RSS iconTwitter iconFacebook icon

The Trek BBS title image

The Trek BBS statistics

Threads: 138,409
Posts: 5,359,722
Members: 24,630
Currently online: 514
Newest member: DasGeneral


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 December 22 2012, 02:17 PM   #31
MacLeod
Admiral
 
Location: Great Britain
Re: Vertical Warp Core?

You could in theory have a horizontal core, you would just have it run under the deck plates, and have grills/ access panels to gain access to it.
__________________
On the continent of wild endeavour in the mountains of solace and solitude there stood the citadel of the time lords, the oldest and most mighty race in the universe looking down on the galaxies below sworn never to interfere only to watch.
MacLeod is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 22 2012, 05:54 PM   #32
DonIago
Rear Admiral
 
Location: Burlington, VT, USA
View DonIago's Twitter Profile Send a message via ICQ to DonIago Send a message via AIM to DonIago Send a message via Yahoo to DonIago
Re: Vertical Warp Core?

If TMP or TNG are any indication, a horizonal warp core is/would be large enough to merit its own deck if placed horizontally...plus if you give it a deck then there's no need to worry about any potential issues accessing it.
__________________
--DonIago
It was the best of Trek, it was the worst of Trek...
"If I lean over, I leave myself open to wedgies, wet willies, or even the dreaded Rear Admiral!"
DonIago is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 28 2012, 05:10 PM   #33
Patrickivan
Fleet Captain
 
Patrickivan's Avatar
 
Location: Ontario, Canada
Re: Vertical Warp Core?

And if you're in the camp where the TOS warp nacelles held the warp engines, then the engineering hull was the place where all the energy from those nacelles was shunted for ship wide use. And in the case of ejection, it was the nacelles being popped off... I posted a thread a while ago where I went through the 79 episodes of dialogue using key word searches, and that justified them being the "power pods" as was also labelled on an early sketch of the Enterprise.

Anyway- not the point completely, but there is no reason that every ship throughout the history of the Federation would contain the same type of warp engine.

Let's say something like the past 100 years of ships having similar characteristics like propellers, but to drive those propellers, we had (coal) steam, diesel electric, diesel, gas, nuclear (steam again), electric... et c... Regardless of the location of the power source, my point is that there were different sources throughout a short period of time. Having warp power coming from the Nacelles could have been revolutionary, but then deemed not needed on following classed due to different engine power source configurations... Whatever the reason... Work now!
__________________
http://patrickivan.wordpress.com/page/2/

40 Years and ticking. Damn, that's too old fashioned.
40 years and still processing!
Patrickivan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 30 2012, 09:41 PM   #34
publiusr
Commodore
 
Re: Vertical Warp Core?

Well the TOS Impulse deck had this long spine infront of it ant on top of the saucer. I had an idea of it sliding out the back and being caught between the two warp nacelles with remaining anti-matter in them warp accelerating the spine far away from the ship, like a warp mass drive picard maneuver type deal.
publiusr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 30 2012, 10:04 PM   #35
DonIago
Rear Admiral
 
Location: Burlington, VT, USA
View DonIago's Twitter Profile Send a message via ICQ to DonIago Send a message via AIM to DonIago Send a message via Yahoo to DonIago
Re: Vertical Warp Core?

That seems like another case where, if the ship suddenly changed orientation, things could go very badly...

...though it isn't as bad as ejecting the core "ahead" of the ship.
__________________
--DonIago
It was the best of Trek, it was the worst of Trek...
"If I lean over, I leave myself open to wedgies, wet willies, or even the dreaded Rear Admiral!"
DonIago is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 2 2013, 03:37 AM   #36
Darkwing
Commodore
 
Location: This dry land thing is too wierd!
Re: Vertical Warp Core?

