RSS iconTwitter iconFacebook icon

The Trek BBS title image

The Trek BBS statistics

Threads: 138,901
Posts: 5,387,183
Members: 24,717
Currently online: 555
Newest member: teriankhoka

TrekToday headlines

Gold Key Archives Volume 2
By: T'Bonz on Aug 19

Takei Documentary Wins Award
By: T'Bonz on Aug 19

Cumberbatch To Voice Khan
By: T'Bonz on Aug 19

Shaun And Ed On Phineas and Ferb
By: T'Bonz on Aug 18

New Ships Coming From Official Starships Collection
By: T'Bonz on Aug 18

Trek Stars Take On Ice Bucket Challenge
By: T'Bonz on Aug 18

Retro Review: Profit and Lace
By: Michelle on Aug 16

Eve Engaged
By: T'Bonz on Aug 15

Shatner’s Get A Life DVD Debuts
By: T'Bonz on Aug 14

TV Alert: Takei Oprah Appearance
By: T'Bonz on Aug 14


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 January 9 2013, 11:14 PM   #16
Robert Comsol
Commodore
 
Robert Comsol's Avatar
 
Location: USS Berlin
Re: Space Station K-7

Timo wrote: View Post
"Indeed. But transporters are such a convenience in the 23rd century already that hard dockings might in fact be extremely rare events."
Most likely not in "The Ultimate Computer" - 400 members of the Enterprise crew had to leave the ship.

Remembering the queues in "This Side of Paradise" they probably got faster off the ship by doing it the old way. And it tells us something about the accomodation capability of the space station seen in this eposode.

Bob
__________________
"The first duty of every Starfleet officer is to the truth" Jean-Luc Picard
"We can't solve problems by using the same kind of thinking we used when we created them."
Albert Einstein
Robert Comsol is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 9 2013, 11:28 PM   #17
blssdwlf
Commodore
 
Re: Space Station K-7

They could've hard docked in "The Ultimate Computer" but I think they would've stayed away in "Trouble With Tribbles" to maintain the ability to fight given the disputed space and Klingon presence.
blssdwlf is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 10 2013, 02:51 AM   #18
Wingsley
Commodore
 
Wingsley's Avatar
 
Location: Wingsley
Re: Space Station K-7

I would say any kind of TOS-era space station would have to have built-in hard-docking-ports. What if there are technical difficulties with the transporter? Space stations, just like any other space vessels, would have to be designed to handle any contingency including an "abandon ship" option of shutting the place down and leaving it. And if you ever had to come back and reactiviate it, a starship might need to re-power it and board it using a docking port.

"The Ultimate Computer" (non-remastered version) makes it clear that an entire Federation starship's crew can (somehow) be disembarked from ship to station, and that the crew can (apparently) stay there. This, combined with the presence of Starfleet brass and V.I.P. Daystrom, should make it clear that such a station has plenty of room and creature comforts. It also seems (to me, anyway) to at least swing the door open a little further about the existence of 22-person transporter rooms. (The ones standing in line for "This Side of Paradise" were likely the last crewmembers after everything else had been shut down.)

I'm not too sure I agree on the discussion about K-7 and the grain. Whether K-7 was being used to temporarily hold the grain until the weekly freighter came to pick it up, or it was being held there for some procedural reason (needed to be subject to some kind of treatment, needed to be check and approved before being released to Sherman's Planet, whatever) K-7 may be serving a purpose it was designed for: to harbor valuable cargo until it can be either processed or traded or simply picked up. It could be a standard use for stations like this. This would seem to be backed up by the station's obvious personnel uses: shore leave, shopping/trade, a platform for official business, etc.

I suppose that either K-7 or the unnamed M-5 war games station could be located just about anywhere in Federation space, from inside a star system to an interstellar void. If such a station were located in orbit around a planet or moon, how difficult would it be for a station of that size to keep the orbit from decaying? The only advantage I could see to a station being in-system is quick access to a nearby planet and free photovoltaic power from the star. (But if your station is using transporters and subspace transmitters all the time, wouldn't that kind of usage demand the same kind of power generation that a starship uses?)
__________________
"The way that you wander is the way that you choose. / The day that you tarry is the day that you lose. / Sunshine or thunder, a man will always wonder / Where the fair wind blows ..."
-- Lyrics, Jeremiah Johnson's theme.
Wingsley is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 10 2013, 12:29 PM   #19
Timo
Admiral
 
Re: Space Station K-7

Most likely not in "The Ultimate Computer" - 400 members of the Enterprise crew had to leave the ship.
Yet this very feat was achieved in emergency conditions in "The Doomsday Machine", explicitly with transporters.

