RSS iconTwitter iconFacebook icon

The Trek BBS title image

The Trek BBS statistics

Threads: 141,368
Posts: 5,503,824
Members: 25,124
Currently online: 483
Newest member: traedoril

TrekToday headlines

New Abrams Project
By: T'Bonz on Dec 18

IDW Publishing March 2015 Comics
By: T'Bonz on Dec 17

Paramount Star Trek 3 Expectations
By: T'Bonz on Dec 17

Star Trek #39 Sneak Peek
By: T'Bonz on Dec 16

Star Trek 3 Potential Director Shortlist
By: T'Bonz on Dec 16

Official Starships Collection Update
By: T'Bonz on Dec 15

Retro Review: Prodigal Daughter
By: Michelle on Dec 13

Sindicate Lager To Debut In The US Next Week
By: T'Bonz on Dec 12

Rumor Mill: Saldana Gives Birth
By: T'Bonz on Dec 12

New Line of Anovos Enterprise Uniforms
By: T'Bonz on Dec 11


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?

View Poll Results: I think the M/AM reaction of TOS Enterprise takes place in...
the nacelles 20 41.67%
a secondary-hull reactor 17 35.42%
somewhere else or in some combination 11 22.92%
Voters: 48. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old August 31 2013, 02:08 AM   #16
C.E. Evans
Vice Admiral
 
C.E. Evans's Avatar
 
Location: Ferguson, Missouri, USA
Re: Where's the M/AM reaction in TOS Enterprise?

I think it had multiple matter/antimatter reactors--in the nacelles, in the engineering section, in the saucer section, and perhaps even in other locations scattered throughout the ship.
__________________
"Don't sweat the small stuff--it makes you small-minded..."
C.E. Evans is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 31 2013, 08:18 PM   #17
jpv2000
Captain
 
jpv2000's Avatar
 
Location: Georgia, United States
Re: Where's the M/AM reaction in TOS Enterprise?

I voted for a secondary in-hull reactor.

It was a guess more than anything else as I'm not very tech minded. I was just going by the looks of the ships.
jpv2000 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 1 2013, 04:16 AM   #18
Patrickivan
Fleet Captain
 
Patrickivan's Avatar
 
Location: Ontario, Canada
Re: Where's the M/AM reaction in TOS Enterprise?

Having gone through all the scripts using key word search terms, I decided that they were in the nacelles. That said, there were clearly other forms of reactors for power and batteries throughout the ship. I have no problem with that.

I also have no issue with other Starfleet ships have the main warp power reactors being located in the main hull(s) as per design requirements. But I'm completely convinced that Starship Class (Constitution Class) ships, i.e. TOS Enterprise and her sisters, all had their main warp reactors contained within the nacelles.

A little off topic, I even really think TMP's main reactors should be a more efficient stream lined version of TOS's systems. Where the power from the nacelle reactors are the sole source (Other than backup batteries), and engineering is where that energy is converted and shunted to the rest of the ship. Minus other reactors like in TOS. Then by the end of the 2200's we see a conversion to a centralized warp core that are due to more efficient and powerful controls for m/arc energy containment. Pre-TOS had a centralized warp core because they weren't as powerful, and required more hands on maintenance.

Just my two cents to explain the variations on the same ideas.
__________________
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 September 1 2013, 10:22 PM   #19
BillJ
Admiral
 
BillJ's Avatar
 
Location: Covington, Ky.
View BillJ's Twitter Profile
Re: Where's the M/AM reaction in TOS Enterprise?

My gut feeling is that the intention of the shows producers was that the reaction takes place in the nacelles.
__________________
"...the most elementary and valuable statement in science, the beginning of wisdom, is I do not know." - Lt. Commander Data, "Where Silence Has Lease"
BillJ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 1 2013, 11:16 PM   #20
Merry Christmas
Vice Admiral
 
Merry Christmas's Avatar
 
Location: tantalizing t'girl's techno temenos
Re: Where's the M/AM reaction in TOS Enterprise?

My vote was for in the nacelles. This way the reactors would be ajacent to the the warp engines which consume the majority of the reactors output. A small amount of the reactors output would be transferred down to the engineering hull to be used by the rest of the ship's systems, either directly as plasma or converted into electricity.

