar 15 Deckplan stuff 16 Opening Paragraph, Bio-neural Systems 17 Warp Core 18 Distance travelled 19 Computer Rating 20 Dilithium chamber 21 Warp core ejection 22 Duplicate room!

[edit] 2378?

As I have commented elsewhere, I have noticed that is is accepted that Voyager returned home in 2377. Where is this mentioned - as in "Homestead", Neelix commented that they were celibrating the 315th anniversary of First Contact - wouldn't that place the year as 2378?

This seems consistant with the Star Trek website. They seem to imply that Endgame crosed into 2378.

Voyager's Season 1 was in [[2371]. Add seven years to that (seven seasons), and you get 2378 indeed. You reference to the 315th birthday of First Contact is good evidence. Ottens 12:59, 6 Jul 2004 (CEST)

Surely it goes like this (remembering that four season two episodes were produced for season one and have season one Stardates, they aired correctly in the UK) - Season 1 - mid-2371, Season 2 - 2372, Season 3 - 2373, Season 4 - 2374, Season 5 - 2375, Season 6 - 2376, Season 7 - 2377. Voyager still follows the TNG/DS9 convention of having the second digit in the stardate increase by 1 every year, and the stardate for Endgame was 54973.4, which is a 2374 Stardate. Alex Peckover 13:07, Jul 6, 2004 (CEST)

2377 stardate actually but I see what you mean. Of course it's possible that the events of Endgame cross over into the 55000 stardates, thereby starting another year. The fact that the anniversary is mentioned in Homestead is difficult but perhaps not impossible to rectify.

Or that Series 1 was 2371-2372, S2 was 2372-2373...S7 would be 2377-2378. And the idea that the digits changed every season doesn't necessarily mean the year changes every year at that point, we should all know that stardates aren't consistant! MiChaos 22:26, 6 Jul 2004 (CEST)

I always got the impression that "Endgame" was several months after "Renaissance Man". It would be possible then, that the episode was in 2078.

Now that seems somewhat unlikely. :P Ottens 20:13, 27 Sep 2005 (UTC)

I assume (s)he means 2378. I agree with MiChaos - weebiloobil 16:58, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Stardate Year

Well, according to the VOY Season 1 DVD extras, they specify the year as 2377 for Season 1. Not sure how that fits with the canon course, but if you load in the extras disk and look at the Janeway Interview, you'll note the interview date (97), and then a year scroll to 2377 for Season 1. Which if true, means the stardate years are 2377 to 2383. DCody 07:38, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

It does not work on so many levels. By 2377, there was no Maquis to speak of, they had long since been killed or destroyed by the Jem'Hadar. The uniforms seen in Voyager had been retired pretty much by 2373. We see an Admiral Kathryn Janeway back at Starfleet in 2379. I'm sure there are many more problems, but those are some glaring ones. The DVD extras either say something different, or are flat wrong. --OuroborosCobra ^talk 09:21, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] novelization information

Separate question: The novelisation and script of "Caretaker" refer to the deceased doctor as Fitzgerald. Should this be taken as canon and referenced in the crew roster?

Please state your name for the reccord. ;) No, I don't think that's really canon. Even the novelization of The Motion Picture (written by Roddenberry himself, how more canon do you want it?) isn't regarded as "canon". Ottens 17:25, 6 Jul 2004 (CEST)

I'd be inclined to recognize a source by Roddenberry, however. But the Caretaker novelization was done early in the series, by a writer not associated with Paramount, working for a licensed source (Pocket Books)). This means that it is not acceptable canon (expecially since there is evidence in the "Imperfection" casualty list that the doctor and engineer might have different names. However, information like that can still be collected, and referenced in a clearly marked "Background" section. It is presented in this way as necessitated by the site canon policy -- Captain Mike K. Bartel 06:06, 7 Jul 2004 (CEST)

(If you put four tildes (~~~~) after your message, it will leave your username or address, so that we can properly respond to you)

[edit] Voyager's route home?

