Imagine where we’d be if half the military budge went to space each year. If we started that in the 60s and didn’t do Vietnam we’d have a city on mars and regular travel between.
'I know that Human beings and fish can coexist peacefully.' 'Salmon canapes Mr President?" 'Yes please.' You're so consistent in your videos, well constructed with smooth visuals. As I reiterated recently, you being on screen is a vital part of your storytelling. You have struck a great balance with the visuals you use. No choppy editing between dozens of images or jumping between 3 different cameras and a zoom mode. Smooth and stress-free. Emotionally calming but mentally stimulating.
Saw the first line of your comment while waiting for video to start and wondered what that was all about...then saw that clip! am now wondering what possible context can there be that doesn't make that bizarre 🤔 And absolutely agree with the rest of your comment on the style of the videos on this channel they really are well made
@@jamesabernethy7896 but I still don't have context ☹️ why was that line in a speech... that seems very bizarre and can't think of what speech would make that not bizarre ..unless Antedians landed on earth?!? Oh and your comment was very funny btw
I'd be interested in seeing a Part 2 to this video, which covers very early Warp-capable vessels in the 2060's-2100's. Zefram Cochran's First Warp ship And whatever that strange, white, ring-shaped vessel is.
In canon that ring ship was actually a secret program that wasn't made public until the 22nd century and was actually built before Zefram Cochran's supposed "first warp ship". It was sometime before the third world war in which the records were lost and was forgotten about until it's return in the 22nd century. That's what I thought I heard a while back anyway.
As someone who lives for posy-Apollo spaceflight history, I'd like to add my thoughts: The DY-100 uses nuclear engines. This technology was abandoned shortly after the space shuttle project began, as the goal of NASA shifted from 'beyond the moon' to 'more sustainable Earth orbit spaceflight'. The shuttle also had an emphasis on human spaceflight. It's possible that instead of Nixon the USA had a president with more ambitious spaceflight budgets. Without an early 1970s recession the money could certainly keep flowing such that DY-100 type ships could come into being in the 80s. The 60s and 70s had a lot of cryonics stuff. It's possible that in Trek they figured out something that allowed them to do it more successfully. OV-165 is pretty much just a VentureStar spaceplane. Though the OV designation doesn't necessarily mean it's a NASA system, as OV just means 'orbital vehicle'. VentureStar died due to weird politics and management. I can totally see this happening. Constellation (CxP) is a really really fascinating era (and my personal interest). The existence of CxP in Star Trek implies that Shuttle also existed in pretty much the same form. CxP was sort of formed entirely around the Ares-I, and in real life the Ares-I consistently had performance problems that lead to Ares-V growing ever larger. It was also obscenely expensive, costing twice NASA's budget even at it's best estimates. Following the 2008 recession, Obama was forced to cancel it, and reskin the DIRECT proposal into the SLS rocket we see today. Star Trek NASA clearly has more money going for it, and so I can totally see it being a thing, though maybe not that similar to our own under closer inspection. (No-one likes comment section advertisers, but if you're interested I did go into detail on Constellation's issues in a video I made called The history of DIRECT) Ares IV looks like a real spacecraft. Though the engine section looks like an S-IVB from a Saturn V/IB, rather than a more modern design, which would not have the black paint for thermal reasons. As for the name, it's totally possible CxP was cancelled, and the name instead used for these Mars missions. 2040s does seem rather late for Star Trek, as that's more like what we'll manage, but an international space program is a _serious_ feat that we are many many decades away, and says more about terrestrial culture than technology level. A Saturn Flyby doesn't make much sense given the Ares IV missions. Though if they have working cryonics that might make this feasible. Shango X-1 looks very interesting. I don't see a reason why the probe wouldn't be sent years ahead, (especially if looking for life) unless budgets or transfer windows prevented anything else. Real NASA is very careful about planetary contamination, so a human landing seems like a strange choice.
I was just thinking about this the other day when I realized that the Mars mission in the Voyager episode happened after Picard's mission to Europa and was very confused how to reconcile that.
@@thegrayshaws The design of the ship appeared to be cargo and transport. There didn't appear to be much on it for gathering scientific data. Unless internal geological studies, but that would also require a surface facility to gather, store, and analyze them. It wasn't just a get there, look around, and get back kind of mission
@@k1productions87 according to the Voyager episode "One Small Step" thats all it was spend a couple days on Mars and go back. I dont think a colony was started on Mars until much later. If they started a colony that early it would have collapsed during WWIII
@@thegrayshaws The first step on establishing a colony though is studying the potential colony sites. We do know Martian colonies were eventually founded, so they would need initial survey expeditions. As historic as the "one giant leap" was, the mission itself was just "prove that landing is possible and come home alive" before any in-depth study was even on the docket. And before that, Apollo 8's objectives were close-range (in space terms, 60nm was fairly close) observation of surface sites for future landing missions. Plus, do we even know if the Europa mission had a lander at all, and wasn't just a flyby/orbit mission? Before anyone claims that would be pointless, one of the missions NASA proposed to utilize the extra hardware left from cancelled landing missions was a Venus flyby, using an empty S4B stage as a working laboratory (this idea eventually morphing into Skylab)
8:17 Yea it possible that Europa was launch earlier to on a capitalize on planetary alignment that created a specific launch window or maybe Ares 4 had different set of mission goals...like maybe one of its goals was to survey several a large area to determine what is the ideal place to create a permanent Mars colony
Someone should go through all the episodes and record when things that occured in the past happened. E.G. in TOS - the eugenics wars were 1989 to 1999 or whenever. In TNG - "The Royal" was 2034 and had 65 states. In TNG - The eugenics wars were retconned to 2021 to 2022. In DS9 - the sanctuary districts were 2024, yes I think 2 years from now, 2022. I don't know exact dates but it would be interesting.
Hohmann transfer orbits are not the lowest energy trip, but they are the lowest energy trip easily achievable in a relatively brief time. If you want to put a space probe into the sun, or interstellar space, either way you need to slingshot around several planets to build up relative velocity. This is because the energy required for a single Hohmann transfer is much harder to get hold of than a probe that will happily drift through space for decades.
6:23 to be fair, by this time Constellation was hemorrhaging cost left and right, bloating its budget, falling behind, and going nowhere while proving to be little more than a jobs program for big contractors. Conversely, this same speech lead to the commercial space program, which brought names like SpaceX to prominence. People like to blame Obama,... but Constellation was just stalling and becoming a money sink. I guess the biggest lesson we took from the Space Shuttle is "screw the costs, look how many contracts we can give out" And I hate the Ares I with a burning passion. Seeing an intended manned spacecraft with its first stage being nothing but a solid booster... knots my stomach something awful. And I was alive to witness Challenger (STS-51-L) and I will never fully trust solids again, especially if you use them on a craft that has no escape system (fortunately Ares-I at least had that, but the Shuttle did not)
Yep, it's important to remember the historical context that these events took place in. I'm glad we're (supposedly) returning to the Moon soon after all.
