Robert Cook: Mickey Kochersperger asked about finding Voyager's airtime in his local market. One thing people in the U.S. might try is searching the TV Guide website, at http://www.tvguide.com The site channels you to your local market via your zip code, and you can do a search for any program title.

John Latchem: UPN looks to be falling off the map. The recent Nielson ratings are very telling. UPN has in the past few weeks finished in sixth place among a six network race. When UPN and WB first premiered UPN had a commanding advantage, finishing in fifth place consistantly for 4 years. You have to figure that the new networks won't do well for the first few years, and the "Big Four" will fight for the top spots (Remember when Fox started 10 years ago they were low ranked but with some popular programs and Football they have risen and should crack the top three in a year or so).

Well now UPN is last. As an outsider I must say it looks like the WB is making better choices and better programing decisions. UPN it seems comes out with a new slate of shows every year. These shows are poorly written and don't appeal to the general audience. The only two shows I think UPN has had any success with are "Voyager" and "The Sentinel." Most of their sitcoms are poorly written with limited appeal. I get the impression UPN has no idea how to be a network. They keep cancelling their shows due to poor ratings, as if they are a real network. HELLO!!! YOU'RE A NEW NETWORK. YOU'RE LUCKY TO CRACK THE TOP 90. So on UPN new shows don't last long.

The WB is making better choices. Shows which ranked lower than now cancelled UPN sitcoms are still there four years later. The WB lets shows last to find an audience. Sure some have been cancelled, and most are just as bad as the UPN ones, and I don't watch them, but the WB has realized they won't find an audience if they keep switching their programming. Plus the WB has some critically acclaimed shows, such as "Buffy the Vampire Slayer," "7th Heaven," and the new "Dawson's Creek." These shows have rapidly found an audience and have the ability to keep them. They are serialized shows which appeal to teen and young adult viewers (remember when Fox struck gold with "90210?") and have been moving up in the ratings (and I must admit "Buffy" is a fascinating show. A recent sketch on "Saturday Night Live" parodied Buffy as if it were "Seinfeld" with Vampires. Well the real show is a lot like "90210" with vampires!) (Note from Phil: Believe it or not, Buffy has been suggested for a Nitpicker's Guide topic and not just in passing by my editor.)

All UPN really has is "Voyager", and I don't think anyone would miss it if it were gone. It premiered to huge numbers and then lost them. The early technobable plots drove away the general audience. Only the most ardent of Trekkers stayed after the second season. If Paramount just shipped "Voyager" and "The Sentinel" to syndication I don't think anyone would notice. The WB has clearly taken the path Fox took 10 years ago. I have no idea what UPN is trying to do.

The WB has also smartly delved into the Warner Brothers trove of children's properties, establishing a weekday block of afterschool and Saturday morning programming anchored by the Loony Toons, Batman, and Superman. What was UPN's bright idea? Establish a block of children's programming on SUNDAY morning. Is anyone suprised that this idea is almost gone?

So it is clear that UPN is on the way down, and the WB on the way up. I'm not surprised if in the smaller markets stations jumped ship. It's interesting that Warner Bros recent films have flopped ("The Postman" is but one of many flops financed by Warner Bros) while on television it just cleaned up with "er" on NBC. Paramount's main strength is in films, having recently financed a part of the huge "Titanic" and looking to make quite a profit from it.

J. Timothy Thompson: Someone mentioned a local station pre-empting a new Voyager episode for a TNG rerun. Well, there are a lot of us out here who would much rather see any NextGen rerun than have to endure a Voyager episode. Well, any rerun except "Sub Rosa."

Andrew Corcoran: If you're interested, the new seasons of Voyager and Deep Space Nine are now out on video over here in England. I hire them from the video shop, so I'll be seeing it on Saturday. Looking forward to it!

Corey Hines, Hamilton, ON: If Data needs to ingest some sort of food, why was Lore able to float in space for 2 years and still work.

Phil: Good point!

Ed Kushnerick: Well seems to me that since Data has an 'off' switch, he must run on some type of internal power system that can be interrupted. Now since he has artificial parts, even if they are organic, they're able to live for long periods without his power source being on (he was found laying on a rock and nobody knew how long he'd been there), he probably has some sort of solar power back up system. He can eat and taste, though before he got the emotion chip tasted didn't have any meaning for him, so I presume he can process biomass for energy, probably at a higher effeciency than humans. He can probably eat nearly anything that isn't hideously destructive like acids or such and it wouldn't bother him. Wonder why nobody every used him as a smuggling device? (Here Data, swallow this phasor so the Romulans don't find it!)

Another revolting idea, since he can control basically every body function, he could build up a stomach full of nasty concentrated acid and give somebody a facefull of Android stomach acid suppliment #5527.

J. Timothy Thompson: So far, your correspondents seem to be under the impression that puncturing the coolant tubes would cause a warp breach. I disagree... In "Generations" Geordi did say "We have a coolant leak!" shortly before the stardrive section had to be evacuated, but this wasn't the cause of the warp core problems. The warp core (and apparently the coolant tubes) were damaged in the incompetently handled battle with the Klingon BOP... The coolant leak merely prevented the Engineering staff from repairing the core because of coolant's flesh-disolving properties (illustrated in First Contact). If there had been a coolant leak but no core damage, or core damage with no coolant leak, then presumably the ship would have survived.