That is, unless Decker lied about this rather unlikely twist of events...

Remembering the queues in "This Side of Paradise" they probably got faster off the ship by doing it the old way.
But that was a bunch of mutineers abandoning not just the ship but all discipline as well. And being in no hurry.

In "11001001", the E-D with its explicit 20+ transporters was clearly benefiting from the availability of a physical gangway when evacuating up to a thousand people. But this was done in minutes, and Kirk would have had hours to offload his personnel. Then again, Kirk's ship would sport an explicit gangway after the TMP refit, and there's no good reason to argue against the use of such a means of disembarking in TOS.

At most, it could be argued the gangway would not be on the saucer rim, because we see no evidence of it there, and that a staircase or ladderway (and/or turbolift connection) through a dorsal hatch is the likelier means, just as you postulated.

What if there are technical difficulties with the transporter?
Then people freeze to death.

Would physical means of disembarking be a "contingency plan", a "primary means", or perhaps "Plan C if both transporters and escape pods fail"?

K-7 may be serving a purpose it was designed for: to harbor valuable cargo until it can be either processed or traded or simply picked up. It could be a standard use for stations like this. This would seem to be backed up by the station's obvious personnel uses: shore leave, shopping/trade, a platform for official business, etc.
The curious thing is that the readiness for such operations includes grain silos. What else is waiting in the wings? Pools for genetically enhanced shrimp? Storage racks for Douglas firs? At some point, diversity and capacity would start competing, and the station would either lose the less likely capabilities, or then have insufficient capacity for each capability.

If such a station were located in orbit around a planet or moon, how difficult would it be for a station of that size to keep the orbit from decaying?
Good question. Terok Nor, a decidedly planet-tied station, wasn't exactly on "low" orbit, and would have experienced little air resistance at the apparent height of perhaps a thousand kilometers. It was generously provided with thruster capacity, though - and Cardassians seemed to have dedicated a lot of effort to sabotaging that particular system when they abandoned the station, perhaps in hopes of having the station crash.

K-7 doesn't have obviously visible thrusters. But the thing is, neither does Kirk's ship!

(But if your station is using transporters and subspace transmitters all the time, wouldn't that kind of usage demand the same kind of power generation that a starship uses?)
Are those high energy systems, though? We never quite learn about transporters - but they seem to work in rather fancy situations, such as when all power supposedly is shut down yet Dona Ragar manages to fire up a platform by using a hand phaser battery. And "terawatt" communications amaze Riker in "The Dauphin", yet the main power systems of his starship appear capable of significantly greater power output, perhaps indicating that communications in general don't require all that much power.

Miscellanea:

When our heroes in "Tribbles" approach K-7, Kirk asks how close the course will take them to "the Klingon outpost". This sort of suggests that the Klingons have a direct counterpart to K-7, with both stations quite possibly dedicated to the same task, namely, staking a claim for this "disputed quadrant".

Of course, it may also be that K-7 is the "Klingon outpost" they are talking about, and that's what the K stands for there. When Chekov speaks of smelling "them", he might not be making a racist remark after all, merely a generally humorous one.

When Nilz Baris takes charge, he is taking charge of the Sherman's Planet project. Kirk seems to think this should in no way be connected to placing the entire quadrant on alert. But Sherman's is the only quoted point of conflict in the quadrant in Chekov's analysis... All the dialogue might be taken to indicate that Sherman's is the raison d'etre of K-7.

Timo Saloniemi
Timo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 10 2013, 03:49 PM   #20
Forbin
Admiral
 
Forbin's Avatar
 
Location: I said out, dammit!
Re: Space Station K-7

http://www.inpayne.com/models/kitbash/trekpage_51.html

Forbin is online now   Reply With Quote
Old January 10 2013, 04:12 PM   #21
Robert Comsol
Commodore
 
Robert Comsol's Avatar
 
Location: USS Berlin
Re: Space Station K-7

Wingsley wrote: View Post
"It also seems (to me, anyway) to at least swing the door open a little further about the existence of 22-person transporter rooms."
I don't think so at all. The station manager's office can only receive two visitors at a time beaming in, already three visitors will be a 'problem'.