This article might be a good home for a geographical survey of the Delta Quadrant and Voyager's route through it, as discussed here. It wouldn't need every planet visited, but a list of the major areas might be useful. -- Josiah Rowe 03:10, 14 Feb 2005 (GMT)

I think Regions visited by Voyager might be a decent idea for an article. -- Captain Mike K. Bartel^talk 11:49, 31 Jul 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Background Information

Shouldn't the information from USS Voyager prototype be moved here and the page deleted? It's all background info and doesn't exist in canon Trek! --Defiant | Talk 12:00, 9 Jul 2005 (UTC)

I think it falls under background information -- if we are creting pages for other facets of the craft (directors, performers, composers -- then we should start with some info on costumes, sets, props and models -- the prototype page is waiting some more sibling articles about the other models built for the series, and a top level page to list all of the above. -- Captain Mike K. Bartel^talk 15:04, 9 Jul 2005 (UTC)

I don't agree with the creation of these "prototype" articles. I think there's a big difference between people that have lives outside of Trek and models that were built specifically for Trek. For instance, the Voyager prototype is much more related to Voyager, it was built purposefully for that reason and no other, than Jeffrey Combs is related to Shran, he only played the Andorian and has other functions, both in Trek and outside. Prototype information can easily be displayed on starship articles, but where does information about a director, actor or composer go if they have appeared several times in Trek?

Obviously, the option that will give most space is if we create behind-the-scenes personnel pages and use the relevant starship pages for "prototype" info.

Also, is there a third option? Is it possible that we could do both - create new pages for prototypes but also display the information on the relevant starship pages.

I realize my response may be seen as a "personal attack" (just about anything can be seen as that, these days!) but I'm only trying to help find the best solution for MA. I hope other Archivists realise this. --Defiant | Talk 14:36, 11 Jul 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Crew Complement

Ah, the red shirts just keep appearing. While it gives the exact numbers given on two separate dates, In my opinion I think it should say "~150" or approximately 150 some how. Cause the idea of Voyagers crew was always 150, they always mentioned it. But when ever they needed an exact number, it'd vary (147, 141, 153) And they were always different, rarely actually accounting for red shirt deaths. Well, I suggest 150. Any disagreements? - AJHalliwell 11:12, 31 Jul 2005 (UTC)

I've got no problems with "c. 150" or "~150", because the number did fluctuate quite a bit. In fact, it changed so often that a website cropped up to keep track of it, which. -- Miranda Jackson ^(Talk) 08:07, 18 Nov 2005 (UTC)

As of Stardate 50912.4, Voyager's compliment was 148. VOY: "Displaced" -- Kooky 22:45, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] We come in peace (shoot to kill, men)

Where is it stated that Voyager made first contact with some 400 species? That number seems like a bit of a stretch. I know since the Delta Quadrant was unexplored territory that there were likely to be many first contacts, but 400? I dunno about that... --From Andoria with Love 04:22, 18 Nov 2005 (UTC)

In 168 episodes, where they could not have met more than one or two new species in each, there is no chance that there were 400. Especially since they met no new species in many episodes. Mr.gn

Irrelevant, there have been numerous mentions of them meeting new species in between episodes, as well as "cantina style" episodes like "Tsunkatse" where they meet up to a dozen unknown aliens at once. -- Captain MKB 02:28, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

Yes, that section is entirely uncited and I would be interested in the quote. 400 is alot, but easily possible as the number of new species "catalogued" or whatever by the Voyager crew over a seven year period. I looked everywhere I reasonably thought of in the last ten minutes, and couldn't find it. It's already PNA'd, so I won't mess with removing or inciting anything (nothing is cited) but it definitely needs to be rewritten and have any unsure material removed to the talk page.--Tim Thomason 05:20, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Speculation

I removed the following:

It is a possibility that Starfleet succeded to perfect the travel at quantum slipstream speeds, and they we're probably very interested in Voyager's armor technology, because they needed it to perfect their resistance to the Borg. It is a possibility that this armor will be upgraded onto newer ships in the sake of defense.