Patrickivan wrote: View Post
Anyway- not the point completely, but there is no reason that every ship throughout the history of the Federation would contain the same type of warp engine.
Yes, I quite like the idea that the TMP refit was major change in the tech, and the TNG warp core was a refinement thereof, far more than the idea that every generation of warp drive had the same type of reactor. Seems like better verisimilitude to me.
__________________
If you don’t drink the kool-aid, you’re a baaad person - Rev Jim Jones
Almond kool-aid, anyone? Or do you prefer pudding?- Darkwing
Darkwing is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 2 2013, 10:09 AM   #37
Timo
Admiral
 
Re: Vertical Warp Core?

Also, people in- and out-universe seem to think starships don't haul much cargo, but the TMP ship has cavernous holds, ones that look like an afterthought in all their clumsiness. A direct result of a propulsion/power system refit similar to that performed on coal-powered WWI battleships before WWII, liberating lots of internal space as the modern gear is much more compact than the original?

Timo Saloniemi
Timo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 4 2013, 11:09 PM   #38
Crazy Eddie
Rear Admiral
 
Crazy Eddie's Avatar
 
Location: I'm in your ___, ___ing your ___
Re: Vertical Warp Core?

Surely it's been mentioned before but the vertical shaft from TMP was envisioned as a power transfer conduit from the reactor to the impulse engines as well as the warp nacelles; the reactor itself was far below decks at the very bottom of the hull. Thus it is "vertical" only because the impulse engines are fairly far away from the reactor. Reliant's vertical segment would be only high enough to connect the reactor to the engine, so the guy who fell over the railing wouldn't have fallen far

The TNG warp core simply works differently. No particular reason for it to be vertical except it used the same set as TMP and they needed to fill that space with something meaningful.
__________________
The Complete Illustrated Guide to Starfleet - Online Now!
Crazy Eddie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 5 2013, 12:08 AM   #39
Timo
Admiral
 
Re: Vertical Warp Core?

What you describe seems to make the TMP and TNG layouts rather equal, with a compact reactor and its power conduits - whereas the TMP layout in Probert's concept was reputed (yeah, citation needed, but Probert's website isn't working too well) to feature power generation all along the length of the piping, an idea Sternbach perpetuated for the VOY core. But none of the theories ever got onscreen verification or even much in the way of support.

Personally, I favor this piping being mere power leads in TMP, just like the same set piece supposedly serves as power leads in TNG. And everything we see could fit on the same curve in this particular sense: STXI shows the cluttered innards of a mid-23rd century starship engine room, TOS shows the sterile control rooms of the same, TMP again returns to the rarely accessed innards where people work in heavy protective gear, and TNG finally advances the tech so that vanity covers hide most of the clutter but the main machinery is now safe enough to be directly exposed to the control room. The actual machinery is pretty much the same all the time, though: reactors looking like big boilers, power leads looking like neon tubes, and dilithium inserted into the reactor somehow. But a row of huge beer tanks becomes a single compostor-sized thing between STXI and TNG.

Timo Saloniemi
Timo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 7 2013, 04:21 PM   #40
SicOne
Commodore
 
Location: Omaha, NE
Re: Vertical Warp Core?

I have a little issue with the idea of the warp core in the Constitution original and refit-classes taking up space in the "neck". It seems a bit careless to have something so important to have half of it in the exposed neck, close to the surface.

Then again, it seems careless to have the bridge be atop the primary hull, even though in-universe explanations about overshielding that area help explain it away.

And when they refit Enterprise and put twin torpedo launchers right next to the warp core, if it indeed goes up through the neck, well, that seems especially daft.

I tend to think of the Constitution (refit, at least) as having a warp core some 5 decks in height and entirely within the secondary hull. Such an arrangement would also fit in the Miranda-class without controversy and appeals to my sense of symmetry.

Regarding the "impulse engine deflection crystal", it's my understanding that it is meant to deflect energy from the warp core towards the impulse engines when needed, is that correct? And yet it seems strange that it's situated atop the primary hull when the warp core is at least a few decks down from it, or should be, to accommodate saucer separation. I could see the purpose of some kind of "deflection crystal" being a way to divert power from impulse engines to the phasers, perhaps (especially in separated flight mode), but not necessarily in relation to the warp core to the impulse engines.
SicOne is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 7 2013, 04:41 PM   #41
Timo
Admiral
 
Re: Vertical Warp Core?