Unlike the Enterprise the station does not appear to have the capability to warp space and take in interstellar matter as fuel or to simply be refueled like a starship at the earliest next convenience - at a station or starbase!

Thus, most likely, you have to bring everything to the station (compare to an oil drilling platform) and energy saving should be a major issue where the corporeal transfer of people to the station appears to be the favorable means, IMHO.

@ Forbin

Nice link and visualization. Thanks

Bob
__________________
"The first duty of every Starfleet officer is to the truth" Jean-Luc Picard
"We can't solve problems by using the same kind of thinking we used when we created them."
Albert Einstein
Robert Comsol is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 10 2013, 04:43 PM   #22
Timo
Admiral
 
Re: Space Station K-7

While bringing in goods was something of an issue for DS9, we never heard of risks or difficulties associated with delayed fuel shipments. It appeared that the onboard power generators were quite capable of operating systems such as personnel transporters (for apparent daily commuting of large numbers of Bajoran laborers, back in ye olden days), shields and phasers (for fighting multiple starships), even in a siege situation...

Where the comparable powerplant of K-7 might be located is an interesting question, with many possibilities. K-7 is significantly smaller than DS9 regardless of what exact size we choose for the two ill-scaled structures, within the apparent limits. It's not smaller than Kirk's ship, though, and could plausibly mount a "starship-category" powerplant or three in, say, the hangar section, with significant fuel tankage along the booms.

The station manager's office can only receive two visitors at a time beaming in, already three visitors will be a 'problem'.
Which is a very good limitation to have for a station manager's office! The mall transporter might be quite capable of receiving parties of 58 people at one stroke, though.

This is assuming that the platforms on the station handle the transport, of course. Kirk could have beamed in with at least five friends if he didn't bother with Lurry' platforms - and with twenty-one if the larger units are assumed to exist. A problem, definitely, but only for Lurry...

Timo Saloniemi
Timo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 17 2013, 02:27 PM   #23
Robert Comsol
Commodore
 
Robert Comsol's Avatar
 
Location: USS Berlin
Re: Space Station K-7

Had a thought the other day which I felt to be a good opportunity to revive this interesting thread.

Obviously the three extending pylons of Space Station K-7 (or the one from "The Ultimate Computer", TOS-R ignored) do not serve a useful purpose such as providing artificial gravity by rotation of the station.

Another subject I talked about a longer time ago were the rectangular bottom markings on the Enterprise's engineering hull many assume to be cargo hatches.

I'll now go one step further and theorize that these are actually cargo containers. There are some episodes where the Enterprise has a rendezvous with one of her sister ships to transfer cargo.

Trying to imagine a quick exchange I somehow think a basic swap of cargo containers between both ships would do the job.

Which, of course, brings us to the question where these containers were picked up in the first place. Considering the spherical nature of a starship's engineering hull bottom, the extending pylons of a K-7 type space station could actually hold clusters of such containers.

I haven't checked out, yet, how this would impact the actual dimensions of the K-7 type space station but it might be a hint.

The cargo container idea would also help to rationalize the difference in color of the "cargo hatch" at the bottom of the 11-footer Enterprise and the smaller model - these were just differently colored cargo containers...

Bob
__________________
"The first duty of every Starfleet officer is to the truth" Jean-Luc Picard
"We can't solve problems by using the same kind of thinking we used when we created them."
Albert Einstein

Last edited by Robert Comsol; July 17 2013 at 02:38 PM.
Robert Comsol is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 17 2013, 05:11 PM   #24
Mario de Monti
Captain
 
Mario de Monti's Avatar
 
Location: Heidelberg, Germany
Re: Space Station K-7

That´s a truly interesting idea, that I´d get on board with immediately. Unfortunately however, it´s not going to work and for a very simple reason: The "arms" of the space station are cylindrical, while the engineering hull of the Enterprise is conical. So the radius of the curved surface of such a container would be the same on both ends in the space station arms, but in the Enterprise the forward ends of the containers would have a bigger radius than the aft ends. That just wouldn´t fit together.