@@OrangeRiver It would be foolish not to. Not only for the natural resources the Moon can offer, but the Moon itself also provides the additional benefit of being a natural launch point out of Earth Orbit. The Moon's orbit itself being a partial slingshot, just a simple thrust past it and the Earth can no longer hold you
The reason why we have not progressed as fast as hoped in the 60s is time travelers from the future have interfered with human progress. While Enterprise maintains an optimistic outcome, the truth is what we have. No space travel. Just low earth orbits and some communication satellites, and occasional probe launch. We won't have interplanetary capability until we develop a small fusion drive engine - a combination of fusion power with ion drive. That's about 20 years away.
@@joeboxter3635I'd say warp drive (Alcubierre) is shockingly close too, all we'd need is fusion to properly test it on a larger scale. And if you're unaware, a scientist that I can't remember the name of reworked the original to a point that it would actually be feasible with far less energy the originally thought required
now you’ve got me wondering about what soong’s “project khan” folder was about. my preferred interpretation is that he’s looking into reviving the project khan was created(?) for.
Your videos comparing Trek’s altered history from the 80s/90s on are always a joy. Though of course the divergence even includes the 60s in Assignment Earth, but it was similar enough of an idea to Reagan’s SDI programme that I can write that off as “well, they’d probably do it if they could afford it” just like all the other craft in the show. It is as you said, Trek’s chronology basically assumed there’d be no slow-down of investment in space tech. There were indeed plans for the 70s and 80s to have nuclear-rocket cargo ships purely for interplanetary transit and not landing, which sounds not too dissimilar from the DY ships. But then the Space Shuttle programme derailed those other plans. It’s interesting how Trek folds-in new history whenever it can, such as incorporating the space shuttle and its successor, or with showing the ISS, rather than simply insisting they did follow the abandoned early-70s plans. I will note the actual vehicle for Europa is much larger and more advanced than Ares IV, especially that it looks to have a spin-gravity section of the interior. But that did have private investment too; perhaps the Mars missions used repurposed closer-to-Earth equipment.
@@subraxas I don’t recall exactly, I’m sure Data spouted it off, but it’s 1910s or 1920s yeah. Of course there’s other more recent stuff too, like the VentureStar never being cancelled, leading to the “OV35” shuttle, but that’s all after Star Trek debuts. So I think Dixon Hill might be the earliest difference. I suppose the Ferengi Roswell incursion might count as well? That was the 40s after all.
I really enjoy these videos syncing up the Trek timeline with the real life timeline. Thank you for another excellent one! Stay well out there everybody, and God bless you, friends. ✝️ :)
In the real world flybys of the Jupiter system both Voyager 1 and 2 suffered massive damage to onboard instrumentation due to the high concentration of radio-active particles in the Jovian magnetic field. I watched a great documentary by JPL about how hard they worked to complete the rest of the mission objectives despite the damage. I highly recommend the JPL documentaries (available here on youtube) for the true account of our robotic exploration of our solar system.
The issue remains getting from the Earth’s surface into orbit. We can do it reliably and the cost is cheaper, but it is still very expensive and you really can’t take much up weight wise. All of this revolves around the vertical lunch of a giant rocket where you burn through most of your fuel just getting to space. I like companies like SpaceX but they really just have better versions of what we already had 40 or 50 years ago. What sci-fi and futurists dreamed was that we would find something better. We haven’t and I don’t really foresee that changing. But you know what? It’s important to keep the dream alive and sci-fi is central to doing that.
This is mostly because nobody has tried to build the far more efficient devices that work by economy of scale, such as a skyhook. Until recently, nobody had even started work on a spin launcher. A skyhook would be monumentally expensive, and although it's not as impossible as a space elevator, it's still at the far edge of what carbon composites can achieve. Imagine dropping the cost to orbit to $100/kg for all of your parts, and then see what comes next. But instead, both the US and USSR imagined bigger bombs and bigger surplus margins (known in the west as profits).
TNG 2x18 Up the Long Ladder ... In 2365, the Enterprise-D encountered a pair of colonies seeded by the SS Mariposa. This ship was a DY-500 subtype, equipped with "Yoyodyne Pulse Fusion Engines" ("an early nuclear-powered warp drive"), launched in 2123. It was not a sleeper ship, it had a large population of live people and animals onboard.
Star Trek and every other sci-fi franchise should have pushed their timelines about 100 years. In Picard Wesley Crusher actually talks about losing a century.
This once again makes me wonder why tv-shows, especially Sci-fi shows and more so a Star Trek show, do not have people employed to make sense of these details. And make sure they get it correct on screen. Very disappointing. Its almost they don’t give a shit about accuracy. Ironic. Aw well at least we have you doing this good work. Great vid.
Another very interesting video Tyler most enjoyable. There are a few things that were touched on in other movies like for example the rescue ship sent out to the Event Horizon in the movie of the same name that ship was called the Lois & Clark but eerily similar to Lewis & Clark. You also mentioned a scientist in the ST timeline discovering bacteria on IO well this was also touched on in the 2001: A Space Odyssey follow up movie 2010 where they found a bacterial lifeform on IO then the ship was hit with what looked like a plasma ball. Anyway oh spoiler ahead if you have not seen the movie at the end of 2010 they then receive a message "All these planets are yours do with them what you will except IO attempt no landing there". Anyway great video loved it.
I happen to think that if we had kept up the effort after the Apollo missions, we would be a lot further along than we are now in terms of space infrastructure and transportation. The problem is that we haven't made investment in space based infrastructure (aside from low earth orbit) a priority. In fact, for decades less than half a cent for every dollar spent by the US government was given to NASA to work with. Imagine what we would have achieved if we spent on NASA ten cents for every dollar the US government spends.
Not necessarily. Setting aside dwindling public interest for a moment, continuing past Apollo would have resulted in exponentially increasing costs. To get Apollo to the moon, NASA needed just under 5% of the nation's GDP for two years, and a good 2-3% for another five. For comparison, NASA has not been even up to 1% since Apollo concluded. This was for a mission profile that had two men on the surface for 2-3 days, spread across 10 missions AT MOST (grand total of 25 days maximum, factoring in the shorter first few landings)... and we only accomplished 6 (the latter three falling to budget cuts). To continue past Apollo, larger crews will have to stay on the surface for weeks at a time. This would require not only a larger lander, but additional modules and equipment. This further requiring a whole new and much larger Command Module and Lunar Transit stage. This in turn requiring an absolutely MASSIVE launcher (or multiple Saturn V equivalents per mission). And if you were going to have a program of, say... 3 missions,... that would still effectively double, triple, or even QUADRUPLE the cost Apollo required. And that's just for the moon. If we were to push beyond that, then you can add another exponent to that doubled, tripled, or quadrupled cost. Then another,... then another. It just wasn't feasible. Not until we learned to be more economical with our space programs. ... and if the Space Shuttle has proven anything,... we sure as hell HAVE NOT learned that lesson. What the Space Shuttle had instead proven is that NASA could be leached off of as a jobs program for the big contractors. While the Shuttle had the mission of building ISS, Constellation's mission was so broad and vague that it became a license to spend and spend. For all the complaining people do about Obama "killing NASA", what we instead got was the commercial spaceflight program, which allowed names like SpaceX to rise to prominence. And in that time, they had proven they could pioneer spaceflight on a much lower budget, AND actually be LEGITIMATELY reusable with its vehicles (unlike the Shuttle, which cost more to refurbish after every flight than it would have to just build a new one each time). So, it isn't really a "if only more money was given to NASA" issue,... its a "if the government didn't start using NASA to funnel cash into the hands of the usual suspects" issue. Lockheed and Boeing especially.
