Because an episode only lasts 45 minutes otherwise we would have the watch the journey of the columbia for a couple of weeks would that satisfy your sense of accuracy? it's a tv show for Christ sakes what did you expect BBC Horizon ?

They weren't going to get anywhere in 45 minutes, regardless. It's obvious that they don't follow real time in any of the series-es. Like when Data says it will take 13 hours to reach the Neutral Zone, and then BINGO! there they are, after the next commercial break.

But if they're going to say they can get to Kronos in 3 or 4 days, they should not then specify a speed in MPH which makes that claim totally impossible. It really can't be that difficult to either use numbers that work, or don't use numbers at all.

Like I said earlier it was done to create the illusion of being scientific,so people would more easily accept things like flying with the speed of light through the galaxy. If you have such problems with Star Trek why then watch although I can say that most SF shows and movies won't be your thing since these rarely make an effort to make it sound scientifically plausible. Better not watch Star Wars cause that will really put your knickers in a twist

In many ways Star Wars is far more faaaaantasy (said derisively) than science fiction, and certainly not "hard" science fiction. But that said, they never claimed (at least not that I remember) that their ships went X miles per hour and they would be at Alderaan (or whatever) in Y hours when that speed wouldn't even get you out of our solar system in that amount of time.

Like a said previously being more of a fan of TOS and ENT part of my main problems with TNG and the shows that take place in the TNG timeline is the use of too much science or so called science they quantified it and therefore took away the mystery of the show and the whole "unknown"aspect of the series. In TOS and ENT the science was never on the forefront it was a part of the show yes but not the main focus, it was more focussed on the relationships and discovering the unknown and to work out the problems not by using machines or science but using human ingenuity and wit. Never was much of a fan of Star Wars to begin with though even then without the explanation or science I could detect ideas or concepts that were pretty silly or downright dumb. Even the fantasy parts were pretty lame like using a lightsaber.Why would you get close to your opponent to cause harm when you can use a blaster to kill him from a distance? Chivalry ? do you think that those medieval knight would have used a suit of armour and lance if machine guns or bazooka's had been available?I think not they would have said F@ck chivalry and picked up the bazooka to shoot their opponent from it's horse.

Well, supposedly the light sabers could also fend off blaster shots - nice trick for something that should also be going the speed of light - but that's another reason why a lot of Star Wars fits more into faaaantasy rather than sci-fi.

Apart from Tolkien I am not a fan of fantasy,I'm a kid of the 70's when most SF movies were gloomy,dark,existential,dystopian and self reflective.Star Wars was always a bit too sugary sweet for my taste.