Phil: Only the creators know for sure!

Corey Hines, Hamilton, ON: I noticed that for many movies, only when it's aired on television they show the extra footage. Some of the movies I can remember is: Star Trek II, Airplane II, Throw Mama from the Train, Aliens, Dances With Wolves, Superman, Superman II and Close Encounters of the Third King. There are no doubt more. Now I can see now putting this extra footage in the theatrical release, not too many people want to sit through too much movie. But why can't they realse these special editions on video or DVD. One can hit pause, ir turn it off if a break is needed. The only case I can remember them doing this is Terminator 2.

Phil: Seems like I've heard of stuff being released as a "Director's Cut" for letterbox format or laserdisk. I would imagine we'll see more of this kind of thing as technology becomes more sophisticated.

J. Timothy Thompson: What I find really disturbing is that back before they released the video, someone at Paramount must have sat down and watched this movie, and had the reaction, "You know, this movie is good, but what it really needs is to be LONGER."

Phil: :-)

Desmond Warzel: Also, you mentioned in the latest "Ask the Chief" that you might like to do a Star Wars guide. The exact title and author escapes me, but an unofficial Star Wars trivia book was published several months ago by Kensington. It's mostly trivia questions, but there are a few other sections as well, including one which points out various errors in the films. The title of this chapter is "The Nitpickers' Guide!" I was just wondering what sort of control you have over the name. The word "nitpicker" can't be owned, but "Nitpcker's Guide" seems like it should be your property or at least Dell's (however that works. I can't be the only person to have pointed this out to you, but in case I am, I thought you might like to know that someone else is using the name.

Phil: By all right "Nitpicker's Guide" is my trademark but I'm not sure how the trade mark law applies to the names of chapters. Certainly, if someone tried to put out a book and call it a "Nitpicker's Guide," Dell would view that with a fair measure of displeasure (and there has already been a case of someone trying to subtitle a book, "a Nitpicker's Guide" and the situation quickly dealt with), but in the case of a chapter title? Don't know, couldn't say!

Jim Elek of Sterling Heights, MI: I need to add to the thoughts concerning a Star Wars nitpicking guide. I think that the official line is clear: the movies, novelizations thereof, and the radio dramas are canonical. This is stated in your quote from Star Wars Insider as well as The Guide to the Star Wars Universe. The novels, TV specials, and comics are not. However, unlike Star Trek, elements from these sources may be used in a future canonical source. For example, the casino from Tales from the Mos Eisley Cantina appears in Star Wars-The Special Edition as well Dash Rengar's ship from Shadows of the Empire. There is no "quasi-canonical" status. If we must label it, then it would be something like "possibly canonical pending an appearance in a canonical source." Actually, I think that label best sums up what The Guide to the Star Wars Universe" says about canon.

Therefore, while there are certainly sufficient monetary motivations for a Star Wars nitpickers guide, I think that there are more compelling philosophical reasons not to do one.

First of all, if you stick with what it is strictly canonical, then you simply do not have enough material for a book. Plus any material you do have has already been hashed and re-hashed in various forums of fandom for over 20 years!

Secondly, if you include the novels, then you are doing a disservice to your fellow writers. As I said in my last message, there are several writers writing separate novels at the same time. These stories take place in the same universe and with a central core of characters, but can occur in different time frames. For example as one writer is finishing up novel A, another is in the middle of novel B that is set 5 years before novel A and a third writer is just starting novel C that is set 5 years after novel A. Even with staffers from Lucasfilm overseeing and coordinating these efforts, discrepancies are going to creep in. As the Emperor said, "It is unavoidable." If you publish a book that points out these discrepancies and screams "Mistake!" then you are effectively taking away the artistic license of all Star Wars writers. As you know, the creative process is an evolution. Elements change constantly. Can we expect author A (from my above example) to do a massive re-write if author B changes one of the elements of his story?

Now this same creative argument could be applied to Star Trek. However, the canon of Star Trek consists mainly of the TV shows and movies. These mediums are better suited for last minute re-writes (and, in fact, encounter them frequently) than novels.

Also, the Star Wars Universe is conceptualized differently than the Star Trek Universe. George Lucas has always said that Star Wars is a fairy tale, a myth. Continuity and historical accuracy are not necessary elements of a myth. In contrast, the stories of Star Trek are framed by a series of captain's logs. This implies that these stories are the facts in this universe. Here, historical accuracy is very important.

Finally, I think that you have to consider the efforts of TPTB to maintain some semblance of continuity. I think that we can all agree that TPTB for Star Trek make little or no effort in this area. At the very least, they minimize their effort. On the other hand, simply checking out the "Acknowledgements" section of any given novel there is mention of Lucasfilm employees whose job is to help maintain continuity between everything (I'd give an example, but I don't keep my novels at work). This plus the final results make the difference in effort quite clear.

In my last message, I suggested getting a hold of Steve Sansweet at Lucasfilm for an official answer on canon. As stated above, I think that question has been answered. However, if you want to talk to someone on the inside of all this (since it's obvious we fans have a wide difference of opinion and interpretation of the facts), I suggest Kevin J. Anderson. He has written several Star Wars novels as well as edited 3 of the anthologies. I have read that he has pretty much become the "godfather" of the world of Star Wars novels. He could give you some real insight on this whole subject.

