this post was submitted on 25 Mar 2025
33 points (100.0% liked)

Daystrom Institute

3587 readers
61 users here now

Welcome to Daystrom Institute!

Serious, in-depth discussion about Star Trek from both in-universe and real world perspectives.

Read more about how to comment at Daystrom.

Rules

1. Explain your reasoning

All threads and comments submitted to the Daystrom Institute must contain an explanation of the reasoning put forth.

2. No whinging, jokes, memes, and other shallow content.

This entire community has a “serious tag” on it. Shitposts are encouraged in Risa.

3. Be diplomatic.

Participate in a courteous, objective, and open-minded fashion. Be nice to other posters and the people who make Star Trek. Disagree respectfully and don’t gatekeep.

4. Assume good faith.

Assume good faith. Give other posters the benefit of the doubt, but report them if you genuinely believe they are trolling. Don’t whine about “politics.”

5. Tag spoilers.

Historically Daystrom has not had a spoiler policy, so you may encounter untagged spoilers here. Ultimately, avoiding online discussion until you are caught up is the only certain way to avoid spoilers.

6. Stay on-topic.

Threads must discuss Star Trek. Comments must discuss the topic raised in the original post.

Episode Guides

The /r/DaystromInstitute wiki held a number of popular Star Trek watch guides. We have rehosted them here:

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

So, this may be a frequently discussed topic, and I'm sorry if so. But I was watching S1 of SNW and there was a scene where an early "shields up" saved the ship from serious damage. And now that I think of it, I just can't come up with a good reason why shields aren't up all the time, with a few obvious caveats.

  1. Yes, shields must be down to transport, this seems like the most obvious reason to have them down. But we see plenty of episodes where shields are brought down momentarily for a transport. Why not do that always?
  2. One reason brought up frequently is that raising shields could be taken as an act of aggression. But if you arrive with shields already up, then you're not doing anything aggressive, you just arrived that way, so I don't think this makes much sense in a world where most Starfleet ships just keep their shields up.
  3. I don't know for certain, but it seems possible that shields may not be usable at warp. I don't remember any specific episode where that happened, but it seems possible. But even then, a ship could just be programmed to bring them up as it drops out of warp.
  4. I guess it could be possible that the power usage of the shields is too much for the day-to-day use. But again, it seems like a lot of missions clearly begin with "dropping out of warp into an unfamiliar area" and those are the times where your shields should just be up by default.

Of course, I know the answer is that "shields up" is great dramatic dialogue, but I guess I wondered if there are any more satisfying answers than that?

top 13 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] T156@lemmy.world 8 points 11 hours ago* (last edited 2 hours ago)

They are often up, but not at full power. TOS made many references to the computer raising the automatic defence screens, and by TNG, starships had navigational deflector shields that were always on.

  1. I don't know for certain, but it seems possible that shields may not be usable at warp. I don't remember any specific episode where that happened, but it seems possible. But even then, a ship could just be programmed to bring them up as it drops out of warp.

I want to say it's the opposite, actually. Shields, at least on some level, are required for safe warp drive operation. Voyager had an episode where they were unable to jump to warp speed because their shields were inoperative.

However, they're probably not at full, since warp drive puts considerable strain on the power systems, enough that your average starship may not be able to power their shields at full, and maintain warp drive at the same time. You may need a high-power ship like the Protostar with its dual core system to make it work.

  1. One reason brought up frequently is that raising shields could be taken as an act of aggression. But if you arrive with shields already up, then you're not doing anything aggressive, you just arrived that way, so I don't think this makes much sense in a world where most Starfleet ships just keep their shields up.

Only if they don't have a baseline. Starfleet ships seem to have no problem detecting ships charging their shields and weapons, even if it is an alien ship with technologies and configuration that they have never encountered before. There is no reason to think that aliens would be any different in that regard.

  1. I guess it could be possible that the power usage of the shields is too much for the day-to-day use. But again, it seems like a lot of missions clearly begin with "dropping out of warp into an unfamiliar area" and those are the times where your shields should just be up by default.

