RSS iconTwitter iconFacebook icon

The Trek BBS title image

The Trek BBS statistics

Threads: 139,124
Posts: 5,401,232
Members: 24,744
Currently online: 630
Newest member: rachaela3

TrekToday headlines

Trek Merchandise Sale
By: T'Bonz on Aug 28

Star Trek #39 Villain Revealed
By: T'Bonz on Aug 28

Trek Big Bang Figures
By: T'Bonz on Aug 28

Star Trek Seekers Cover Art
By: T'Bonz on Aug 27

Fan Film Axanar Kickstarter Success
By: T'Bonz on Aug 27

Two New Starship Collection Ships
By: T'Bonz on Aug 26

Trek Actor Wins Emmy
By: T'Bonz on Aug 26

Trek Retro Watches
By: T'Bonz on Aug 26

New DS9 eBook To Debut
By: T'Bonz on Aug 25

Trek Ice Cube Maker and Shot Glasses
By: T'Bonz on Aug 25


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 > Star Trek TV Series > Voyager

Voyager There's coffee in this forum!

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old April 12 2013, 12:09 PM   #31
T'Girl
Vice Admiral
 
T'Girl's Avatar
 
Re: Can USS VOYAGER separate from saucer section?

teacake wrote: View Post
But if it's midgets you don't need that much space.
Correction ... Andorian midget gangbang porn.


T'Girl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 12 2013, 05:17 PM   #32
lennier1
Commodore
 
lennier1's Avatar
 
Location: Germany
Re: Can USS VOYAGER separate from saucer section?

teacake wrote: View Post
But if it's midgets you don't need that much space.
And that's why the secondary core in the saucer section is smaller than the primary core in the engineering hull.
__________________
Programming today is a race between software engineers striving to build bigger and better idiot-proof programs, and the Universe trying to produce bigger and better idiots. So far, the Universe is winning.
lennier1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 12 2013, 05:56 PM   #33
Lance
Fleet Captain
 
Lance's Avatar
 
Location: The Enterprise's Restroom
Re: Can USS VOYAGER separate from saucer section?

The dramatic need (ie. in the scripts) for a 'saucer seper' was negated by Voyager's ability to jettison the warp core and then re-integrate it, as we've seen in a few episodes. If, indeed, the primary reason for seperating the saucer is in case of a warp core breach. As opposed to, you know, maybe Neelix deciding to take it for a quick joy ride one night while the crew are all suspiciously asleep after he served them some of his new soup in the mess hall, or something. It could happen.

I mean, if you can jettison the core, and the ship doesn't have families on it anymore, then there isn't really a need to a saucer seper is there? Unless it was for purely tactical reasons, like we saw with the Prometheus in "Message In A Bottle". Of course, that doesn't mean Voyager can't seperate. But I'd argue jettisoning the core is easier. Except on those occasions when the jettison fails and the core stays clamped in the engine room. If that happens then they're pretty much screwed.
Lance is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 12 2013, 06:20 PM   #34
T'Girl
Vice Admiral
 
T'Girl's Avatar
 
Re: Can USS VOYAGER separate from saucer section?

Lance wrote: View Post
I mean, if you can jettison the core ...
It would not be all that hard to think of other reasons to want to put some distance between the saucer and the lower hull.

If you absolutely had to land on a planet, and the lower was damaged to the point that it was no longer aerodynamic.

TWOK showed that the dilithium chamber can emit enough radiation to kill someone in minutes, a major breach could make a separation (for days or weeks) a real good idea.

I wrote a story once where the Enterprise Dee was having it's antimatter bottles refilled, and the ship separated for that. The saucer moved some distance away

Or, if the ejection system was simply "offline."


T'Girl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 12 2013, 08:07 PM   #35
R. Star
Rear Admiral
 
R. Star's Avatar
 
Location: Shangri-La
Re: Can USS VOYAGER separate from saucer section?

T'Girl wrote: View Post
teacake wrote: View Post
But if it's midgets you don't need that much space.
Correction ... Andorian midget gangbang porn.


Amazing how a thread about saucer seperation turned into this.
__________________
"I was never a Star Trek fan." J.J. Abrams
R. Star is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 12 2013, 09:45 PM   #36
JanewayRulz!
Vice Admiral
 
JanewayRulz!'s Avatar
 
Location: North America
Re: Can USS VOYAGER separate from saucer section?

Voy "can" land on a planet... so it doesn't need something else "kewl" to distinguish it from the rest of the Fleet like 1701D

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=niWu7JsSAyc

Then again... it has Janeway, so its Kewl" factor has already exceeded most ships of the line.

__________________
"But life is a battle: may we all be enabled to fight it well!" Charlotte Bronte
JanewayRulz! is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 12 2013, 09:52 PM   #37
Lance
Fleet Captain
 
Lance's Avatar
 
Location: The Enterprise's Restroom
Re: Can USS VOYAGER separate from saucer section?

My recollection is that the designer (was it Rick Sternbach?) initially started out from the premise that Voyager was going to be a smaller ship, maybe an intermediate between the Defiant and something like a Constitution. I do remember seeing plans somewhere showing the nacelles actually below the ship, more like one of DS9's runabouts. Maybe the design was more intergrated at this stage, and that's why it's hard to see the lines for things like saucer seper? They were never considered seriously, and then the ship ended up being upscaled to the design we now know and love.

R. Star wrote: View Post
T'Girl wrote: View Post
teacake wrote: View Post
But if it's midgets you don't need that much space.
Correction ... Andorian midget gangbang porn.


Amazing how a thread about saucer seperation turned into this.
It's one of the main reasons for visiting the Voyager section. That and the free beer.
Lance is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 12 2013, 09:53 PM   #38
R. Star
Rear Admiral
 
R. Star's Avatar
 
Location: Shangri-La
Re: Can USS VOYAGER separate from saucer section?