Phil: Well, let's take this one piece at a time. I too think it's clear what is canonical. However, the underlying spirit of the Prime Directive for Nitpicking, "All nits picked shall derive from sources the creators consider canonical" is that the creators get to make the rules. In this case, the creators have made a rule and then backpedalled on it: In essence, making another rule that says it's okay to backpeddle a bit on what's canonical. When I look at the Star Wars universe and I see official guides listing novels et all as sources, when I hear the creators talk about it all being part of the same mythology, when I see action figures that come from "Shadows of the Empire," I'm inclined to allow myself the say liberty that the creators have allow themselves!

Concerning only doing the movies, obviously there isn't enough material for a book. And that's why the creators have include other stuff in their official guides! (And that's why I feel able to do so as well IF I decide to do a Star Wars Guide. By the way, concerning the idea that any material I would do from the movie has been rehashed so there's no point in do it? I note that the same situation applied to Classic Trek and I found things to talk about in the Classic Guide. I would also note that I'm a writer and its part of my job to find a fresh perspective, to bring a bit a humor, to make the Nitpicker's Guides fun and interesting books to read. I feel like I've accomplished that five times in a row. If I were a betting man, I'd say the odds are pretty good in my favor! ;-)

Now let's talk about "doing a disservice" to my fellow writers. I would hope by now that all Guild members understand that nitpicking is not about finding fault--that's one of the reasons that I say that nitpickers don't deal in reality. For me, nitpicking is a celebration of being human. It is saying, "Look, this is great stuff but we're human and we all make mistakes so as long as we're going to make mistakes why not 'fess up and admit it and have some fun with it." This has always been my approach and it will continue to be my approach and it's the reason that I am very happy to accept nits on my own work because I'm human too! I've found the only creators who really get bent out of shape about nitpicking are the ones who are looking for worship and frankly, I reserved my worship for Someone who deserves it! ;-)

Concerning the different conceptualization of the Star Wars universe, I will probably use this to my advantage. I've read that one way to discuss SW is to say that everything in it are legend that have been handed down. Fine! I like that idea. The task at hnd for nitpicking then is to do a critical analysis and determine--based on consistancy--what is likely to have really occured and what is less likely to occur. If LucasFilms wants to identify everything as myths, that's just fine because it fudges the canonicity issue even further! The term canon is intrisically tied to fact. If it's all a myth, there really is no such thing as a Star Wars canon, there are merely stories that are more likely to have occured. It seems to me in this situation that the art of nitpicking would be invaluable! (Wink, wink.)

Finally, I'm am in the process of determine the best way to contact the people I need to contact. Interestingly enough, Kevin J. Anderson is currently working on a Chronology of the Star Wars Universe. Now, dear friends and neighbors, what are the chances that his Chronology will cover only what is "canonical"? Do you think there will be enough material for his book if he does? (Personally, if I could just get Mr. Anderson to supply me his list of sources for the Chronology, I'd be more than happy to stick with those! And, I will try to get in touch with him. Unfortunately, some creators have little affection for nitpickers!)

Donald Carlson: Too bad you couldn't have had a Titanic guide ready... Seems like EVERYTHING dealing with the Titantic and the Titanic movie is flying off the shelves. You should see how difficult it is to find anything about it at major bookstores. (They were caught by surprise, too.) For example -- the newsgroup alt.movies.titanic, in which nitpicking the movie is a huge part of the group, currently has over 3,000 active messages, and adds 300 or so PER DAY. Amazing.

You should go see it. I've been 5 times already. Don't let the brief, tastefully done nude scene stop you from going. This movie has an extremely spiritual ending that moves many people to tears...

Anyway, what I wanted to write to you was that I firmly believe that when the Star Wars movie is released next year we will witness a massive wave of Star Wars mania the like of which have never been seen. I predict that it will set new records at the boxoffice, surpassing even those set by TITANIC. Everything Star Wars will be in high demand, and a Nitpickers Guide to Star Wars will sell. Very much so.

Go for it!!

John Latchem: As far as a Simpsons Guide goes, I don't think it is a good idea. The Trek and X-Files guides work because these shows take themselves seriously. The Simpsons is a comedy show which especially does NOT take itself seriously. For example in one episode Homer is watching TV and says that in cartoons the impossible can happen. Just then we see Homer walking past the outside of the window while he is still sitting on the couch? This is an obvious nit because Homer is in two places at once, but that is the point. It's all a joke. The whole show is just a parody of life. Besides most of the inconsistancies are pointed out in the recently released "Complete Guide to the Simpsons."

Phil: I'm not really seriously considering a Simpsons Guide but it's been my experience that not matter what people have found before, there's always more!

John Latchem: As far as a Star Wars guide goes there are well over 20 novels and about a hundred comics which go into the timeline. A FAQ release a few years ago, which is mentioned in "Sci Fi Universe #1" states that the Movies, Novels, and Dark Horse comics are canon, the Marvel comics and the Christmas special are not (however background info on Chewbacca from the Christmas special has crept into the more recent novels). My interpretation of this whole thing is that they are canon until George Lucas contradicts them. Since these novels cover post ROTJ, and George is making movies which take place 30 years prior to Star Wars, a time which is hardly covered in the novels, I don't anticipate much contradiction. Lucas is using the term "Coruscant" which was invented in the novels.

