Talk:Trinity Sector

Are we assuming that each box in the map is a sector? --Wolf /^{talk page} 02:17, 21 March 2008 (EDT)

Name of sector

BTW, I just saw the discussion on Canreb's page about the naming here. I've always called it "Sector 118," under the assumption that StarFleet is boring like that :D And, that the sector was named/mapped first, with StarBase 118 being built there much later and simply named for the sector. --Wolf /^{talk page} 02:23, 21 March 2008 (EDT)

That idea crossed my mind too but starbase numbers in canon don't correspond to sector numbers. ma:Sector 23 is home to Starbase 173 for example. Also, a sector can have a name in addition to a number, as the Maxia Sector (home to Starbase 32) may well do. Sector 001 has been referred to as the Sol Sector I think. - Lt. Salak^Talk 03:03, 21 March 2008 (EDT)

True, but is there any proof to show that bases and sector #s never coincide? --Wolf /^{talk page} 03:09, 21 March 2008 (EDT)

I can't find a list of the sectors each starbase is in but a list of sectors and a list of starbases are both on MA. I'm yet to find any that match up, but it's not impossible I guess. Sector numbers do generally seem higher than Starbase numbers though. SB118 gets a side mention in TNG btw, but assume you knew that already :) - Lt. Salak^Talk 03:24, 21 March 2008 (EDT)

Well, I suppose it doesn't really matter to me. The sector name doesn't get used that much, and I was just using "Sector 118" out of force of habit :) --Wolf /^{talk page} 03:57, 21 March 2008 (EDT)

As to Trinity and Acamar sectors... what star names would be found in them... this way I don't mess up again as with Ophiuchus... also I LOVE the Trinity sector nav window... but personnaly I like the star system basic info all on one page with links to any planet with more than basic info...the pre Cart'hen look... but that is just me... I find it easier to work with... I will try and finish Trinity soon... other than the 3 stars in Fed space with no info what else would you like to see??? Canreb 13:57, 2 April 2008 (EDT)

Also is it Ok to name the sector with the other half of the Azure Nebula... the sector to the left of Trinity = Acamar??? Canreb 14:12, 2 April 2008 (EDT)

Ophiucus 70

This star actually exists but is probably too close to Earth to realistically be in this sector? Also, it's binary, but both stars are K type, not G. - Lt. Salak^Talk 16:53, 27 March 2008 (EDT)

I read data on 3 different Star Trek site's (useing mostly Memory Alpha, etc...) and tried to compile a realistic merge of the info... I also wanted to try and bring some of the history into the project I was working on for Sector Trinity - Starbase 118, of all the episodes this seemed to be the only one I could bring in... so I shifted the star... as some of the data indicated it could have been in other locations... Canreb 17:31, 27 March 2008 (EDT)

I don't mean in canon, I mean it REALLY exists! The info on the link above is not sci fi but Sci fact. Thus tweak the number or something perhaps? - Lt. Salak^Talk 17:51, 27 March 2008 (EDT)

The notes I have read put the real star with in one of the 4 sectors that meet at Sol (Earth)less than 20 lightyears, The notes at Memory Alpha and other sources claim it is the star in this episode... problem... with all the space traffic their is no way 300 years could pass with out a response to an old style radio SOS... Earth, the Federation and all it's ships would have picked it up long before... the notes also claim the star was in a backwater part of space... so I moved it to meet the second fact but kept the name to meet the first... however I have no problem TWEAKING the number... can you tell me what number is not used with that star name??? If you still want me to change it. Canreb 00:32, 28 March 2008 (EDT)

Firstly, the further you get from an object, the fainter the signal would become. It would likely be background noise by the time it reached Earth. Secondly; Sol is established to be in Sector 001, despite the Beta/Alpha border passing through it. Thirdly; Wikipedias List of stars in Ophiuchus shows a lot of stars lacking official names, with most G types being giants. For real stars, HD170469 might work, though if you want a star that doesn't exist, there seems to be no 75 Ophiuchi ("Ophiucus 75") - Lt. Salak^Talk 04:45, 28 March 2008 (EDT)

Now might also be a good time to point out that the constellations Ophiucus (of which any Ophiuchi is a member) and Hydra (of which Lambda Hydrae is a member) are in opposite directions from Earth? Ophiucus is on the Zodiac (largely above it) between Sagitarrius & Scorpio (Sun passes through in November) whilst Hydra is below the Zodiac near Cancer (Sun passes near in June). The Centre of our galaxy is in the direction of Sagitarrius of course. - Lt. Salak^Talk 07:00, 28 March 2008 (EDT)

Thanks for the info... guess I will make it 75 then... and will have to check those links before I work on another sector... that is if I do... I was thinking of maybe doing another one... maybe the one with Khitomer in it... Canreb 09:51, 28 March 2008 (EDT)

I've done some more reading... if you still have a problem with calling the system Ophiuchus then how about I change it to Miri after the episode... add in under starfleet intelligence that it was mistakenly recorded as Ophiuchus 70 after the first contact... due to faulty records from the freighter that made contact... records finally corrected and adjusted... that would put Ophiuchus the star back on the opposite side of Sol where it is suppose to be... answer the question of why it was mistaken placed in the wrong location... etc... it would also explain why no one visited the system... it was in the wrong place... let me know what you think??? Canreb 13:35, 2 April 2008 (EDT)

Seems reasonable enough :) - Lt. Salak^Talk 13:36, 2 April 2008 (EDT)

In that case I will start makeing the changes Canreb 13:51, 2 April 2008 (EDT)