@@brandonb1681 Manned missions are the best way to light the public's imagination. To steal a quote from Tom Hanks for a moment: "... but the satisfaction, and sudden emptiness of an adventure completed are intangible Human concepts. And the argument could be made that Man cannot truly appreciate an event unless another of Mankind has experienced the adventure firsthand. Not necessarily FIRST, mind you... just firsthand. For it is not necessary to be Neil Armstrong to appreciate the great adventure found... in a voyage from the Earth to the Moon"
@@k1productions87 Incredible answer! I would also note the likely consequences to our unmanned space probes / landers since '69. I think a lot of those would not have happened if funding/focus continued towards our moon. What knowledge would we miss without Pioneer, Voyager and Hubble? The universe beyond the inner planets may well still be a mystery to us. How about the microgravity experience we gained with the Skylab and ISS, or the international co-operation demonstrated by the Apollo/Soyuz docking. How much of that would still have happened?
OV-165 for sure. Love the ship and kinda wish that was the design united earth used before warp was invented. Instead it just gets satellite duty, hehe.
You're roughly saying that the trips to Europa and Mars would have gotten back right around the same time frame. That sounds like a logistically sound approach actually and would explain why they would launch the trip to Europa first. Yeah that actually works now that I think about it.
Another real world OV-165 connection was the Lockheed VentureStar, and the scaled down prototype X-33. At the time Enterprise was being produced it seemed like it was a done deal that this would be replacing the Space Shuttle. But the thing just wasn't feasible.
Please can you talk about the sonic screwdriver from Doctor Who how it works and it is possible that we could have some technology like this in the next fifty years so
I think the thought mistake you made here at 2:24 is that you assumed it was stil the prime timeline, but the crew of Voyager has travelled back to an alternate timeline, because the federation time-surveyer ship from the future that attacked Voyager was thrown back even further into the past than Voyager, I think 1960s or so it was. There the guy that found it used its technology to gain a lot of money and influence by reverse engineering starfleet tech from the 29th century best he could, thus reshaping the entire timeline into something that resembles more our IRL timeline, when Voyager arrived in this 'alternate' 1996 (alternate in the sense that it deviates from the Star Trek prime tineline.) It was also mentioned by that woman who worked at the observatory that the USSR collapsed, yet in the Star Trek timeline this did not happen as it did IRL. So the model and photo of the launch of the DY100 would more to be seen as some sci-fi gimmicks instead of something related to the Star Trek prime timeline.
Honestly, I tend to agree. Discovery season 4 in particular has the most optimistic depiction of politicians I've seen in years. On the one hand, it definitely stands out in stark contrast to our everyday reality, but it's also nice to see people in positions of power who are competent and focused on the greater good.
@@OrangeRiver Not to dive too far into religion, but if we must have a guiding myth for our political positions, Star Trek would be better than many other options.
the answer is that ripples in the timeline change the past present and future and the waves make all the changes possible and solidify when they subside so all events were true depending on perspective.
I think it may be necessary in the near future for the franchise to retcon the dates of the Eugenics Wars, not just because of what we've seen recently in SNW and Picard, but frankly what's been depicted since '90s Trek lol. Of course, that said, space technology appearing to move backwards is not totally unrealistic. The Saturn V rocket was the most technologically advanced vehicle humans ever built, but for decades after the Apollo program, we took a pretty significant step back in terms of crewed exploration.
@Discobolos True, they are hints. What worries me is, for example, the SNW writers' reasoning behind "hinting" that the timeline of the Eugenics Wars is not what has been previously established. They're on record in interviews saying that the Temporal Cold War might have caused some changes to the timeline, and they're potentially using that as justification to bring parts of the lore more in line with the modern day. Problem is, it's all fiction, so I find this move completely unnecessary lol
Another great Video! I was wondering if there is like a single seminal event that leads to breakthroughs in space flight? Is there only Zefram Cochrane? is anybody named after Zefram Cochrane in the future? does he end up having kids that do anything in the star trek universe? As always, thank you for this video. Live Long and Prosper 🖖
Thanks Geoffrey! In Greg Cox's Eugenics Wars novels, the events of DS9's "Little Green Men" evidently put humanity on track for faster spaceflight advancement by reverse-engineering specs from the Ferengi shuttle. I included info about this in an early draft of the script for this video but decided to cut it for time.
In my opinion, in think the deviation of the timeline would have been around WW2. As we know, technology tends to be accelerated during times of conflict. What if WW2 lasted longer, even by a few years? Or, better yet, Germany delayed invading Poland by a year or two? Basically, the outcome of the war would remain the same, but certain choices within that era would be different. And that's for starters, like what if the idea of having an atomic plane, one that the US Air Force wanted to develop, was actually approved during the 1950s?
I am a little confused. Since it appeared that the DY 100 to 1200 seemed far more advanced and simply needed to be upgrade to better propulsion technology. In our reality, we have not achieved the technology for cryonic suspension.
As far as pre-warp technology goes, We could, according to the latest breakthroughs in Fusion research, use a fusion powered rocket to travel to and beyond Mars by the year 2042. And it could take as little as 2 weeks for it to travel from Earth to Mars.
All the different retcons and timeline mismatches make a lot of sense when you remember that the Star Trek universe is running on dozens of paradoxes and other timey whimey things because of all the various temporal escapades, particularly those on Earth.
Inspired by that prototype and a few smaller ones, but a distinct design too. We can assume it’s the artists’ idea of what the final production would’ve been like
I'm not that big of a Star Trek fan but I'm really impressed and entertained by your depth of knowledge/research, sly humour, and engaging presenting style. Enjoyed your recent "clone sequence", hilarious. Um sorry to be that pedant but for future reference Charybdis is pronounced ka-RIB-dis - an odd choice of name for a space vessel since Charybdis was a mythical whirlpool that sucked sailors to their deaths :p
Maybe in the Star Trek timeline our government actually paid off its massive debt. Commercial spaceflight, like SpaceX, is what will get us back to the Moon and onto Mars, not NASA. I liked this video, keep up the good work.
SpaceX is heavily subsidised by the gov't. In fact, SpaceX would be a historical footnote without tax payer money. Private industry will never front the costs required to head to the Moon or Mars. Governments will create the infrastructure that will allow private industry to take hold.
So I got to ask.....do you actually enjoy Discovery and Picard? No judgement, it's no skin off my back, your videos rock regardless. I'm just curious as to your thoughts on them
I've liked Discovery seasons 3 and 4 insofar as I think the show has improved. Picard has been...a letdown at just about every turn, in my opinion. But I felt it was important to acknowledge Picard season 2's contributions to the lore about human pre-warp spaceflight because the idea of a manned mission to Europa is cool on its own.