As far as nitpicking them goes it would involve taking the time to collect and read all of these novels (The Del Ray Han Solo Adventures and Lando Adventures have been alluded to in some of the Bantam novels, and "Splinter of the Mind's Eye" has had a number of inconsitancies cleaned up by a Dark Horse comic release. I don't know if you intend to do this, or if you have the time.

Personally I think the novels have been more consistant with each other than the more canonical sources. That is to say, the differences between the novelizations of the films and the radio dramas and the films (which are all canonical) are worse than discrepancies between the books. In the "Empire Strikes Back" General Veers destroys the power generator. In the novel, however, a pilot named Hobbie crashes his Snowspeeder into Veer's At-AT, destroying both. Unfortunately this is before Veers has a chance to destroy the generator, and no more time is spent telling how the generator is destoyed. It just comes down. The radio drama features scenes in direct conflict with the films (eg. in the radio drama Jabba's lackey meets with Solo at the Millenium Falcon, not Jabba himself as in the film).

There are some amazing problems with the continuity of the novels. The wedding of Han and Leia in "The Courtship of Princess Leia" is in contradiction with the end of "The Glove of Vader" children's series (which is mentioned in every timeline I've seen) in which Han and Leia get married. It also features the New Republic using Yavin as a base, using Dagobah as a base, and using Cloud City as a base (which the other novels say they didn't. Yavin was untouched until Luke built the Jedi Academy there, Dagobah remained deserted, and Cloud City was under Imperial Garrison. Considering the dumbed down plots of these books I'd have no objection to ignoring them. The "Anakin Solo" children's books are a lot better).

The "Corellian Trilogy" features a superweapon that can destroy stars. Han and Leia sit around wondering what it could be. They mention the Empire has been gone for years, and they say that they have never seen anything with the power to destroy a star and wonder if it is a lost superweapon.

Unfortunately, The "Jedi Academy Trilogy" which came out earlier takes place seven years earlier and features a new Imperial villain and a lost Imperial Superweapon, which can destroy stars. After reading the Academy books the Corellian books really lack credibility.

Also "Spectre of the Past" states that the Empire still controls a thousand worlds 15 years after ROTJ, a far cry from being "dead" as stated in previous novels which take place 10-14 years after ROTJ.

Then there is an interesting occurance in the Callista trilogy (not intended as a trilogy but featuring a continuing story thread). In "Children of the Jedi" Luke finds a girlfriend. Well, in "The Crystal Star" and "The Corellian Trilogy" which take place a few years later, but came out first, every indication is made that Luke's Jedi nature prevents him from having a mate. So follow up to "Children of the Jedi," "Darksaber," is mostly spent dealing with Callista and getting her out of the picture. "Darksaber" features a scene in which Mara Jade meets Callista. Unfortunately Mara was present when Callista was rescued at the end of "Children of the Jedi." So at the end of "Darksaber" Callista is gone and Luke vows to find her, so the story isn't over yet because someone needs to establish why he is not looking for her in the later books. Hence "Planet of Twilight" which explains this. Interestingly "Spectre of the Past" hints at a Luke/Mara romance in the future.

There are also the apparant contradictions between the novels and the end of the ROTJ special addition. The novels maintained that Coruscant was held by the Empire for 3 years following ROTJ, and Cloud City held for at least 6 (Thrawn uses it in the first Zahn trilogy). In the Special Edition both places are shown celebrating the death of the Emperor. This is easily explained away as a temporary loss of discipline following the debacle at Endor, and military interests quickly reestablished a foothold, and order. The novels and comics are an interesting lot. Since no major characters can die and nothing major can happen they all just seem to be running in place, with no great changes in character arcs. The only major lasting change is Leia replacing Mon Mothma as President and Luke establishing his Jedi Academy.

Omer Belsky, Isreal: About the new Nitpickers guide - how about a guide for `Roseane`.

You`ll probably say it ain`t commercial, but I think there are some really Good reasons for such a guide

1. There is alot of Continuity - and alot of smart writing. Something that is rare on TV. It`ll defnetly be a challenge

2. There are SO many great lines. One of the best must be Dalene saying something like:"I`ve been saying things like that[laughing about the house and the Family] since the day I learned to talk - before that I just pointed at things and laughed"

3. There is the greatest Nit EVER. I mean, ofcourse, to the constantly changing face of the oldest daughter.

4. You won`t have to complain about sing weman as sex symbole as you always do in the guides. After all, the hero of the show is, ah... how sould I put it...`Roseanne`

OK, so it probably won`t work but it`s a nice idea, and it would defnetly be fun reading.

Phil: I can't imagine sitting and watching those episodes four times. I think I've seen a complete episode of Rosanne once or twice!

Ray Andrade: I am an avid fan of Star Wars and run an rpg based on West End Games system. I know for certain that everything West End has published goes to Lucasfilm for approval before going to the shelves. In fact a lot of technical and design contributions to the Star Wars universe stem from West End's huge line of products.