This is idle speculation that could be added as background info, but since there is no such evidence in subsequent Star Trek projects (namely, Star Trek Nemesis) to suggest how the technology was used following Voyager's return, it seems unnecessary to me. However, it's here if anyone wishes to discuss it. --From Andoria with Love 03:16, 31 Dec 2005 (UTC)

[edit] More specifics

There can be more added to this article (e.g. schematics, in the Delta Quadrent). If USS Enterprise D article is as big as it is, why can't Voyager be? They explored a totally different region than the Enterprise. --Galaxy001 05:44, 15 Jan 2006 (UTC)

• Go right ahead. Jaz 05:59, 15 Jan 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Casino?

Voyager had a casino on deck 2? I'd be interested in the reference for that.

It did not. Jaz ^{talk | novels} 04:17, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

Then why is it listed? MrPsychic 05:42, 1 April 2006 (UTC)

Its non-cannon. Probably speculation. If non-cannon, it can be gotton rid of (if it already has not).  :) Galaxy001^talk 06:24, 1 April 2006 (UTC)

*g* this isnt speculation. it is a translation error. i take this table from the german version of the article. our offical german translation called the mess hall as casino. *gg* --Shisma 09:55, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] EMH an enlisted?

An edit was just made moving the Docter from the enlisted to the officers because he is Chief Medical Officer. The reason given was that he cannot be an officer and enlisted at the same time. I disagree with this, well, not so much disagree with it as feel it is flawed.

His position was Chief Medical Officer. Whether he is enlisted or not is a matter of rank, not position.

For example, I used to be a cadet in something called Civil Air Patrol, the Auxiliary of the US Air Force. We follow a military rank and position structure. When I was a Cadet Senior Airmen (an enlisted rank), I was made the Cadet Aerospace Education Officer (a position).

I feel we are dealing with the same thing when it comes to the EMH. His rank may have been an enlisted level, while his position was Chief Medical Officer. Granted, the Civil Air Patrol is a civilian organization, and may not follow the military practice to the full letter, but Starfleet is not the current military either, so I think the comparison is valid.

I will revert the change tomorrow, unless someone objects. --OuroborosCobra 07:20, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

I think you are right. The EMH did not hold an officers' rank, and thus should be under Enlisted personnel. Ottens 11:48, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

I know this is an old discussion, but as per [{e|Virtuoso}}, the Doctor resigned his commission. That makes things a lot more confusing. Thoughts? --Kevin W. ^Tlk 06:07, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

Old discussion indeed, but I was pondering this, and wondering if the EMH and Seven of Nine and Neelix should actually be listed as "Enlisted" Crewmembers. I'll grant that the status of the EMH might be fuzzy, but unless Seven and Neelix actually joined Starfleet (and if they did, why aren't they wearing uniforms like the rest of the crew the majority of the time - Neelix in Ops gold in Year of Hell not counting?) then they're not technically "Enlisted". The Doctor we could argue about as definitely being Starfleet, as he had *some* kind of commission, but on the other hand, and maybe somebody who's been in the military can back me up, having a commission would tend to imply to me that he is in fact an officer, and not enlisted. --umrguy42 06:15, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

Originally, it would seem that the EMH would be neither Officer OR Enlisted. He was a hologram, ostensively he would be incapable of holding either position. Further, one could use his lack of a rank insignia as further indication he is not considered either. This lends itself to the pretext of is the Doctor a life form or property, similar to the dispute regarding the status of Data from TNG: "The Measure Of A Man". One could note however, that later in the series, with the implementation of the Emergency Command Hologram (VOY: "Tinker Tenor Doctor Spy", VOY: "Workforce") the Doctor was given officer rank pips for Captain. His Resignation attempt may have been simply a resignation of his status as CMO. -- Kooky 23:08, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] landing

... Voyager also had the capibility of landing on the surface of a Class-M planet, then returning to space. The USS Voyager was the first starship capible of doing so.