@@OrangeRiver I do think that idea is cool! Thanks for responding! I appreciate your opinion. I haven't seen Discovery or Brave New Worlds yet. But Picard really hurt me. I watched TNG on a lark in my early 20s. Was just bored one day, put it on Netflix in the background. It changed my life lol. The vision it represented of the future is something I think we all can strive for. So the first season of Picard was a real disappointment for me, and it put me off of the newer stuff almost immediately. Maybe I'll check out Discovery if seasons 3 and 4 got better. Thanks again for the response! Really love your videos, keep up the good work
We(they) don't know all of history. Dates can be incorrect, or discoveries change the narrative! Unless it's time travellers messing with our timeline ( The Bell Riots, First Contact revised).
Voyager already showed that pre-series history diverges from ours in a very major way. Our microchip computer boom didn't happen originally. So that alone could have adjusted global investment away from genetic engineering and space exploration.
I suggest playing Kerbal Space Program and getting the KSP Interstellar Extended mod. The mod takes the already great rocket simulator based on currently used tech and adds current & near-future reactors and rockets (thermal, electric, positron, and plasma-types), all based on peer-reviewed scientific publications and real physics.
It really makes things much simpler if you think of it like this. Every iteration of Star Trek takes place in its own universe. This would explain every timeline inconsistency between all the shows and movies. Then we have to take into account the number of times time travel changed things. These time travel incursions would create new universes as well. Think about it, there is no way that the Enterprise crew and the Borg interacting with Cochrane and Lilly, didn't have any effect on future events. We know, for a fact, that the time ship in Voyager changed history, by having Henry Starlings company become the tech giant, instead of companies like Intel and Apple. The list goes on.
In my non-canon, homebrew stuff I am working on, I created the concept of 'Space Time' (which just so happens to have the initials 'ST'), a calendar that is precisely 100 years off from our own, just to add-in the century that is so obviously missing. ST is the only Scify franchise that has no 'Sol-system only' period - we go right from WW3 to traveling to other planets. Its just so bad.
Really interesting video, I'm pretty disappointed in Obama for a number of reasons, including the way he gutted NASA. I'd love to see you talk more about 2001, and possibly its sequels if you're aware of those at all.
Actualy there is a simple and logical explanation for the aparent contradictions between canon and reality. All of these advancements happen in the prime Timeline. So if we live in the dark parallel universe we would naturaly be technologicaly backwards. On the bright side we can look forward to beeing opressed by Intendant Kira. And no, i have absolutely no sense of Ironie (as a matter of fact i dont even know how to spell it).
Considering the enterprise space shuttle (named after the enterprise in star trek) is in the opening credits of enterprise, I say that sometime durring the temporal cold war, someone came to earth and got drunk at a bar with Roddenberry, and told him about the future. He ended up writing about it and star trek was born. But in doing so, it delayed the ugenics war because people who would have started it, were influenced by the ideas of star trek the show. So, in reality, we are just an alternate time line to the prime universe. It's all real. 🤯
It would be inspiring and uplifting to seriously pursue space exploration if for nothing more than to just do something with ourselves, but we're too busy looking for the next big boogie man to set aside the time and money to do that. Such a waste in potential. If the next big boogie man was out in space, we'd get our butts in gear in a heart beat. We need more than fear as a motivator to live.
I think that the Star Trek universe begins to diverge from ours the moment Data created advanced subspace tech in San Francisco in 1893. Instead of continuing to kick the timeline down the road, we need to just accept that our own history diverged. Rip that band aid off and then maybe we can see some 80s eugenics stuff.
Once again another excellent presentation! One thing though; the DY-100, and by extension the entire DY series seem too advanced and out of place with the other vehicles in the time line. Most particularly, what is the need for the Lewis and Clark, the Shango-x1 or the Ares 4 when you've got the DY-100 and it's successors ranging all the way to I believe the Dy-1200. Seems to me the DY-100 belongs in the 2090's, along with Space: 1999. Now there's a show you should do a few videos on! By the way, like the beard, but I can't tell if your a college professor or a mountain. Although you do talk like a college professor. Live long and prosper.
I hear what your saying, but at that time in Star Trek history, at that technological level in universe, the production of a ship like that by the DOD would have been highly material and treasure intensive and possibly a one of a kind! Beside historian Marla McGiver statement about the DY-100 implies they, and possibly other ships like them, were regularly in use and perhaps common place. Also If it's top secret, how is it that Rain Robinson had a model of it stacked on it's booster, and a photo of it launching?
Man, the 60s were such an optimistic time when it came to spaceflight! If only...
Imagine where we’d be if half the military budge went to space each year. If we started that in the 60s and didn’t do Vietnam we’d have a city on mars and regular travel between.
Science Fiction writers in the 60s: "We're gonna go to Mars!"
Capitalism: "Why? Waste of profits."
Only now my weekend really started!
We have to go back...
“Hey guys, Tyler here”
Like a sci-fi Vsauce.
'I know that Human beings and fish can coexist peacefully.'
'Salmon canapes Mr President?"
'Yes please.'
You're so consistent in your videos, well constructed with smooth visuals. As I reiterated recently, you being on screen is a vital part of your storytelling. You have struck a great balance with the visuals you use. No choppy editing between dozens of images or jumping between 3 different cameras and a zoom mode. Smooth and stress-free. Emotionally calming but mentally stimulating.
Saw the first line of your comment while waiting for video to start and wondered what that was all about...then saw that clip! am now wondering what possible context can there be that doesn't make that bizarre 🤔
And absolutely agree with the rest of your comment on the style of the videos on this channel they really are well made
I second this comment. Bravo!
Too many YT videos are 100% jump-edits, it’s a bit too frenetic when the viewer is in a calm state.
@@lifeinthevoid1595 I’d have been confused too without context. I couldn’t help myself.
@@jamesabernethy7896 but I still don't have context ☹️ why was that line in a speech... that seems very bizarre and can't think of what speech would make that not bizarre ..unless Antedians landed on earth?!?
Oh and your comment was very funny btw
@@lifeinthevoid1595 I think it was just a random Bush Jnr video of something funny. I was totally talking about context for my joke.
Thanks!
Thank you!
I'd be interested in seeing a Part 2 to this video, which covers very early Warp-capable vessels in the 2060's-2100's.
Zefram Cochran's First Warp ship
And whatever that strange, white, ring-shaped vessel is.
In canon that ring ship was actually a secret program that wasn't made public until the 22nd century and was actually built before Zefram Cochran's supposed "first warp ship". It was sometime before the third world war in which the records were lost and was forgotten about until it's return in the 22nd century. That's what I thought I heard a while back anyway.
@@discobolos4227 Was it TriAngulum studios that I got this from? It hit me when you said "beta canon".
Id like to know more about the Eastern Coalition?
Ah I miss that lovable rascal Bush Jr. Most entertaining president and a secret ninja, watching him dodge shoes being thrown at him
Everyone know that Ares 3 launched on July 7th 2036! Poor Mark Watney got stranded there for a long ass time!
What a fascinating video you had me hooked 😊
Probably faster than you think. Corperate sponcership of spacetravel like Space X and Beizo's Blue Origin.
Really well done and well researched video - Thanks for this!
Thank you Dean!
Why do I keep hearing crewed as crude?
Very well done and interesting! I’ll agree with @James Abernethy - the smooth video transitions are wonderful and consistent.
Plus we have to factor in gas prices for these trips. Like the Grand Canyon we've already been there.