Merry Christmas is online now   Reply With Quote
Old September 2 2013, 11:45 AM   #21
F. King Daniel
Admiral
 
F. King Daniel's Avatar
 
Location: King Daniel Into Darkness
Re: Where's the M/AM reaction in TOS Enterprise?

"Elaan of Troyius" puts the main dilithium crystal in the middle of the engine room. If the nacelles were self contained, that would make no sense. Ditto the antimatter pod Scotty was messing around with in (I think?) "Lights of Zetar", and the times Scotty glances at the glow behind the mesh in engineering to guage ships' power

It may have been the original intent that the nacelles themselves be the power source, but even if so, that's not how it ended up on-screen.
__________________
Star Trek Imponderables, fun mashups of Trek's biggest continuity errors! Ep1, Ep2 and Ep3
F. King Daniel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 2 2013, 02:08 PM   #22
Patrickivan
Fleet Captain
 
Patrickivan's Avatar
 
Location: Ontario, Canada
Re: Where's the M/AM reaction in TOS Enterprise?

King Daniel Into Darkness wrote: View Post
"Elaan of Troyius" puts the main dilithium crystal in the middle of the engine room. If the nacelles were self contained, that would make no sense. Ditto the antimatter pod Scotty was messing around with in (I think?) "Lights of Zetar", and the times Scotty glances at the glow behind the mesh in engineering to guage ships' power

It may have been the original intent that the nacelles themselves be the power source, but even if so, that's not how it ended up on-screen.
As part of the power distribution system, all that means is that the failed crystals in main engineering compromise major systems. It doesn't mean that the m/arcs for the warp drive system are not contained in the nacelles.

As for Scotty glancing behind the mesh... Well, he's not going to run up to a nacelle if main engineering is integrated into the whole power systems... That's why it's called engineering.

There are also references in TOS episodes the provides as much if not more instances where the nacelles contain the main power generation, or at the very least significant power generation. So that intent of having the nacelles containing power generation is indeed how it ended up on-screen.

The Doomsday Machine

SPOCK: I would say none, Captain. The energy generated by our power nacelles seems to attracts it. I doubt we could manoeuvre close enough without drawing a direct attack upon ourselves.

KIRK: Go.
WASHBURN: We made a complete check on structural and control damage, sir. As far as we can tell, something crashed through the deflectors and knocked out the generators. Somehow the antimatter in the warp drive pods has been deactivated.
KIRK: Deactivated? Scotty, could some kind of general energy dampening field do that, and would the same type of thing account for the heavy subspace interference?

Bread And Circuses

SPOCK: No doubt about it, Captain. The space debris comes from the survey vessel SS Beagle.
KIRK: Missing for six years, and now this junk in space.
SPOCK: Portions of the antimatter nacelles, personal belongings. Captain, no signs of bodies whatsoever.

By Any Other Name

SCOTT: I have opened the control valves to the matter-anti-matter nacelles. On your signal, I will flood them with positive energy.
KIRK: What?
__________________
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 September 2 2013, 03:39 PM   #23
Robert Comsol
Commodore
 
Robert Comsol's Avatar
 
Location: USS Berlin
Re: Where's the M/AM reaction in TOS Enterprise?

Patrickivan wrote: View Post
There are also references in TOS episodes the provides as much if not more instances where the nacelles contain the main power generation, or at the very least significant power generation. So that intent of having the nacelles containing power generation is indeed how it ended up on-screen.
If I'm allowed (?) I'd like to add

The Ultimate Computer

SPOCK: M-5 appears drawing power directly from the warp engines, tapping the matter-antimatter reserves.
SCOTT: So now it has virtually unlimited power. Captain, what'll we do?

Patrickivan wrote: View Post
By Any Other Name

SCOTT: I have opened the control valves to the matter-anti-matter nacelles. On your signal, I will flood them with positive energy.
KIRK: What?
Indeed, WHAT?!?

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 September 2 2013, 06:06 PM   #24
austen_pierce
Captain
 
austen_pierce's Avatar
 
Location: Virginia Beach, VA
Re: Where's the M/AM reaction in TOS Enterprise?