Brian Straight, Shawnee, Kansas: Have you considered doing an ER guide? I'm sure there's alot of people out there who would like to know the inacuaracies, and such of this top-rated medical drama. Granted, you may have to find someone in the medical feild to help you out. But since it's the highestr rated drama in the country, I'm sure a guide will work.

Phil: There was a media-tie-in book that was done on ER a few years ago. If I recall, it didn't do very well!

Mike Deeds: Just to let you know, I vote "thumbs up" on a SW guide. Please cover the infamous 1978 "Holiday Special". Even though it was not (and probably never will be) issued on videotape, it is available on the Internet. Since SW material (at least as far as TV and movies are concerned) is limited, please do more reviewing and less nit-picking. I wish the XF guide had more of what you thought of the episodes. I particularly enjoyed the "Ruminations" in the Trek guides. You also should probably cover what should be in the prequels. Thanks for reading my thoughts.

Phil: The prequels are a problem since they won't be out yet! As far as the ruminations goes, I'm glad you enjoy reading them but I'm already struggling to find a balance there. If I err anywhere, I prefer to err on the side of people wishing I would do more instead of having them wish I would shut up! ;-)

J. Timothy Thompson: I would buy both a Star Wars guide and a Bond guide. However, I imagine the Bond guide would be easier to compile, given the relative scarcity of live-action material for Star Wars.

Phil: Forty-one down . . .

Andrew Corcoran: As with the next guide, I'm looking forward to whatever you produce, but I would also buy a Bond guide. You are thinking about Star Wars, you say? Well, since you may only be able to use the films, how about combining Star Wars and James Bond films into a guide, or a guide on lots of films? I like the idea of creating a guide full of Nitpicker comments and NCIEO conversations and bundling them all together.

Phil: As far as a combined guide goes, see above under the Bond Guide heading. Oh, and, forty-two down . . .

Todd Pence: I was reading in one of your recent newsletters that someone suggested a volume II of the Classic Nit Guide. An idea that would be less time-consuming and expensive would be to print a revised and expanded edition of the Classic Nit Guide, adding the best of the nits you've received or noted since the first guide came out. I know I sent you my own rather extensive personal list of nits a few years ago, and I'm sure others must have as well, so I think the material is there to justify such a new addition.

Phil: There *is* plenty of material!

Chris Cook: Yes, I would buy a Star Wars nitpicker's guide (another one down) provided you promise not to try to figure out who would win between the Death Star and Starfleet. Don't go there. Incidentally (while I have the attention of the intelligent online world) are the plots from the X-Wing and TIE Fighter games at all official, or ever followed up or referred to in the novels? TIE in particular went all over the place in an apparent attempt to prevent me from fighting the Rebel Alliance (civil wars, technology trading, Harkov, Zaarin, Tarrak - what happened to Tarrak anyway?). And of course, if the games are considered canon, it gives you ample opportunity to go on at length about starfighter technology. Maybe with enough effort you could explain what use the jamming beam or mag pulse warhead is supposed to be... sorry, lingering resentment over not being allowed to change weapons.

By the way, I will also buy a nitpicker's guide to: Babylon 5, Space:A&B (despite having about three good episodes in the whole season), Millennium, The Avengers (five volume set there), Buffy the Vampire Slayer, James Bond and Mission: Impossible. And anything else I can't think of at the moment. And Xena, because I'll buy anything about Xena, not because I think it takes itself seriously enough to be nitpicked. If only you had a few thousand more people this hooked on nitpicking, you could become the Bill Gates of the publishing world and make more books than Danielle Steele. They'd have the advantage of being readable, too...

Phil: Thanks for the kind words about the writing!

Murray Leeder: That shot in "Ascension" is said to be in Mulder's mind, but how does that explain that it's reused in "Nisei"... in Scully's mind!

Phil: Ooooo-eeeeeee-oooooo

Joe Griffin: [Our system is] actually the "Terran" system, from the fact that Terra is another word for "Earth." (Latin: "terra firma"="solid ground.") If you watch or read any '50s sci-fi, from time to time you'll notice humans being referred to as Terrans and our home planet being called Terra. In Bradbury's _Martian Chronicles_ and the Martian stories of Edgar Rice Burroughs (Yes, the Tarzan guy), the Martians had their own names for the red planet. We continued to call them Martians, of course.

We can also assume that Federation names are ocasionally different from what the actual alien race calls themselves. Real-world example: When we call Native American tribes by the names they give themselves, we are usually just not translating a term into English. Shoshone, Navajo and other tribal names generally translate to mean "human beings" or "the real people."

Nick Oven: [Concerning the turning of the wheel,] This quote it from "The Discovery of the Titanic" by Robert Ballard, in the Glossary:

"Hard a starboard: in 1912, this order required the man at the wheel to turn the wheel to port, not to starboard, and the rudder and hence the ship would turn to port. This practice was a survival of the days when ships were steered by a helm or tiller bar rather than by a wheel. The helm or tiller bar was directly connected to the rudder post so that if you wanted to turn the ship go turn to port you had to put the helm to starboard. The use of these old 'helm orders' began to die out after the first World War and was obsolete by the middle 1930s."

Donald Carlson: Craig Mason's question about the possible nit in TITANIC about the helmsman turning the wheel opposite of what he was ordered has been asked many times in the Titanic news groups. In short --- it's correct as shown in the movie.