What about the VASMIR propulsion system .
As someone who lives for posy-Apollo spaceflight history, I'd like to add my thoughts:
The DY-100 uses nuclear engines. This technology was abandoned shortly after the space shuttle project began, as the goal of NASA shifted from 'beyond the moon' to 'more sustainable Earth orbit spaceflight'. The shuttle also had an emphasis on human spaceflight. It's possible that instead of Nixon the USA had a president with more ambitious spaceflight budgets. Without an early 1970s recession the money could certainly keep flowing such that DY-100 type ships could come into being in the 80s.
The 60s and 70s had a lot of cryonics stuff. It's possible that in Trek they figured out something that allowed them to do it more successfully.
OV-165 is pretty much just a VentureStar spaceplane. Though the OV designation doesn't necessarily mean it's a NASA system, as OV just means 'orbital vehicle'. VentureStar died due to weird politics and management. I can totally see this happening.
Constellation (CxP) is a really really fascinating era (and my personal interest). The existence of CxP in Star Trek implies that Shuttle also existed in pretty much the same form. CxP was sort of formed entirely around the Ares-I, and in real life the Ares-I consistently had performance problems that lead to Ares-V growing ever larger. It was also obscenely expensive, costing twice NASA's budget even at it's best estimates. Following the 2008 recession, Obama was forced to cancel it, and reskin the DIRECT proposal into the SLS rocket we see today. Star Trek NASA clearly has more money going for it, and so I can totally see it being a thing, though maybe not that similar to our own under closer inspection.
(No-one likes comment section advertisers, but if you're interested I did go into detail on Constellation's issues in a video I made called The history of DIRECT)
Ares IV looks like a real spacecraft. Though the engine section looks like an S-IVB from a Saturn V/IB, rather than a more modern design, which would not have the black paint for thermal reasons. As for the name, it's totally possible CxP was cancelled, and the name instead used for these Mars missions. 2040s does seem rather late for Star Trek, as that's more like what we'll manage, but an international space program is a _serious_ feat that we are many many decades away, and says more about terrestrial culture than technology level.
A Saturn Flyby doesn't make much sense given the Ares IV missions. Though if they have working cryonics that might make this feasible.
Shango X-1 looks very interesting. I don't see a reason why the probe wouldn't be sent years ahead, (especially if looking for life) unless budgets or transfer windows prevented anything else. Real NASA is very careful about planetary contamination, so a human landing seems like a strange choice.
Another well thought and well presented banger!
Birds eye for frozen everything lol
Birdseye. Haha, funny!
Well done as always Tyler.💯🖖
Great video thank you so much please keep up your amazing works stay safe and leave long and prosper🖖🏻
I was just thinking about this the other day when I realized that the Mars mission in the Voyager episode happened after Picard's mission to Europa and was very confused how to reconcile that.
Europa was more of an expedition, while Mars was more the beginnings of colony establishment I believe
@@k1productions87 what makes you say that? It didnt seem like a colony establishment to me
@@thegrayshaws The design of the ship appeared to be cargo and transport. There didn't appear to be much on it for gathering scientific data. Unless internal geological studies, but that would also require a surface facility to gather, store, and analyze them. It wasn't just a get there, look around, and get back kind of mission
@@k1productions87 according to the Voyager episode "One Small Step" thats all it was spend a couple days on Mars and go back. I dont think a colony was started on Mars until much later. If they started a colony that early it would have collapsed during WWIII
@@thegrayshaws The first step on establishing a colony though is studying the potential colony sites. We do know Martian colonies were eventually founded, so they would need initial survey expeditions.
As historic as the "one giant leap" was, the mission itself was just "prove that landing is possible and come home alive" before any in-depth study was even on the docket. And before that, Apollo 8's objectives were close-range (in space terms, 60nm was fairly close) observation of surface sites for future landing missions.
Plus, do we even know if the Europa mission had a lander at all, and wasn't just a flyby/orbit mission? Before anyone claims that would be pointless, one of the missions NASA proposed to utilize the extra hardware left from cancelled landing missions was a Venus flyby, using an empty S4B stage as a working laboratory (this idea eventually morphing into Skylab)
Another great video Tyler, this is easily my favorite Star Trek UA-cam channel. 👍🏼
thanks for the live long and prosper- I missed an earlier video about humans going extinct, I'll check it out later when I'm ready for the bad news
Thanks again for your awesome informative piece 👍
8:17 Yea it possible that Europa was launch earlier to on a capitalize on planetary alignment that created a specific launch window or maybe Ares 4 had different set of mission goals...like maybe one of its goals was to survey several a large area to determine what is the ideal place to create a permanent Mars colony
Someone should go through all the episodes and record when things that occured in the past happened.
E.G. in TOS - the eugenics wars were 1989 to 1999 or whenever.
In TNG - "The Royal" was 2034 and had 65 states.
In TNG - The eugenics wars were retconned to 2021 to 2022.
In DS9 - the sanctuary districts were 2024, yes I think 2 years from now, 2022.
I don't know exact dates but it would be interesting.
So we’re doing even WORSE than the Star Trek timeline, ALREADY. Great.
Hohmann transfer orbits are not the lowest energy trip, but they are the lowest energy trip easily achievable in a relatively brief time.
If you want to put a space probe into the sun, or interstellar space, either way you need to slingshot around several planets to build up relative velocity. This is because the energy required for a single Hohmann transfer is much harder to get hold of than a probe that will happily drift through space for decades.
6:23 to be fair, by this time Constellation was hemorrhaging cost left and right, bloating its budget, falling behind, and going nowhere while proving to be little more than a jobs program for big contractors. Conversely, this same speech lead to the commercial space program, which brought names like SpaceX to prominence. People like to blame Obama,... but Constellation was just stalling and becoming a money sink. I guess the biggest lesson we took from the Space Shuttle is "screw the costs, look how many contracts we can give out"
And I hate the Ares I with a burning passion. Seeing an intended manned spacecraft with its first stage being nothing but a solid booster... knots my stomach something awful. And I was alive to witness Challenger (STS-51-L) and I will never fully trust solids again, especially if you use them on a craft that has no escape system (fortunately Ares-I at least had that, but the Shuttle did not)
Yep, it's important to remember the historical context that these events took place in. I'm glad we're (supposedly) returning to the Moon soon after all.
@@OrangeRiver It would be foolish not to. Not only for the natural resources the Moon can offer, but the Moon itself also provides the additional benefit of being a natural launch point out of Earth Orbit. The Moon's orbit itself being a partial slingshot, just a simple thrust past it and the Earth can no longer hold you
The reason why we have not progressed as fast as hoped in the 60s is time travelers from the future have interfered with human progress.
While Enterprise maintains an optimistic outcome, the truth is what we have. No space travel. Just low earth orbits and some communication satellites, and occasional probe launch.
We won't have interplanetary capability until we develop a small fusion drive engine - a combination of fusion power with ion drive. That's about 20 years away.
@@joeboxter3635I'd say warp drive (Alcubierre) is shockingly close too, all we'd need is fusion to properly test it on a larger scale. And if you're unaware, a scientist that I can't remember the name of reworked the original to a point that it would actually be feasible with far less energy the originally thought required
The OV-165 was actually partially built by Lockheed Martin.