Idle speculation or was this mentioned in an episode? -- Captain M.K.B. 01:37, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

This ability was demonstrated in VOY: "The 37's". During an interview I once saw about the making of Voyager, I'm not sure exactly where anymore, they (several staff members) spoke about how they wanted to have the ship consistently land on planet's surfaces, but opted for use of the transporters due to the visual effects techniques and budget costs. They then stated that, when the show was actually in production and airing, it would be occasionally feasible due to an improved budget and increase visual effects techniques. During that discussion, one person had stated that this was the first ship in Star Trek history capable of doing this. So you could say the producers can confirm this ability.--Gravydude 01:55, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

The note about its place in Star Trek history is misplaced then... the article should be written from the POV of the Star Trek universe, where no known ship has been able to land. A note could be placed in the background section, where we talk about Star Trek 's history, as opposed to the Federation's. -- Captain M.K.B. 02:47, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

We still do not know if it was the first starship capable of landing on a planet's surface; we know there are at least 2 other Intrepid class starships, and we can assume all Intrepid class starships could land (why would Voyager be any different?). An interview/documentary is not considered canon! - weebiloobil 17:10, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

For all we know, there could have been a dozen other designs that could land in the 23rd and early 24th centuries -- the fact about Voyager is that is the first ship to have its own series that could land. -- Captain M.K.B. 17:51, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

The space shuttle is a space ship that can land on an M-class planet. It is part of the star trek canon, too. – The preceding unsigned comment was added by Ant6n (talk • contribs) .

[edit] Tom Paris

I just want to make sure that I am accurate in my assumption before making any changes, but isn't Tom Paris a Lieutenant and not a Lieutenant Junior Grade. In Caretaker, Janeway grants a field promotion to Lieutenant, and his pips on the collar indicate that rank. I ask this because if you read from StarTrek.com, they indicate that he holds the rank Lieutenant until he is reprimanded and reduced to Ensign.

The following link goes to startrek.com and describes Tom Paris as a Lieutenant. [1]

Thank you for helping me double check this.....

Actually, as you can see in these images, he wears the grade of Lt. J.G. This is a similar problem as Lt. Commander Chakotay. --OuroborosCobra ^talk 01:06, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

But if you watch in the first season episodes, he wears the rank of Lieutent not Lieutenant J.G. --Brad 01:22, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

Not exactly the best choice of pictures... as the image of Paris shows him as an "Ensign" (on another note, that image is wrong, it's from 2376) before his promotion in [{e|Unimatrix Zero}}, and he wore standard Rank pips, not a maquis bar. - AJ Halliwell 01:27, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

Blaah, finally found a pic of his pips. (On the brightside, we finally found someone whose headshots are always facing left :P) For the first five years he was a full lieutenant (seen here in Ex Post Facto) and was demoted to Ensign in "Thirty Days." He was then promoted to Lieutenant junior grade a year later in "Unimatrix Zero, Part I" and spent the last year as a Lt. jg (seen here in "Drive"). - AJ Halliwell 01:33, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

Oh well, I thought the picture looked a little funny. I just thought it was an odd angle. Thanks anyways for answering the question. --OuroborosCobra ^talk 02:02, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Sidebar

Original configuration
Affiliation:	Federation Starfleet
Registry:	NCC-74656
Class:	Intrepid-class
Mass:	700,000 metric tons
Launched:	2371
Decks:	15
Max Velocity:	Warp 9.975
Refit:	2378
Crew Complement:	141 (2371) 146 (2377)
Status:	Active
Armor refit configuration

Old sidebar moved here. Some information might need to be re-included, eventually cited if it hasn't already. Also see Template talk:Sidebar starship. -- Cid Highwind 15:23, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Deckplan stuff

I added notes to the talk page for, I think, Intrepid class decks, or something like that. That page might need to be merged or at least the info I put there added here. -- Lt. Washburn 18:21, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

That suggestion has already been brought up (Talk:Intrepid class decks) and rejected. --From Andoria with Love 04:24, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Opening Paragraph, Bio-neural Systems

I just began a plan to bring the article up to the same level as the other main ships of the series', and already, i stubled into a problem. The artacle says that Voyager was the first ship to have Bio-Neural Systems, but arn't those common to all intrepid-and-later ships?– 7th Tactical 21:49, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