The manuver that 2nd Officer Murdoch was trying was called a "port-round;" the objective was to swing the stern around the object to prevent it from striking the back of the ship. He wanted the stern to go Port (which is why he later called HARD A PORT), but it was too late.

The part about reversing engines is also correct in the movie, but it was a mistake made by MURDOCH, not by Cameron. It's natural to try to "step on the brakes" as it were, but by reversing the engines he made it harder to turn the vessel because the flow of water over the rudder was disturbed by cavitation of the reversing propellers, and slower flow over the rudder mean't a slower turn. Had he just ordered a turn and left the engines at full steam, it's very likely Titanic would have missed the berg.

Incidently, there's been a computer study done that shows that had Titanic hit the 'berg at full speed head-on, other than the loss of about 150 firemen berthed in the bow the ship would have survived the collision. It would have been badly damaged, but would not have sunk. Twenty or so years earlier the steamer Arizona smacked head-on into an iceberg and was able to be towed back into port.

Joe Griffin: There is a historical nit [in Titanic]: Jack tells a story about ice fishing on Lake Wissota in Chippewa Falls, WI. But Lake Wissota is a man-made lake which wasn't completed until 1917, five years after the Titanic disaster.

John Latchem: After the iceberg is spotted, First Officer Murdoch bellows a helm order: ``Hard a'starboard!'' But Quartermaster Hichens, manning the wheel, turns the wheel counter-clockwise, or to port. At first glance this would seem to be a mistake. The order itself, ``Hard a'starboard,'' was a holdover from earlier days when the tiller of a ship would be used to control the rudder. Pushing the tiller to the right (starboard) would cause the ship to turn to the left (port). So a turn to port was ordered by calling ``harda'starboard.'' But Titanic, like her contemporaries, had a direct-driven telemotor, which means turning the wheel counter-clockwise (toward the left) would cause the rudder to turn left, resulting in a turn to port. So the order given was ``hard a'starboard,'' but the wheel was turned counter-clockwise, and the bow of the ship swung to port. Director James Cameron was aware of the possible confusion that this might create, but decided to include it to be as accurate as possible.

John Myers: Somebody actually wrote to the Daily Telegraph pointing out the same "nit". The next day they printed another letter explaining it. Pre-1933 helm orders were given in terms of the direction you would move a tiller bar, which is the opposite of the way you want to turn. I think they said it was on January 1st 1933 that they switched to giving the order in terms of the direction you want to go.

Brian Straight: BTW In a repeat viewing I found a HUGE production error. In the opening credits there's some "film" of the launching of the ship. In one sceen we see a few people leaning over a rail, there's a heavy-set girl on the right, and an attractive one on the left. Laster when we see the sceen in the 1912 establishing shots, the same sceen is show except the girls are reversed. This was because they only re-created half the ship (the starboard side) and had to film the bon voyage from there, and flip the film so it would look correct (being seen on the port side). Hope that all mad sense.

John Myers: By the way does "nits" include histroical inaccuracies? Probably not or the Guild would be swamped every time a Hollywood blockbuster was released overseas, I just wish James Cameron hadn't gone on so much about the accuracy of his film since it makes all the mistakes in it even more annoying. Still all the letters of complaint and articles on what a travesty of history it is are all free publicity.

Phil: Historical nits are fine with me! I'm always tickled at the protestations of how accurate things are by creators. It's true that they know how diligent they have been with certain details. But they all seem to make the same mistake of believing that since they have attempted to get many, many things right, then they must have gotten everything right! (Which, as we all know, can never be true!)

Phil: Thanks to: Aaron Nadler, Joe Griffin, Murray Leeder, Brian Straight, Hugh Mowen, Shane Miller, Sean Breen and Chris Cook for sending information along as well!

Omer Belsky: First I wanted to answer to a question aboutCancer name being called johnson or something to that efect. In the original Pilot episode, before a re-write there where several difrent matters, including a charecter named Johnson, which acted very much like Cancer man did in that episode. Also there was a scene of Scully in bed with her boyfriend. I believe that scene was removed because the executives in FOX were building on sexual tension between M&S.

Ronan Sean Mitchell: Just a quickie - in response to the question about cigarette smoking man's name, the closest I recall was in the episode "Musings of a cigarette smoking man" where he had a writers pseudonom - Raul Bloodworth. Not sure about the characters real name, though.

David: There are more than one defiant class ships. Besides the Defaint two others were seen in DS9's "A Call to Arms". Two more were seen in Voyager's "Message in a Bottle". I don't know if they're the same two from DS9 or if they're two new ones.

Charles Cabe: In response to the question about the lack of Defiant class ships on First Contact, I checked my widescreen tape, and I think I've found a Defiant class ship. It appears to the right of the E-E when they fire phasers at the Borg. It is just after they beam the Defiant survivors to the E-E. Since noone is on the Defiant and the mystery ship fires phasers as well, it must be a diffrent ship.

