RSS iconTwitter iconFacebook icon

The Trek BBS title image

The Trek BBS statistics

Threads: 137,860
Posts: 5,328,651
Members: 24,554
Currently online: 532
Newest member: Kastrol

TrekToday headlines

Retro Review: Inquisition
By: Michelle on Jul 12

Cubify Star Trek 3DMe Mini Figurines
By: T'Bonz on Jul 11

Latest Official Starships Collection Ships
By: T'Bonz on Jul 10

Seven of Nine Bobble Head
By: T'Bonz on Jul 9

Pegg The Prankster
By: T'Bonz on Jul 9

More Trek Stars Join Unbelievable!!!!!
By: T'Bonz on Jul 8

Star Trek #35 Preview
By: T'Bonz on Jul 8

New ThinkGeek Trek Apparel
By: T'Bonz on Jul 7

Star Trek Movie Prop Auction
By: T'Bonz on Jul 7

Drexler: NX Engineering Room Construction
By: T'Bonz on Jul 7


Welcome! The Trek BBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans. Please login to see our full range of forums as well as the ability to send and receive private messages, track your favourite topics and of course join in the discussions.

If you are a new visitor, join us for free. If you are an existing member please login below. Note: for members who joined under our old messageboard system, please login with your display name not your login name.


Go Back   The Trek BBS > Misc. Star Trek > Trek Tech

Trek Tech Pass me the quantum flux regulator, will you?

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old March 7 2009, 10:22 AM   #16
Herkimer Jitty
Rear Admiral
 
Herkimer Jitty's Avatar
 
Location: Dayglow, New California Republic
Send a message via Windows Live Messenger to Herkimer Jitty
Re: 1701 warp core?

I always thought the tube-y thing in TWOK was the dilithium crystal housing. Would be a pretty good locale for all that radiation (lotsa it from m/am reaction), so the reactor would occupy the space below the engine room thar. I've always thought of the TOS/TMP reactors as being rather large and rather oddly shaped, with lots of sprawling support equipment and what-have you, unlike TNG's lawnmower-motor-sized reactor (by comparison, anyways).
__________________
"What?" - { Emilia }
Herkimer Jitty is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 8 2009, 01:31 AM   #17
Whorfin
Lieutenant Commander
 
Whorfin's Avatar
 
Re: 1701 warp core?

uniderth wrote: View Post
JNG perhaps that piece in TAS is related to this in TWOK:
Never noticed this before, but what are those overhead frames (windows?, screens?), and are they part of a larger reactor???
Whorfin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 9 2009, 01:19 AM   #18
Captain Robert April
Vice Admiral
 
Location: In selfless service to fandom, on the road to becoming a Star Trek trivia god...
Re: 1701 warp core?

I'm rather fond of this arrangement...


Last edited by Captain Robert April; March 9 2009 at 01:52 AM.
Captain Robert April is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 9 2009, 02:01 AM   #19
Praetor
Vice Admiral
 
Praetor's Avatar
 
Location: The fine line between continuity and fanwank.
Re: 1701 warp core?

I wonder why?

I like it too overall CRA, but there are a few details in placement here and there that I'm still a little unsure about. Of course when you revisit it, I'll be glad to provide my thoughts.
__________________
"If you can't take a little bloody nose, maybe you ought to go back home and crawl under your bed. It's not safe out here. It's wondrous, with treasures to satiate desires both subtle and gross; but it's not for the timid." - Q
Praetor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 10 2009, 08:27 AM   #20
Captain Robert April
Vice Admiral
 
Location: In selfless service to fandom, on the road to becoming a Star Trek trivia god...
Re: 1701 warp core?

That is a slightly over version, so some of your concerns may have already been addressed. Besides, fielding questions about this monster helps get me in the mood to dive in, so ask away.

And if the discussion moves too far away from the topic here, we can always relocate back over to my thread on Trek Art.
Captain Robert April is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 11 2009, 01:01 AM   #21
Whorfin
Lieutenant Commander
 
Whorfin's Avatar
 
Re: 1701 warp core?

Praetor,

Well thought out work, where can I see the rest of it.
Whorfin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 12 2009, 04:48 PM   #22
Tallguy
Fleet Captain
 
Tallguy's Avatar
 
Location: Beyond the Farthest Star
Re: 1701 warp core?

I object to "warp core" in connection with TOS for two reasons. I think it's lazy - it's this way in TNG so it's always been this way! And it discounts any changes or advances in Trek tech. It's like calling the things on the wings of a B-17 "jets". Sure, it's propulsion and even a similar layout and position. But calling them jets is silly.

But really it's "keep your damn TNG out of my TOS".
__________________
-- Bill "Tallguy" Thomas
"All I ask is a tall ship..."
Tallguy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 12 2009, 05:18 PM   #23
Plecostomus
Commodore
 
Location: Official forum sex god
Send a message via Windows Live Messenger to Plecostomus
Re: 1701 warp core?

Tallguy wrote: View Post
I object to "warp core" in connection with TOS for two reasons. I think it's lazy - it's this way in TNG so it's always been this way! And it discounts any changes or advances in Trek tech. It's like calling the things on the wings of a B-17 "jets". Sure, it's propulsion and even a similar layout and position. But calling them jets is silly.