Maybe so. I don't know. But I think Voyager was the first Intrepid.68.124.23.146 03:11, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

There is no evidence of that, and in fact evidence to the contrary in the USS Intrepid (NCC-74600). --OuroborosCobra ^talk 03:13, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

Looked it up. Second, not first. 68.124.23.146 03:17, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Warp Core

Was there any mention of why Voyager's warp core was the way it was? Most other warp cores consisted of the two tubes converging at the dilithium chamber and having the rings of light converging there as well. But in Voyager's core, there was no such thing, it was more like floating shadows in liquid. Rajrajmarley 18:28, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

Actually, the Voyager warp core is not unique in this respect. Take a look at the NX warp core, the Constitution warp core, the Constitution refit warp core, the Constellation warp core, the Nova warp core, and possibly some others. In fact, the Intrepid warp core pretty closely matches the Constitution refit one. While it is mostly fanon speculation, many consider the two classes of ships to be pretty near each other in size, so it may be that is the reactor style used in ships of this size. Fact is, of the warp cores we have seen there seems to be about an equal number that use the "rings of light" to those that do not. --OuroborosCobra ^talk 18:49, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Distance travelled

I notice that in the list of events that shortened Voyager's trip home, the following paragraph concludes:

Furthermore, it is safe to say that Voyager must have been very close to the Beta Quadrant, and might have even already crossed its borders during the last months of its journey.

This last sentence seems particularly speculative to me. I'm willing to grant the original math (100K LY diamater of Milky Way = 50K LY side length for a quadrant, 43.1K+ additional LY travelled to whatever Voyager could cover on her own normally... but we just don't know how close to the Beta Quadrant they got. They could have (and probably did) have to take a more circuitous route home than just a straight line, having to go back occasionally, things like that. (It comes to mind that depending on the positioning, they might have had to make more of an arc to avoid crossing through the center of the galaxy, for example - meaning that while Earth was 70K LY away by a direct path, they would have to go further than that since they couldn't *take* a direct path.) I would also argue the speculative conclusion in the following in the beginning paragraph:

thus, we can conclude that the Caretaker's Array and Voyager's starting point was on the far edge of our galaxy, not that far away from the border of the Delta Quadrant to intergalactic space.

--umrguy42 06:15, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

There is no need for anyone to speculate or calculate what distance Voyager traveled, what route it took, where it started out from, etc. As there is a perfectly clear and canonical map from the background monitor graphics in astrometrics of the route of Voyager, prior to "Endgame" [2] see the last image on this page. And we know they got as far as the delta quadrant borg transwarp hub before coming home. Position was depicted here [3]. I dont know how far off the conjectural calculations are from the canonical depictions on the page, maybe someone wants to check that out though. --Pseudohuman 13:29, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Computer Rating

We have no idea what the clock speed of the computer is, or if indeed their computer even uses a central clock for processing, we only know how many calculations per second it can perform. I think the processor rating should be in FLOPS not PHz because there are plenty of processors that may take mulitble clock cycles for a single opperation, and others which, by use of parralel processing, achieve multible opperations in one clock cycle. 24.30.50.182 11:21, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Dilithium chamber

Where is the dilithium chamber of voyager's warp core, sometimes, B'elanna says to vorik to go to control the chamber but how can he reach it? – The preceding unsigned comment was added by 87.8.72.208 (talk).

[edit] Warp core ejection

I noted that in the CG video of the ejection of voyager's warp core, the antimatter injector is larger than the hole on the top of the second level of the engineering. There are two possibilities:

1. The injector seems larger but it isn't;
2. The hole in the engineering can be automatically enlarged.

What do you think? – The preceding unsigned comment was added by 87.8.72.208 (talk).

[edit] Duplicate room!

Holodeck 1, on the floor plan here, seems to be on both decks 10 and 14, both claiming to be referenced from "Darkling". Can someone confirm which is right? --Gaeamil 20:28, 4 September 2008 (UTC)