Robert Cook: A version (probably *not* the version Tim Russ sang) was recently posted to Usenet. I'm not going to send it along, since whoever wrote it probably wouldn't want it reposted. If anyone can wants to see it, go to http://www.dejanews.com and search for 'voyager' and 'gilligan's'

Matt Nelson: You might pass this address along to the chap who asked about "Visit To A Weird Planet"...

http://www.stargames.co.at/trek/fun/Weird.Planet.txt

And here's the second part...

http://aviary.share.net/~alara/startrek/story/tng/RevisitingTheVisitToWeirdPlanet

John Bibb: Edward J. asked where he could find the stories "Visit to a Weird Planet" and "Visit to a Weird Planet Revisited". I'm not sure where to find the first one, but "Revisited" (the one where Bill Shatner, Leonard Nemoy, and DeForest Kelly go to the Enterprise) was published in a book called "Star Trek: The New Voyages", which published several Trek fanfics.

Rob Levandowski of Rochester, NY: "Visit to a Weird Planet Revisited," a short story by Ruth Berman in which William Shatner, Leonard Nimoy, and DeForest Kelley are beamed off the Desilu lot and onto the "real" Enterprise during a freak transporter accident, appears in the anthology "Star Trek: The New Voyages", Sondra Marshak and Myrna Culbreath, eds. It is published by Bantam Books, ISBN 0-553-24636-4. I don't know if this is still in print -- if it is, you may have to hunt for it, as the Bantam Trek books aren't as commonly stocked as the Pocket books.

The foreward to the story mentions that "Visit to a Weird Planet" was written by Jean Lorrah and Willard F. Hunt. That story was the flipside to this one, and details what happens to Kirk, Spock, and McCoy when a freak transporter accident lands them on the transporter set on the Desilu lot in the late Sixties.

Phil: Thanks to: Terry Mitchell Hulett, Paul Lalli, Fred Longacre, Shane Miller, Michael Konczewski and Scott McClenney for sending information along as well.

Joe Griffin: RE: snow or the lack thereof on ER. The show is shot on sets in LA, and only once or twice a season do they come here to Chicago to shoot exteriors. The last time they were here was, I believe, October and it hadn't snowed here yet. Now, they could always digitally composite in some snow, but I'd like to think that the Mayor Daley in ER's world is much better at getting the snow off the street than he is in real life!

Side note--another Chicago film nit--In _The Fugitive_, Dr. Kimble is accused of killing someone at the "Balbo St. El stop." Not only is there no such stop, but the shot of Kimble running across the platform clearly establishes it as the Clark/Lake El stop, which is all the way at the north end of the Loop. Balbo Street is a couple blocks south of the south end of the Loop. Distace of about a mile and a half.

Ryan Whitney of Evanston, IL: This comment is in response to Corey Hines' E-Mail in the 1/30/98 "Ask the Chief" column. Mr. Hines mentioned that near the end of the 1/29/98 episode of "ER", there was no snow around the bottom of the L-train platform, although there were reports earlier in the episode that people were having trouble getting to the hospital because of three feet of snow.

My explanation for this is that Chicago, IL (where the show takes place) is one of the best equiped cities in the United States to handle a big snowfall, and as such, city employees had already done the necessary salt sprinkling and/or shoveling to keep the train platforms relatively safe from snow hazzards. Additionally, pedestrians may have kept the snow from accumulating. Public transportation in Chicago will not shut down because of a three foot snowfall, however many of the residential or less traveled streets will go unplowed. I haven't experienced a three foot snowfall in Chicago for a few years (global warming?), but my experience has been that public transportation is unhindered, and the major streets are clear. People who don't live close to a major road might have trouble getting places if their cars are stuck.

Phil: And they sweep off all the sidewalks and curbs and dry them as well?! Wow! Now that's snow removal for you! ;-)

On to the questions . . .

Joe Griffin: If anyone cares, "Splinter of the Mind's Eye" was written by Alan Dean Foster, who also wrote the movie adaption for ST:TMP and the novelizations of the animated Trek series.

Question: How canonical are these movie novelizations? The TMP book talks about a brain implant Kirk has put into his brain when he's promoted to Admiral, with which he can be contacted by Starfleet Command whenever they need him. He's sitting in the reconstructed Library of Alexandria when they call him about V'Ger.

Phil: I have never heard of the novelization of the Star Trek movies referred to as canonical!

Omer Belsky, Isreal: Does anyone know why the charecter of Sela(sp?) daughter of Tasha Yar didn`t appear after `Unifection`? I mean, one week you`re hanging around with leonard Nimoy and next week you`re out? I doubt it was a question of availability, because Dennis Crosby did return for the 7th season finale `All Good Things`

Phil: Only the creators know for sure!

Omer Belsky, Isreal: There was a recent X-Files episode here in Israel about monsters living in the forests. can anyone explain to me the resolution of that episode? Mulder suggests that they were Spannish, and he seemed to indicate that they were the same people who entered those forests 400 something years earlier - but if they were how did they adapt? And if they were the Spannish`s offsprings- why were there only two? (Despite those problems it was a cool episode an a really funny one. The `Naked` discussion was so funny! and Scully sang !:-)

Phil: The resolution was the same as many X-File episodes. Mulder and Scully leave. At least one of the bad guys remains alive to terrorize the good town folk!

Omer Belsky, Isreal: Finally, this question isn`t for the people in the US. I`m wondering when everyone else is getting episodes ofm the fith season of the X-files. Rumors say that we in Israel are third after Canada and Australia.