I think the point of divergence is Star Trek itself. In the Star Trek timeline, Star Trek (the show/franchise) does not exist.
now you’ve got me wondering about what soong’s “project khan” folder was about. my preferred interpretation is that he’s looking into reviving the project khan was created(?) for.
Perhaps!
The Star Trek time line would make so much more sense if it all started from around the 32nd century and not the 22nd.
Nice essay. 👏👏👏👏
Thanks Charles!
@@OrangeRiver ❤️😁❤️
Your videos comparing Trek’s altered history from the 80s/90s on are always a joy.
Though of course the divergence even includes the 60s in Assignment Earth, but it was similar enough of an idea to Reagan’s SDI programme that I can write that off as “well, they’d probably do it if they could afford it” just like all the other craft in the show.
It is as you said, Trek’s chronology basically assumed there’d be no slow-down of investment in space tech. There were indeed plans for the 70s and 80s to have nuclear-rocket cargo ships purely for interplanetary transit and not landing, which sounds not too dissimilar from the DY ships.
But then the Space Shuttle programme derailed those other plans.
It’s interesting how Trek folds-in new history whenever it can, such as incorporating the space shuttle and its successor, or with showing the ISS, rather than simply insisting they did follow the abandoned early-70s plans.
I will note the actual vehicle for Europa is much larger and more advanced than Ares IV, especially that it looks to have a spin-gravity section of the interior. But that did have private investment too; perhaps the Mars missions used repurposed closer-to-Earth equipment.
@@subraxas there’s the Dixon Hill books as a divergence too :)
@@subraxas I don’t recall exactly, I’m sure Data spouted it off, but it’s 1910s or 1920s yeah.
Of course there’s other more recent stuff too, like the VentureStar never being cancelled, leading to the “OV35” shuttle, but that’s all after Star Trek debuts.
So I think Dixon Hill might be the earliest difference.
I suppose the Ferengi Roswell incursion might count as well? That was the 40s after all.
I really enjoy these videos syncing up the Trek timeline with the real life timeline. Thank you for another excellent one!
Stay well out there everybody, and God bless you, friends. ✝️ :)
I kept hearing it as crude space flight. so i guess its crewed crude space flight
How crude!
In the real world flybys of the Jupiter system both Voyager 1 and 2 suffered massive damage to onboard instrumentation due to the high concentration of radio-active particles in the Jovian magnetic field. I watched a great documentary by JPL about how hard they worked to complete the rest of the mission objectives despite the damage. I highly recommend the JPL documentaries (available here on youtube) for the true account of our robotic exploration of our solar system.
The issue remains getting from the Earth’s surface into orbit. We can do it reliably and the cost is cheaper, but it is still very expensive and you really can’t take much up weight wise. All of this revolves around the vertical lunch of a giant rocket where you burn through most of your fuel just getting to space. I like companies like SpaceX but they really just have better versions of what we already had 40 or 50 years ago.
What sci-fi and futurists dreamed was that we would find something better. We haven’t and I don’t really foresee that changing. But you know what? It’s important to keep the dream alive and sci-fi is central to doing that.
This is mostly because nobody has tried to build the far more efficient devices that work by economy of scale, such as a skyhook. Until recently, nobody had even started work on a spin launcher.
A skyhook would be monumentally expensive, and although it's not as impossible as a space elevator, it's still at the far edge of what carbon composites can achieve. Imagine dropping the cost to orbit to $100/kg for all of your parts, and then see what comes next. But instead, both the US and USSR imagined bigger bombs and bigger surplus margins (known in the west as profits).
Maybe the Lewis and Clarke went to recover another spacecraft in the atmosphere of Uranus
SS Birdseye Haha wonder what the captain was called yrs you guessed it (:
Yeah, we're about 50 years off, give or take an episode :(
TNG 2x18 Up the Long Ladder ... In 2365, the Enterprise-D encountered a pair of colonies seeded by the SS Mariposa. This ship was a DY-500 subtype, equipped with "Yoyodyne Pulse Fusion Engines" ("an early nuclear-powered warp drive"), launched in 2123. It was not a sleeper ship, it had a large population of live people and animals onboard.
Irish people hate that episode. All the stereotypes 😂
In my head-canon as a Irishman the events of that episode never happened.
Heh heh "KAAAAAHNtext."
We need to go where no one has gone before, because otherwise, we’ve already been there.
The joke goes, convince the rich that we found oil, on Mars, and we'll be drilling within a week.
FOR ALL MANKIND!!!!
FOR ALL MANKIND!!!!!!!
Star Trek and every other sci-fi franchise should have pushed their timelines about 100 years. In Picard Wesley Crusher actually talks about losing a century.
It is actually pretty clear as two why. In the 60s a lot of people thought that the space race would continue. Take a look at 2001 for an example.
This once again makes me wonder why tv-shows, especially Sci-fi shows and more so a Star Trek show, do not have people employed to make sense of these details. And make sure they get it correct on screen. Very disappointing. Its almost they don’t give a shit about accuracy. Ironic. Aw well at least we have you doing this good work. Great vid.
Another very interesting video Tyler most enjoyable. There are a few things that were touched on in other movies like for example the rescue ship sent out to the Event Horizon in the movie of the same name that ship was called the Lois & Clark but eerily similar to Lewis & Clark. You also mentioned a scientist in the ST timeline discovering bacteria on IO well this was also touched on in the 2001: A Space Odyssey follow up movie 2010 where they found a bacterial lifeform on IO then the ship was hit with what looked like a plasma ball. Anyway oh spoiler ahead if you have not seen the movie at the end of 2010 they then receive a message "All these planets are yours do with them what you will except IO attempt no landing there". Anyway great video loved it.
The rescue ship WAS called the Lewis & Clark, after the explorers. I think you misheard it. 😄
europa was the forbidden moon not io
I happen to think that if we had kept up the effort after the Apollo missions, we would be a lot further along than we are now in terms of space infrastructure and transportation. The problem is that we haven't made investment in space based infrastructure (aside from low earth orbit) a priority. In fact, for decades less than half a cent for every dollar spent by the US government was given to NASA to work with. Imagine what we would have achieved if we spent on NASA ten cents for every dollar the US government spends.
Not necessarily. Setting aside dwindling public interest for a moment, continuing past Apollo would have resulted in exponentially increasing costs. To get Apollo to the moon, NASA needed just under 5% of the nation's GDP for two years, and a good 2-3% for another five. For comparison, NASA has not been even up to 1% since Apollo concluded.
This was for a mission profile that had two men on the surface for 2-3 days, spread across 10 missions AT MOST (grand total of 25 days maximum, factoring in the shorter first few landings)... and we only accomplished 6 (the latter three falling to budget cuts).
To continue past Apollo, larger crews will have to stay on the surface for weeks at a time. This would require not only a larger lander, but additional modules and equipment. This further requiring a whole new and much larger Command Module and Lunar Transit stage. This in turn requiring an absolutely MASSIVE launcher (or multiple Saturn V equivalents per mission). And if you were going to have a program of, say... 3 missions,... that would still effectively double, triple, or even QUADRUPLE the cost Apollo required.
