Launching the Phoenix

[JuanBolio]

Ronald Held wrote:

---

I will assume that in warp, one will not need an IDF. Do we know how fast the Phoenix was going when it went to Warp one?

It was in warp from the moment it broke orbit - the whole time it was building up speed toward warp one its warp drive was what was propelling it.

[CuttingEdge100]

When was the first drawing of the Phoenix ever shown? Was it in a TOS episode, or in a book or something?

I mean before the John Eaves design


Regarding inertial dampener fields. I don't know why you'd need them honestly.

If you used an Alcubierre drive system, which at least one scientist working on TMP suggested more or less the same mechanism (though years before Miguel Alcubierre actually drew it up) there would be no feeling of acceleration as a result of warp-drive.


CuttingEdge100

[trevanian]

I think Jein made up a little model of Cochrane's ship for the STAR TREK ENCYCLOPEDIA entry, but according to Eaves, the producers didn't want that design for the movie. It was kind of l'eggs container-like, I think.

[Ronald Held]

Juan you are saying it might be going 10s of km/secs before it went into warp?

[JuanBolio]

Ronald Held wrote:

---

Juan you are saying it might be going 10s of km/secs before it went into warp?

No, I'm saying it was using its warp drive before it broke the light barrier. The whole time it was building up speed toward warp one, it was under warp drive. As such, there was no need for an IDF.

The only times the Phoenix wasn't moving under warp drive were when it was boosting into orbit (before Cochrane says "Engage!") and after they throttle down and look back at Earth.

[Vance]

Ronald Held wrote:

---

Juan you are saying it might be going 10s of km/secs before it went into warp?

It's more like this...

The Phoenix used it WARP DRIVE to go subluminal speeds, AS WELL AS go to Warp 1 (1C). Because of the use of the warp drive for most of the trip, the effects of relativity, as well as inertia, are dramatically reduced.

[soot]

Plecostomus wrote:

---

Is there a side-view of the Phoenix done in schematic form somewhere? And one of the "ICBM" it was created from?

I can envision what I described above, I need the rough outlines of both so I can "cram" all the flight equipment inside.

Would this be of any help?

http://www.shipschematics.net/startr...ip_phoenix.jpg

[shipfisher]

If you go for a technically conservative approach to the Phoenix considering the limited resources of Cochrane's team, then a Titan booster shell with the original internals swapped for some "high energy density" fuel rocket might have been the most cost-effective way to keep the operational envelope of the Phoenix itself close to the minimum required for a "proof of concept" flight.

A powerplant that would be compact and yet "exotic" enough for a quick warp 1 hop in something the size of the Phoenix in 2063 would likely be a gas core fission reactor. Leave the first use of anti-matter fuel to the unmanned "Friendship 1" of four years later for safety reasons (unlucky Delta quadrant races aside).

As for earth return, perhaps a detachable cockpit/re-entry capsule? I like letting what will later be bussard collectors at the front of nacelles function as ionizing plasma-sheath generators to help get the entire vehicle down, followed by chutes or more likely a para-sail, before a final landing thruster burst. A 20th century style landing would be in keeping with a 20th century style launch after all.

Once again, this scenario represents my idea of the most technically conservative explaination of what we see presented in ST:First Contact.

[CuttingEdge100]

It would have been better if Cochrane's design was a ring-ship... It sounds easier to work than using twin nacelles.

[Timo]

What, and use foreign solutions? NIH! NIH! NIH!

One might actually think that the ring would have to be precision-machined out of a large amount of coil material, while the nacelles would feature more manageable small coils...

Timo Saloniemi