Mario
__________________
"Do you give me attitude, Spock?" - "I´m expressing multiple attitudes simultaneously, Sir. To which are you referring?"
Mario de Monti is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 17 2013, 11:16 PM   #25
Robert Comsol
Commodore
 
Robert Comsol's Avatar
 
Location: USS Berlin
Re: Space Station K-7

@ Mario de Monti

Blast! You're right. Okay, I invoke Plan B.

I can't help but notice the oversized rectangular station hangar door on the lower module or element. If there were only one hangar door (as suggested by the AMT model kit which is practically all we have on the station as a "whole") you'd have to devote precious space for transport purposes, i.e. to get something stored on the other side of the element to the area with the large hangar door.

And since this is TOS with compression / decompression techniques this looks like a hangar way too big to do the compression / decompression procedure just to take onboard Cyrano Jones' merchant ship or smaller vessels in general, IMHO. There might be smaller hangars on the other and unseen side.

Bob
__________________
"The first duty of every Starfleet officer is to the truth" Jean-Luc Picard
"We can't solve problems by using the same kind of thinking we used when we created them."
Albert Einstein
Robert Comsol is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 18 2013, 06:17 AM   #26
Mario de Monti
Captain
 
Mario de Monti's Avatar
 
Location: Heidelberg, Germany
Re: Space Station K-7

I guess you are implying that these smaller (unseen) hangars could be used to store these containers that fit into the Enterprise. That works for me, although your initial idea would have been more elegant

Another thought on the container idea: each type of starship would need its own type of container. For example, the containers that fit into the secondary hull of the Enterprise wouldn´t fit into a TOS Miranda type ship. Depending on the actual number of starship classes in TOS, there might be quite a few different types of containers a station like K-7 might have to have in store. So a standardized container (shape) might make more sense. Or you say, that these containers are merely limited to the top-of-the-line starships, which need to exchange cargo quickly and be on their way again.

But that should maybe be discussed in a thread of its own - along with the actual meaning of all the hull markings on the Enterprise

Mario
__________________
"Do you give me attitude, Spock?" - "I´m expressing multiple attitudes simultaneously, Sir. To which are you referring?"
Mario de Monti is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 18 2013, 03:46 PM   #27
Robert Comsol
Commodore
 
Robert Comsol's Avatar
 
Location: USS Berlin
Re: Space Station K-7

Mario de Monti wrote: View Post
But that should maybe be discussed in a thread of its own - along with the actual meaning of all the hull markings on the Enterprise
Guess you're right. Here it is: http://www.trekbbs.com/showthread.php?t=190540

I'm not yet sure whether a container of the Enterprise couldn't be inserted into one of those huge 2 stern openings of a Miranda Class starship (which I never believed to be shuttlebays: in this case two would mean that one is probably redundant, IMHO)

Bob
__________________
"The first duty of every Starfleet officer is to the truth" Jean-Luc Picard
"We can't solve problems by using the same kind of thinking we used when we created them."
Albert Einstein
Robert Comsol is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 19 2013, 06:33 PM   #28
Mario de Monti
Captain
 
Mario de Monti's Avatar
 
Location: Heidelberg, Germany
Re: Space Station K-7

Thanks for pointing out that thread. Interesting, though it somehow turned into a discussion about the ion pod
__________________
"Do you give me attitude, Spock?" - "I´m expressing multiple attitudes simultaneously, Sir. To which are you referring?"
Mario de Monti is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 20 2013, 02:12 PM   #29
Irishman
Fleet Captain
 
Location: Charlotte, NC
Re: Space Station K-7

blssdwlf wrote: View Post
Wingsley wrote: View Post
Or maybe the ships aren't in proportion to their (presumed) 100 km proximity to the station, meaning the station could be larger on the outside than appearances suggest.
I had gathered that only the Klingon ship was said to be 100km away when they arrived initially. After two or three scenes they could've moved closer to the station...
As aggressive and militant as the Klingons are, I could easily see them having an option for orbiting like a shark, starting out, and spiraling in closer with each run, as an intimidating factor. This imaginary thing I've just made up could explain why the D7 looked closer than 100km.
Irishman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 20 2013, 02:55 PM   #30
Timo
Admiral
 
Re: Space Station K-7

The Klingons might also, as a matter of habit, only make a half-hearted attempt at braking when arriving, leaving their ship deliberately on a very slow collision course... A perfect combination of cruelty and crudity.

Timo Saloniemi
Timo 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 05:42 PM.

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