And that's just for the moon. If we were to push beyond that, then you can add another exponent to that doubled, tripled, or quadrupled cost. Then another,... then another.
It just wasn't feasible. Not until we learned to be more economical with our space programs. ... and if the Space Shuttle has proven anything,... we sure as hell HAVE NOT learned that lesson. What the Space Shuttle had instead proven is that NASA could be leached off of as a jobs program for the big contractors. While the Shuttle had the mission of building ISS, Constellation's mission was so broad and vague that it became a license to spend and spend.
For all the complaining people do about Obama "killing NASA", what we instead got was the commercial spaceflight program, which allowed names like SpaceX to rise to prominence. And in that time, they had proven they could pioneer spaceflight on a much lower budget, AND actually be LEGITIMATELY reusable with its vehicles (unlike the Shuttle, which cost more to refurbish after every flight than it would have to just build a new one each time).
So, it isn't really a "if only more money was given to NASA" issue,... its a "if the government didn't start using NASA to funnel cash into the hands of the usual suspects" issue. Lockheed and Boeing especially.
Our unmanned probes have been pretty successful, The Voyager probes come to mind, but I want to see manned missions.
@@brandonb1681 Manned missions are the best way to light the public's imagination. To steal a quote from Tom Hanks for a moment:
"... but the satisfaction, and sudden emptiness of an adventure completed are intangible Human concepts. And the argument could be made that Man cannot truly appreciate an event unless another of Mankind has experienced the adventure firsthand. Not necessarily FIRST, mind you... just firsthand. For it is not necessary to be Neil Armstrong to appreciate the great adventure found... in a voyage from the Earth to the Moon"
@@k1productions87 Incredible answer! I would also note the likely consequences to our unmanned space probes / landers since '69. I think a lot of those would not have happened if funding/focus continued towards our moon.
What knowledge would we miss without Pioneer, Voyager and Hubble? The universe beyond the inner planets may well still be a mystery to us. How about the microgravity experience we gained with the Skylab and ISS, or the international co-operation demonstrated by the Apollo/Soyuz docking. How much of that would still have happened?
OV-165 for sure. Love the ship and kinda wish that was the design united earth used before warp was invented. Instead it just gets satellite duty, hehe.
Someone has to pick up satellite chan.
You're roughly saying that the trips to Europa and Mars would have gotten back right around the same time frame. That sounds like a logistically sound approach actually and would explain why they would launch the trip to Europa first. Yeah that actually works now that I think about it.
Another real world OV-165 connection was the Lockheed VentureStar, and the scaled down prototype X-33. At the time Enterprise was being produced it seemed like it was a done deal that this would be replacing the Space Shuttle. But the thing just wasn't feasible.
Please can you talk about the sonic screwdriver from Doctor Who how it works and it is possible that we could have some technology like this in the next fifty years so
I think the thought mistake you made here at 2:24 is that you assumed it was stil the prime timeline, but the crew of Voyager has travelled back to an alternate timeline, because the federation time-surveyer ship from the future that attacked Voyager was thrown back even further into the past than Voyager, I think 1960s or so it was. There the guy that found it used its technology to gain a lot of money and influence by reverse engineering starfleet tech from the 29th century best he could, thus reshaping the entire timeline into something that resembles more our IRL timeline, when Voyager arrived in this 'alternate' 1996 (alternate in the sense that it deviates from the Star Trek prime tineline.) It was also mentioned by that woman who worked at the observatory that the USSR collapsed, yet in the Star Trek timeline this did not happen as it did IRL.
So the model and photo of the launch of the DY100 would more to be seen as some sci-fi gimmicks instead of something related to the Star Trek prime timeline.
03:36 I remember the episode, but didn't remember the ship was named after frozen vegetables. 🤣
The Star Trek universe has long suffered from an excessively optimistic view of politicians and their willingness to move humanity forward.
Honestly, I tend to agree. Discovery season 4 in particular has the most optimistic depiction of politicians I've seen in years. On the one hand, it definitely stands out in stark contrast to our everyday reality, but it's also nice to see people in positions of power who are competent and focused on the greater good.
@@OrangeRiver Not to dive too far into religion, but if we must have a guiding myth for our political positions, Star Trek would be better than many other options.
the answer is that ripples in the timeline change the past present and future and the waves make all the changes possible and solidify when they subside so all events were true depending on perspective.
Add 100 years to the Star Trek time line and that would be our reality.
seems like regression. The D100y was more advanced then everything mentioned after it
I think it may be necessary in the near future for the franchise to retcon the dates of the Eugenics Wars, not just because of what we've seen recently in SNW and Picard, but frankly what's been depicted since '90s Trek lol. Of course, that said, space technology appearing to move backwards is not totally unrealistic. The Saturn V rocket was the most technologically advanced vehicle humans ever built, but for decades after the Apollo program, we took a pretty significant step back in terms of crewed exploration.
@Discobolos True, they are hints. What worries me is, for example, the SNW writers' reasoning behind "hinting" that the timeline of the Eugenics Wars is not what has been previously established. They're on record in interviews saying that the Temporal Cold War might have caused some changes to the timeline, and they're potentially using that as justification to bring parts of the lore more in line with the modern day. Problem is, it's all fiction, so I find this move completely unnecessary lol
Do you ever think that maybe our space exploration may follow a similar timeline to that of Erik the Red to Columbus?
You cannot compare OCEAN exploration to SPACE exploration. The circumstances and levels of technology are too different.
You can accidentally explore the oceans. You can’t accidentally explore space. So no.
What happened to the Nomad-1 probe, and the one Voyager found on planet Nuclear Winter? (Four Seasons).
Another great Video! I was wondering if there is like a single seminal event that leads to breakthroughs in space flight? Is there only Zefram Cochrane? is anybody named after Zefram Cochrane in the future? does he end up having kids that do anything in the star trek universe?
As always, thank you for this video.
Live Long and Prosper 🖖
Thanks Geoffrey! In Greg Cox's Eugenics Wars novels, the events of DS9's "Little Green Men" evidently put humanity on track for faster spaceflight advancement by reverse-engineering specs from the Ferengi shuttle. I included info about this in an early draft of the script for this video but decided to cut it for time.
@@OrangeRiver Thanks Tyler! I have a lot of catching up to do in DS9 which is great since it's such a good show.
Crewed or crude? 😅
Lol
In my opinion, in think the deviation of the timeline would have been around WW2. As we know, technology tends to be accelerated during times of conflict. What if WW2 lasted longer, even by a few years? Or, better yet, Germany delayed invading Poland by a year or two? Basically, the outcome of the war would remain the same, but certain choices within that era would be different. And that's for starters, like what if the idea of having an atomic plane, one that the US Air Force wanted to develop, was actually approved during the 1950s?
I am a little confused. Since it appeared that the DY 100 to 1200 seemed far more advanced and simply needed to be upgrade to better propulsion technology. In our reality, we have not achieved the technology for cryonic suspension.
No need to retcon just say it was all classified - lol.
As far as pre-warp technology goes, We could, according to the latest breakthroughs in Fusion research, use a fusion powered rocket to travel to and beyond Mars by the year 2042. And it could take as little as 2 weeks for it to travel from Earth to Mars.
