Daystrom Institute

3467 readers

11 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

[email protected]

Episode Analysis | Star Trek: Lower Decks | 5x05 "Starbase 80?!" (startrek.website)

submitted 4 weeks ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

4 comments fedilink hide all child comments

This is the Daystrom Institute Episode Analysis thread for Lower Decks 5x05 Starbase 80?!.

Now that we’ve had a few days to digest the content of the latest episode, this thread is a place to dig a little deeper.

top 4 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[–] [email protected] 9 points 4 weeks ago

Kassia Nox needs a spinoff. That character was great.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 4 weeks ago (2 children)

I'm a little surprised by the appearance of SB 80 - its interiors are obviously very 2260s, but the exterior appearance seems incongruent with that.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 4 weeks ago

@williams_482 @ValueSubtracted I think it's like a website that got a front-end redesign but the back-end is still using super old tech.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 4 weeks ago

I would have struggled to date the station given just the exterior, personally. A 2260s (or earlier) origin seems well within the bounds of possibility.

How many Starbases does Starfleet have? It seems that their numbering system is not truly sequential, as SB343 was existant in 2256, while SB173 was brand new in 2365. SB80 could be quite old, or relatively new but using a repurposed spaceframe from an older space station which had received a major upgrade.