But really it's "keep your damn TNG out of my TOS".
I've been saying this for awhile. I assume TOS warp works on a different principle than ENT or TNG warp drive. The basics are the same but the way they achieve the "warp" is different.

Physical "warp generators" as opposed to cast coils for a start.
Plecostomus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 12 2009, 05:33 PM   #24
JNG
Chief of Staff, Starfleet Command
 
Re: 1701 warp core?

Tallguy wrote: View Post
I object to "warp core" in connection with TOS for two reasons. I think it's lazy - it's this way in TNG so it's always been this way! And it discounts any changes or advances in Trek tech. It's like calling the things on the wings of a B-17 "jets". Sure, it's propulsion and even a similar layout and position. But calling them jets is silly.

But really it's "keep your damn TNG out of my TOS".
Didn't NX-01 have a warp core, though?
JNG is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 12 2009, 06:24 PM   #25
Tallguy
Fleet Captain
 
Tallguy's Avatar
 
Location: Beyond the Farthest Star
Re: 1701 warp core?

JNG wrote: View Post
Didn't NX-01 have a warp core, though?
That's kind of my point.
__________________
-- Bill "Tallguy" Thomas
"All I ask is a tall ship..."
Tallguy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 12 2009, 06:26 PM   #26
TIN_MAN
Fleet Captain
 
TIN_MAN's Avatar
 
Re: 1701 warp core?

^^ Well, the NX had a warp reactor with 'plasma conduits' running to/from the nacelles, but I dont think we ever saw a vertical warp core per se? Besides "Enterprise" retconed so many things, it's the main reason many do not consider it 'canon'. But here's a thought FWIW, much ado was made in ST:TMP about "the new engines" implying that they were a radical redesign and departure from past systems? So much so, that on their first attemp at warp drive they were sucked into a wormhole! If the engines were simply a variation on past designes, then Scotty and his crew (not to mention Starfleet engineers in general) should have been familiar enough with the new system to avoid this? As a result, Spock had to stick his vulcan nose in Scotty's domain and help fix the problems, something that surely wouldn't have been necessary if Scotty had been as familiar with this design, as he would have been, if this was just a new twist on an old idea?
TIN_MAN is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 12 2009, 06:44 PM   #27
Tallguy
Fleet Captain
 
Tallguy's Avatar
 
Location: Beyond the Farthest Star
Re: 1701 warp core?

The reason I used the jet engine analogy was because Andy Probert once said the diff between TOS and TMP was analogous to the jump from propellers to jets.

It would have been really cool if they had come up with an even earlier concept for Enterprise. Not to be, I suppose.
__________________
-- Bill "Tallguy" Thomas
"All I ask is a tall ship..."
Tallguy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 5 2009, 11:32 AM   #28
Mytran
Fleet Captain
 
Mytran's Avatar
 
Location: North Wales
Re: 1701 warp core?

uniderth wrote: View Post
I figure that the thing on the floor in engineering in TOS was the reactor. We've seen it house the dilithium in "Elaan of Troyus." It is located at the rear of the saucer section. the two large round things are the mattar and anti-matter injectors. Tmatter and anti-matter are drawn up fromtheir storage areas inthe secondary hull. They are sent through the intermix chamber and then the drive plasma is sent back down to the engineering hull. The whole thing would occupy the same space as seen in TMP…
This sounds convoluted, but bizarrely it’s almost exactly the solution I arrived when I first drew up my own TOS deck plans back in college. My aim was to construct them relying SOLELY on the on-screen evidence, and they went together surprisingly well! I still have them somewhere if anyone’s interested in seeing scans.
Mytran is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 5 2009, 02:15 PM   #29
Cary L. Brown
Rear Admiral
 
Location: Austin, Texas
Re: 1701 warp core?

USS Jack Riley wrote: View Post
What's going on in TAS?

I'm voting on it being a distillery. Its hard to get good Scotch whiskey in deep space you know.
Well, it was the 70's.....
So, you're saying it's a "bong?"
Cary L. Brown is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 5 2009, 04:50 PM   #30
Saquist
Commodore
 
Location: Starbase Houston
Re: 1701 warp core?

JuanBolio wrote: View Post
"Warp core" is a somewhat nonsensical term. "Main reactor" or "matter/antimatter reactor" is more accurate.

Anyway, opinions differ, and the dialog from the show is somewhat contradictory. Some episodes seem to indicate that the nacelles themselves had self-contained reactors. Others seem to indicate that one or more reactors are located in the engineering hull. The latter is what I personally believe. The nacelles are just for warping space - power generation and fuel storage are the job of the secondary hull.

Ancient drew up the best damn 1701 cutaway I've ever seen. You can see the reactor located under the deck in the main engine room:

Very reasonable.
I wanted to believe the core was in the nacelles but that's not logical. To put the ships reactor in such a vunerable location would be folly. The multiple reactors that The last movie displayed is very likely.
Saquist is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Tags
1701, constitution, core, technobabble, warp, warp drive

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump



All times are GMT +1. The time now is 05:43 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
FireFox 2+ or Internet Explorer 7+ highly recommended.