Think about with Buck Rogers and Ranger 3. The picture of the Botany Bay came from Mike Okuda's book.
All the different retcons and timeline mismatches make a lot of sense when you remember that the Star Trek universe is running on dozens of paradoxes and other timey whimey things because of all the various temporal escapades, particularly those on Earth.
Isn't the OV-165 just a X-33 Venture Star?
Inspired by that prototype and a few smaller ones, but a distinct design too. We can assume it’s the artists’ idea of what the final production would’ve been like
I'm not that big of a Star Trek fan but I'm really impressed and entertained by your depth of knowledge/research, sly humour, and engaging presenting style. Enjoyed your recent "clone sequence", hilarious. Um sorry to be that pedant but for future reference Charybdis is pronounced ka-RIB-dis - an odd choice of name for a space vessel since Charybdis was a mythical whirlpool that sucked sailors to their deaths :p
Someone is going to get ot the moon probably by the end of this decade.
And do the other things, not because they are easy, but because they are hard ;)
Maybe in the Star Trek timeline our government actually paid off its massive debt. Commercial spaceflight, like SpaceX, is what will get us back to the Moon and onto Mars, not NASA. I liked this video, keep up the good work.
SpaceX is heavily subsidised by the gov't. In fact, SpaceX would be a historical footnote without tax payer money. Private industry will never front the costs required to head to the Moon or Mars. Governments will create the infrastructure that will allow private industry to take hold.
some say in 4 months, some you mean actual rocket scientists ?
I hope the starship opens up these early missions
So I got to ask.....do you actually enjoy Discovery and Picard? No judgement, it's no skin off my back, your videos rock regardless. I'm just curious as to your thoughts on them
I've liked Discovery seasons 3 and 4 insofar as I think the show has improved. Picard has been...a letdown at just about every turn, in my opinion. But I felt it was important to acknowledge Picard season 2's contributions to the lore about human pre-warp spaceflight because the idea of a manned mission to Europa is cool on its own.
@@OrangeRiver I do think that idea is cool! Thanks for responding! I appreciate your opinion. I haven't seen Discovery or Brave New Worlds yet. But Picard really hurt me. I watched TNG on a lark in my early 20s. Was just bored one day, put it on Netflix in the background. It changed my life lol. The vision it represented of the future is something I think we all can strive for. So the first season of Picard was a real disappointment for me, and it put me off of the newer stuff almost immediately. Maybe I'll check out Discovery if seasons 3 and 4 got better.
Thanks again for the response! Really love your videos, keep up the good work
We(they) don't know all of history. Dates can be incorrect, or discoveries change the narrative! Unless it's time travellers messing with our timeline ( The Bell Riots, First Contact revised).
Oh ya have you done any battlestar galactic vidoes,that would be great lore
Voyager already showed that pre-series history diverges from ours in a very major way. Our microchip computer boom didn't happen originally. So that alone could have adjusted global investment away from genetic engineering and space exploration.
OV-165 looks a lot like the Lockheed VentureStar
In a vacuum... and you didn't cut to the Spaceballs ship. Presumably you were just leaving a void for me to fill.
I suggest playing Kerbal Space Program and getting the KSP Interstellar Extended mod. The mod takes the already great rocket simulator based on currently used tech and adds current & near-future reactors and rockets (thermal, electric, positron, and plasma-types), all based on peer-reviewed scientific publications and real physics.
It really makes things much simpler if you think of it like this. Every iteration of Star Trek takes place in its own universe. This would explain every timeline inconsistency between all the shows and movies. Then we have to take into account the number of times time travel changed things. These time travel incursions would create new universes as well. Think about it, there is no way that the Enterprise crew and the Borg interacting with Cochrane and Lilly, didn't have any effect on future events. We know, for a fact, that the time ship in Voyager changed history, by having Henry Starlings company become the tech giant, instead of companies like Intel and Apple. The list goes on.
In my non-canon, homebrew stuff I am working on, I created the concept of 'Space Time' (which just so happens to have the initials 'ST'), a calendar that is precisely 100 years off from our own, just to add-in the century that is so obviously missing. ST is the only Scify franchise that has no 'Sol-system only' period - we go right from WW3 to traveling to other planets. Its just so bad.
Really interesting video, I'm pretty disappointed in Obama for a number of reasons, including the way he gutted NASA. I'd love to see you talk more about 2001, and possibly its sequels if you're aware of those at all.
Obama definitely has no balls to just take the risk.
Imagine if the Europeans discovered America and then never came back because "We've been there before".
Smh..
Imagine the trip to Mars and getting stuck with that smart ass and annoying astronaut that repeatedly asks "Are we there yet?"
Actualy there is a simple and logical explanation for the aparent contradictions between canon and reality.
All of these advancements happen in the prime Timeline. So if we live in the dark parallel universe we would naturaly be technologicaly backwards.
On the bright side we can look forward to beeing opressed by Intendant Kira.
And no, i have absolutely no sense of Ironie (as a matter of fact i dont even know how to spell it).
Considering the enterprise space shuttle (named after the enterprise in star trek) is in the opening credits of enterprise, I say that sometime durring the temporal cold war, someone came to earth and got drunk at a bar with Roddenberry, and told him about the future. He ended up writing about it and star trek was born. But in doing so, it delayed the ugenics war because people who would have started it, were influenced by the ideas of star trek the show. So, in reality, we are just an alternate time line to the prime universe. It's all real. 🤯
Crewed missions? Or crude missions? 😁
It would be inspiring and uplifting to seriously pursue space exploration if for nothing more than to just do something with ourselves, but we're too busy looking for the next big boogie man to set aside the time and money to do that. Such a waste in potential. If the next big boogie man was out in space, we'd get our butts in gear in a heart beat. We need more than fear as a motivator to live.
I think that the Star Trek universe begins to diverge from ours the moment Data created advanced subspace tech in San Francisco in 1893. Instead of continuing to kick the timeline down the road, we need to just accept that our own history diverged. Rip that band aid off and then maybe we can see some 80s eugenics stuff.
8:44 "his f-104 starfighter"? Was this supposed to be a space-worthy fighter in 1969?
Once again another excellent presentation! One thing though; the DY-100, and by extension the entire DY series seem too advanced and out of place with the other vehicles in the time line. Most particularly, what is the need for the Lewis and Clark, the Shango-x1 or the Ares 4 when you've got the DY-100 and it's successors ranging all the way to I believe the Dy-1200. Seems to me the DY-100 belongs in the 2090's, along with Space: 1999. Now there's a show you should do a few videos on!
By the way, like the beard, but I can't tell if your a college professor or a mountain. Although you do talk like a college professor. Live long and prosper.
I think that the DY-100 was a top secret DOD thing.
I hear what your saying, but at that time in Star Trek history, at that technological level in universe, the production of a ship like that by the DOD would have been highly material and treasure intensive and possibly a one of a kind! Beside historian Marla McGiver statement about the DY-100 implies they, and possibly other ships like them, were regularly in use and perhaps common place. Also If it's top secret, how is it that Rain Robinson had a model of it stacked on it's booster, and a photo of it launching?
@@emsleywyatt3400
You did a video saying could dune be our future? You should do one how warhammer 40k could be our future