tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Mon May 17 16:29:29 1999

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]

bIraqlul (was Re: tlhIngan De'wI'mey)

On Mon, 17 May 1999, Steven Boozer wrote:
> quljIb:
> : Knowing Klingons, they probably built in the same multiple redundancies
> : that make Klingon physiology so unique. Personnaly, if given the choice
> : between two computer systems, Federation and Klingon, I'd choose the
> : latter; more rugged design and less prone to "energy surges" that seem
> to
> : plague Federation ships.
> Perhaps not.  In some of the novels, Klingons have sneered at these
> multiple redundancies in Federation technology considering them
> unnecessary
> and, probably more relevant, expensive luxuries.  I vaguely remember one
> Klingon commenting on the quadruple (!) redundancies of Federation
> personnel transporters, "Are they so afraid of dying?"  It does seem odd
> in
> view of the brak'lul {bIraqlul}.

I suppose it depends on the system being redundanized (is that a word?).
After life support and the engine core, I'd give targeting and weapons top
priorty; a warship is fairly useless without weapons. Anything else I'd
just make easy to fix/jury rig.

Speaking of Federation ships, I've oft wondered what gauss level is
required to short out a starship's structural integrity fields and cause
it to literally fall apart at the seems (could that be the basis for the
new Breen weapon???).


Back to archive top level