Shields interfere with a lot of systems, not just the transporter. It also messes with sensors, which is why ships like the constitution-class Enterprise and Phoenix have their shields set up so that they're lowered on a cycle to allow the (high-power) sensors to operate in that gap.

If you're in a new place taking sensor readings, having shields would unnecessarily hamper your readings, so you may end up spending longer there, or be unable to take some readings at all.

[–] silverlose@lemm.ee 23 points 17 hours ago (1 children)

My personal explanation is that it is a power saving measure. I got the idea from a fan made Star Trek game called super Star Trek. One could move around with shield up all the time but you’d use up tons of energy

My other theory is that it has something to do with the deflector shields.

[–] the_sisko@startrek.website 7 points 15 hours ago (1 children)

Yeah, I think the power-saving argument (#4) is potentially strongest, especially if the plot needs it to be for a given episode.

But I'm having trouble thinking of a situation in the shows where the maneuverability was limited by the shields. Certainly there are plenty of cases where power was routed to shields, maybe even the power that was meant for propulsion. But I think in general, those would be cases where power was already limited, or the need for defense was much higher. In general, I don't think I recall a trade-off where shields restrict maneuverability or speed.

[–] Flagstaff@programming.dev 5 points 15 hours ago* (last edited 15 hours ago)

Then maybe the generator would experience long-term degradation to be constantly running. Ironically, until I thought of this just now, I totally agreed with your reasoning about it being a weak plot point, haha!

[–] match@pawb.social 13 points 16 hours ago

obrien is spending all day every day fixing shit up you wanna give him more work?

[–] Rivalarrival@lemmy.today 5 points 14 hours ago (1 children)

Perhaps shielded vessels are more easily detected on long range sensors. If you're constantly using shields, you're continuously broadcasting your location to everyone in the sector.

[–] the_sisko@startrek.website 2 points 6 hours ago

I like this idea a lot, it might become my new head cannon!

[–] HaveYouPaidYourDues@lemmy.world 8 points 17 hours ago (1 children)

Could be that the wear on the emitters would be significant enough to make it bothersome?

[–] the_sisko@startrek.website 3 points 15 hours ago (3 children)

Possibly. But how much more wear & tear would this be compared to the wear put on the warp drive, which gets incredibly frequent use? If that warp drive can withstand it, why not the shield emitters?

[–] _cryptagion@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 9 hours ago

The warp core is used frequently, but not constantly. And while it's not in use, it's literally located directly in engineering so that it can be easily maintained.

The shield emitter is located outside the ship.

[–] Jesus_666@lemmy.world 2 points 11 hours ago

If you already have one critical high-wear component in your ship you probably don't want a second one, especially when both of them are security critical. The Federation might be essentially post-scarcity on a personal level but that doesn't mean their resources are unlimited. Also, time spent in dry dock is time not spent on missions.

My guess is that in the end ships don't travel with anything but navigational shields up for several of reasons:

  • It's usually not needed.
  • It's rude and makes it harder to solve things by diplomacy.
  • It reduces the ship's active time and wastes resources.
[–] neatchee@lemmy.world 3 points 13 hours ago

Ooo fun writing challenge. *Knuckles crack*

Ok, so hear me out:

Warp Drives use up massive amounts of energy in a single burst. We all know acceleration and deceleration are the things that are costly in space, not maintaining momentum. So you can design against that, right? Massive capacitors that are easily replaced, that store the charge before passing it to the warp drive, which only needs to operate for a short time.

Shield emitters, on the other hand, need constant power running through them to generate the necessary energy field. Like a powered magnet, it's only by running current through the device that the field is generated. And any time you move large amounts of power continuously like that you're going to generate heat and degrade the medium.

So it comes down to the fundamental nature of the task being performed by the hardware.

[–] wizzor@sopuli.xyz 7 points 17 hours ago

For 2. I feel also like arriving with shields up and then bringing them down is a strong message too, when communicating peaceful intent. Familiar races would also come to recognize that this is how starfleet does things and not consider the default aggressive.