And when they refit Enterprise and put twin torpedo launchers right next to the warp core, if it indeed goes up through the neck, well, that seems especially daft.
Then again, if you need antimatter to load your torpedoes, then placing this application right next to all the other antimatter-consuming ones to create a "citadel" where you center all your armor and shielding is probably the way to go. Distributing these kaboom-prone systems all over your ships just means your ship will go kaboom all over!

Indeed, the neck would be smack in the middle of a bubble-type shield, and shadowed from enemy fire by both the major hulls even in purely physical (or skintight shielding) terms... Arguably the best protected part of the vessel overall.

Regarding the "impulse engine deflection crystal", it's my understanding that it is meant to deflect energy from the warp core towards the impulse engines when needed, is that correct?
We never learned if this backstage speculation held true in the "real" Star Trek universe. In ENT, the similar-looking blue glowing thing is said to manipulate the warp field somehow, in comparable offscreen doubletalk by the creators of the design.

Perhaps both are true, and any energies pumped into this crystal will be used for adjusting the main warp field in such a way that it makes inertia do the crew's bidding? From the DS9 pilot we (canonically, for a change!) learn that manipulation of subspace fields is indeed important in facilitating sublight propulsion; perhaps starships with these blue crystal things manipulate their warp fields in order to adjust their inertial mass?

Does the fact that Khan's ship has two of these things and Kirk's just one contribute to Spock's assertion that Khan can outmaneuver Kirk?

Another thing to consider: Andy Probert placed Main Engineering in TMP directly below this crystal, allowing the vertical "core" (or whatever) to point straight at it. But the set was then boosted by a forced-perspective matte painting showing a long corridor towards the bow from Main Engineering, meaning the facility "actually" has to be farther back. Nothing wrong with that as such - but it means the upper part of the vertical "core" must either twist or terminate just a deck or two above Main Engineering. Perhaps it runs along the spine of the connecting neck and eventually reaches the crystal... Or perhaps it just hits a fuel tank inside the neck, like in the TNG design?

Timo Saloniemi
Timo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 8 2013, 01:46 AM   #42
blssdwlf
Commodore
 
Re: Vertical Warp Core?

Timo wrote: View Post

Does the fact that Khan's ship has two of these things and Kirk's just one contribute to Spock's assertion that Khan can outmaneuver Kirk?
Two cylindrical crystal deflectors?
blssdwlf is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 8 2013, 07:57 AM   #43
Timo
Admiral
 
Re: Vertical Warp Core?

Well, two domed blue things - there's the big one inside the octagon atop, but also a corresponding one inside a circle at the bottom. If those relate to impulse propulsion, then Khan could have an agility advantage right there.

Whether the cylinders on the roll bar have anything to do with the matter, I don't know. They do look a little bit like the front end of Kirk's TOS ship, with concentric cylinder surfaces around the central spire thing, but without the paraboloid dish.

Timo Saloniemi
Timo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 9 2013, 03:57 AM   #44
Crazy Eddie
Rear Admiral
 
Crazy Eddie's Avatar
 
Location: I'm in your ___, ___ing your ___
Re: Vertical Warp Core?

Timo wrote: View Post
Well, two domed blue things - there's the big one inside the octagon atop, but also a corresponding one inside a circle at the bottom.
The lower feature is slightly further aft than the one above, which would indicate a slanted intermix chamber. Also, there doesn't seem to be an actual dome present in that feature, just a very small running light that blinks intermittently.
__________________
The Complete Illustrated Guide to Starfleet - Online Now!
Crazy Eddie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 9 2013, 06:37 AM   #45
blssdwlf
Commodore
 
Re: Vertical Warp Core?

Upon looking at the Reliant again, the lower cylinder is further forward than the one on top. The one on top is directly over the impulse engines which hang off of the main body. The lower cylinder does lack a dome. Perhaps it is the bottom of the reactor shaft?
blssdwlf is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

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 02:25 AM.

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