Lance wrote: View Post
My recollection is that the designer (was it Rick Sternbach?) initially started out from the premise that Voyager was going to be a smaller ship, maybe an intermediate between the Defiant and something like a Constitution. I do remember seeing plans somewhere showing the nacelles actually below the ship, more like one of DS9's runabouts. Maybe the design was more intergrated at this stage, and that's why it's hard to see the lines for things like saucer seper? They were never considered seriously.

R. Star wrote: View Post
T'Girl wrote: View Post
Correction ... Andorian midget gangbang porn.


Amazing how a thread about saucer seperation turned into this.
It's one of the main reasons for visiting the Voyager section. That and the free beer.
Free beer? You've been holding back on me!
__________________
"I was never a Star Trek fan." J.J. Abrams
R. Star is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 13 2013, 02:03 AM   #39
T'Girl
Vice Admiral
 
T'Girl's Avatar
 
Re: Can USS VOYAGER separate from saucer section?

JanewayRulz! wrote: View Post
Voy "can" land on a planet...
A fact not in dispute.

But try this, the ship gets both of her nacelles blown off and for survival they need to land some where. Once they touch down, the remaining ship is going to nose right over. Hard to use that as a base of operations. Yeah?

So, bring them down separate. The lower lands on it's gear, and the saucer lands on it's belly.




T'Girl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 13 2013, 02:48 AM   #40
Melakon
Vice Admiral
 
Melakon's Avatar
 
Location: Unmarked grave, Ekos
Re: Can USS VOYAGER separate from saucer section?

Voyager doesn't need to separate. As stated, it can land. It also has all those nifty escape pods. Those things must be a bear to reinstall or reload after jettisoning, sort of like a PEZ dispenser.
__________________
Moe: I'll take the blonde!
Larry: I'll take the brunette!
Curly: I'll take the Black and Tan!
--Wee Wee Monsieur (1938)
Melakon is online now   Reply With Quote
Old April 13 2013, 07:09 AM   #41
Rick Sternbach
Fleet Captain
 
Re: Can USS VOYAGER separate from saucer section?

T'Girl wrote: View Post
JanewayRulz! wrote: View Post
Voy "can" land on a planet...
A fact not in dispute.

But try this, the ship gets both of her nacelles blown off and for survival they need to land some where. Once they touch down, the remaining ship is going to nose right over. Hard to use that as a base of operations. Yeah?

So, bring them down separate. The lower lands on it's gear, and the saucer lands on it's belly.




What some folks miss is the fact that the impulse engines keep the ship in a basic "hover," and only allow enough downward force to let the feet steady the ship, not hold up the entire 750,000 MT. Sure, if the impulse reactors and space-time driver coils quit, the belly pancakes into the ground. But we're talking about a system that regularly kicks Voyager at tens or hundreds of gees (with the famous inertial dampeners running), so countering a ~1g planetary field is no sweat at all. But if the impulse power fails, Voyager better set down with its chin resting on a mound.

Rick
__________________
Senior Illustrator Emeritus
Star Trek 1978-2001
Rick Sternbach is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 13 2013, 05:43 PM   #42
R. Star
Rear Admiral
 
R. Star's Avatar
 
Location: Shangri-La
Re: Can USS VOYAGER separate from saucer section?

I always wondered about the alignment and the ship tilting over. Though if the impulse engines are having to continually fire to keep the ship upright.... what's the point of even landing it?
__________________
"I was never a Star Trek fan." J.J. Abrams
R. Star is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 13 2013, 06:22 PM   #43
T'Girl
Vice Admiral
 
T'Girl's Avatar
 
Re: Can USS VOYAGER separate from saucer section?

If you can in deed endlessly hover, why devote any internal space to those four legs?

Technically, if you're hovering (regardless if the legs are touching the ground) you haven't actually "landed."

Another reason to have the ability to separate would be, instead of the saucer needing to get away from the lower section (i.e. possible warp core breach), there could be occasions when you wanted the lower to be able to get away from the saucer.

Contamination, boarding party, irreparable damage.

The lower would give you (the Captain) a place to withdraw your crew too.

First Officer: "The entire crew is in the lower section, but the boarders now control the saucer section, what shall we do Captain?"

Captain:
"Eject the warp core!"

First Officer:
"Huh?"

Captain:
"I mean, lock out the saucer's computers and separate the ship."


T'Girl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 13 2013, 10:36 PM   #44
Guy Gardener
Fleet Admiral
 
Guy Gardener's Avatar
 
Location: In the lap of squalor I assure you.
Re: Can USS VOYAGER separate from saucer section?

I'm thinking about at the academy when a class of cadets have all finished their Kobayashi Maru Tests and then either by design (a protest perhaps?) or coincidence that 90 percent of the graduating classing screamed "RAMMING SPEED!" then aimed their ship at the Kobayshi Maru, and BOOM.

It's a fricking neutronic feul carrier.

If you want to blow up the 60 cloaked ships lurking about it's the best target available, if you don't want your crew to end up as rapefood.
__________________
"Glitter is the herpes of arts and craft."

Troy Yingst. My Life as Liz
Guy Gardener is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 13 2013, 11:07 PM   #45
SonicRanger
Rear Admiral
 
SonicRanger's Avatar
 
Location: Sheffield, England
Re: Can USS VOYAGER separate from saucer section?

Of course it separates:

http://www.starshipmodeler.info/inst...R_RE_SHT04.JPG
__________________
"STAR TREK is... Action - Adventure - Science Fiction."
-- Gene Roddenberry, 1964, top of the first page of his original pitch and outline for Star Trek
SonicRanger 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 07:35 PM.

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