Ronan Sean Mitchell: While we're on the subject [of Cancerman], can I ask what everyone else thinks about his apparent death in "Redux 2" ? Any theories?

[Personally, I think [hope!] he's alive. I though it looked like the bullet went through the picture frame - merely wonding CSM. However, the photo is intact at the end of the show....who knows?]

Phil: Personally, I think it's time for him to be dead! He's a little long in the tooth as far as I'm concerned and he's getting too touchy-feely with the whole Samantha thing. And he's stuck his finger in the eye of the consortium enough times that I'm surprised they didn't "off" him already!

Patrick Sweeney: I was watching that Behind the X-Files show and I was curious, did I see Jarry Hardin talking, the same guy that played Samual Clemens in Time's Arrow (TNG)? Just curious, the face looked familiar.

Phil: I believe so! Jerry Hardin, great actor!

Craig Hamilton: I enjoyed the information re: Apollo 13. By any chance do you know what role was played by Ron Howard's mother?

Phil: Sorry, no idea! Anybody?

Don Ferguson of Queens, NY: Briony Coote suggested in the 11/14/97 column that voyager should develop cloaking tech. This is a good point and while we are on it... why hasn't the federation expanded and implemented its research in phase cloaking? given the events in "message in a bottle in the last voyager episode, the romulans have made a clear act of war against the federation, my thinking is that the rommies dont think the federation can take them since they are at war with the dominion. The way I see it is that since the romulans have broke the treaty of Alderion by hijacking a federation ship and killing her crew... There is no reason why the federation cannot implement the phase cloak that was introduced in "the Pegasus". The federation has nothing to loose, I dont see how the rommies can object without explaining why they attacked the Prometheus.

This seems logical right? will the creators take my advice though? Noooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo!!!

Phil: Starfleet technology is a bit too powerful as it is for good story-telling! With the addition of cloaking . . . (especially with Roddenberry's absolute refusal to let Starfleet use cloaks) . . . I don't know . . .

Mike Cheyne: Finally, it's great to see a writer who has morals these days. Kudos. By the way, that "The Son, The Wind, and The Reign" story sounds great. How about selling it to Senor Spielbergo?

Phil: The chances of me even getting in the door let alone getting a chance to talk with Stephen Speilberg are exactly zero! There be a whole lot of writers out there--many with little or no talent--who are constantly beating on the doors of people like Spielberg.

Chris Marks: In the 16/1 column, someone asked if the X-Files guide was available here in the UK. I managed to pick up a copy last weekend, at a shop called 'Forbidden Planet' in London (on New Oxford Street).

Great book by the way.

Phil: Thanks for the info and thanks for the kind words about the Guide!

Andrew Corcorans: I am still not sure about this face of Spock in DS9's opening credits. You said it appeared in the comet dust, but I've heard other people say that it is to the left of the station as it comes into view.

Do you know anywhere where I can get some proof, or guide that can show me where it is? For now I'll keep on looking.

Phil: Freeze-frame on the frame after the asteroid disappears from the screen. Then frame advance between 13-16 frame. Something that looks like Spock's head is in the middle of the screen tilted to your left . . . sort of . . . or it could just be dust!

Greg Reed:During your research for your Star Wars book did you happen to discover what Darth Vader's exact title or job description is?

In "Star Wars" he seems to defer to Grand Moff Tarkin, however, in "Empire Strikes Back" he removes a fleet Admiral for incompetence. In several books he is called the Dark Lord of the Sith, but how does that translate into the Imperial bureaucracy?

Phil: Actually, I haven't done much research on Star Wars yet but I'm sure someone here would know! Anybody?

Clay: Was this ever your web address to your page? http://www.woodtech.com/~nitcentral/voyager/voyager.html

Phil: A long time ago, in a galaxy far, far away.

Matthias Roth: Was the military force of the Tal Shiar really completely destroyed in the battle between the Dominion and the RomCard strike force?

Most ships of the strike force were from the Obsidian Order and only a few from the Tal Shiar:

- When the fleet arrived at DS9 the ships were on the display represented as dots (Card=small dots, Rom=big dots )the first ship decloaking was a warbird=big dot)) and there were only few big dots!

- Admiral Toddman (the guy in the YELLOW uniform) mentioned 20 ships (I hope I'm right or BSE?) and I think he couldn't mean the whole strike fleet.

- During flybys or battle scenes only a few warbirds but many Card cruisers could be seen.

Either the Tal Shiar had less ships than Starfleet expected [g] or the Romulans were VERY cautious. And AFAIK the Romulans had no civil war or military putsch (my knowledge reaches only to the end of the fourth season of DS9).

Maybe the guild can clearify this situation.

Phil: The dialogue at the end of "The Die Is Cast" does seem to indicate that the Dominion believes they have crippled the Tal Shiar but I would agree that the organization should seem a bit more sturdy!

Have a great weekend, everybody!

If you would like to submit a question or comment, send it to: chief@nitcentral.com with "Ask the Chief" or "Question" in the Subject line. (Remember the legalese: Everything you submit becomes mine and you grant me the right to use your name in any future publication by me.)

Copyright 1998 by Phil Farrand. All rights reserved.