Talk:Sleeper ship

I am familiar with "Space Seed", but don't recall these facts being discussed in them: Also, there is no mention of the (possibly tall tale and perhaps as bogus as Janeway's family stories) Kim family story of a sleeper ship (but there it was called "statis") in. The article should cite its sources or modify/remove the statements. Aholland 17:46, 17 February 2006 (UTC)
 * A sleeper ship using "stasis technology". The episode called it "suspended animation".
 * While possibly true, I don't recall anything about them being "typically a stage of technology used before the advent of warp drive". Or that they were "used by many species".
 * Humans used sleeper ships in the 20th century according to "Space Seed" and "Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan"; not just the 21st and early 22nd century.
 * I don't recall anything about the ships being stated as "colony vessels".
 * The statement that "The wide-scale use of such vessels was phased out with the advent of impulse and warp technologies, but some usage continued into later decades" is not quite right. The episode says of the DY-100 style of statis that "suspended animation" was "necessary because of the time involved in space travel until about the year 2018.  It took years just to travel from one planet to another".
 * This is where is seems to have gone from "simple facts" to awry. --Alan del Beccio 17:53, 17 February 2006 (UTC)
 * I think you're right. The Klingon addition makes some sense, though.  If no one comes forward to claim responsibility and support the statements, I'll attempt a revision.  Aholland 17:57, 17 February 2006 (UTC)
 * The person who made the changes shown above (which were made over a year and a half ago) is on here almost never, so it is fairly safe to say he isnt going to fix it, and its even safer to say I wont because I have other things I'd rather be doing, so feel free. Nobody *owns* the content anyway so it can be changed/fixed at anytime. "If you don't want your writing to be edited mercilessly and redistributed at will, then don't submit it here." --Alan del Beccio 18:12, 17 February 2006 (UTC)
 * I'll fix it, then. I just wanted to give fair warning since, presumably, whoever wrote the darn thing had some idea of why they were saying what they were saying!  It just seemed neighborly.  :)  Aholland 18:18, 17 February 2006 (UTC)
 * I don't know enough about how the word "stasis" is used or misused in canon, but several related articles use it, and at first glance, have obvious flaws: Stasis, Cryostasis, and Cryogenic_stasis. The DY-100 class article's lead reads "The DY-100 class were cryogenic sleeper ships...". Maybe it's just my impression, but I don't think we can call them all "sleepers". --Aurelius Kirk 19:11, 17 February 2006 (UTC)