My vote is for the secondary hull due to the glow from behind the mesh in engineering whenever the engines strained. IFIRC this happened in multiple episodes.
austen_pierce is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 2 2013, 10:13 PM   #25
Boris Skrbic
Commander
 
Re: Where's the M/AM reaction in TOS Enterprise?

The April 1967 writer's guide is fairly clear: The two "outboard" nacelles contain matter and antimatter, a controlled intermixing of which creates the stupendous power needed. We are presently searching for an optical effect in, about, or between these nacelles which will make their spectacular potential seem more obvious to the eye. Since the document would've been known to the writing staff, no wonder the dialogue suggests the same.

Last edited by Boris Skrbic; September 2 2013 at 10:33 PM.
Boris Skrbic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 3 2013, 01:58 AM   #26
Patrickivan
Fleet Captain
 
Patrickivan's Avatar
 
Location: Ontario, Canada
Re: Where's the M/AM reaction in TOS Enterprise?

Robert Comsol wrote: View Post

If I'm allowed (?) I'd like to add



Indeed, WHAT?!?

Bob
No- You take it all back. No additional input!

Boris wrote: View Post
The April 1967 writer's guide is fairly clear: The two "outboard" nacelles contain matter and antimatter, a controlled intermixing of which creates the stupendous power needed. We are presently searching for an optical effect in, about, or between these nacelles which will make their spectacular potential seem more obvious to the eye. Since the document would've been known to the writing staff, no wonder the dialogue suggests the same.
Well put... That guide quote, paired with online dialogue, and concept drawings of the Enterprise are all canon, and therefore further validate the opinions of those in the Nacelles camp.

That said, if some want to believe otherwise, they can. I'm just hoping for fun information to support our respective positions. Nothing wrong with some good discussion... (Even if you who think it's in the main hull are wrong )
__________________
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 September 3 2013, 08:39 AM   #27
Masao
Fleet Captain
 
Masao's Avatar
 
Location: Tokyo
Re: Where's the M/AM reaction in TOS Enterprise?

Robert Comsol wrote: View Post
If I'm allowed (?) I'd like to add...
You're like a little kid that keeps hopping out of bed! No cookies for you!

My intention for this thread was to find out what people believed about how Enterprise works. But polls are kind of pointless if someone is trying to influence you as you answer the question.

The intention was not to provide another venue for you guys to throw facts and quotes at each other in yet another skirmish in some never-ending war. These types of situations always make bad episodes!

Fire away!
__________________
"Jesus said the meek would inherit the earth, but so far all we've gotten is Minnesota and North Dakota." -- Garrison Keillor
Masao is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 3 2013, 10:36 AM   #28
Boris Skrbic
Commander
 
Re: Where's the M/AM reaction in TOS Enterprise?

But… belief is irrelevant. You need to examine the canon and derive a hypothesis that fits the facts. There is M/AMR in the nacelles and maybe elsewhere. Multiple M/AMR reactors, as opposed to the central one in TMP+, would best explain conflicting reports on the subject. Here's a possible outline:

1) In TOS they're extremely dangerous and must be kept in the nacelles, away from the crew, so the reactors are pretty much restricted to warp power generation. Later, engineers start experimenting with smaller reactors in the main body.

2) In TMP they move everything to the main body, in order to gain more power for other ship systems, but still with mandatory radiation suits.

3) Later, the shielding improves and no protective suits are needed.

Last edited by Boris Skrbic; September 3 2013 at 01:30 PM.
Boris Skrbic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 3 2013, 01:02 PM   #29
Robert Comsol
Commodore
 
Robert Comsol's Avatar
 
Location: USS Berlin
Re: Where's the M/AM reaction in TOS Enterprise?

@ Boris

Many thanks for that quote from the Writer's Guide I had been previously and completely unaware of. Looks like I could have saved myself the effort coming up with this thread.

@ Masao

What is the purpose of your poll as you seem to be keen that participants remain unaware of or have forgotten the original TOS dialogue? Just beliefs and assumptions to be useful for what?
Is it a sociological experiment to see how retroactive continuity influences our memory of what we (could have) learned originally?

In this case it might have been a good idea to say so first, as I'm confident you've noticed in the various Trek Tech related threads (e.g. Romulan Bird of Prey) that it's virtually impossible to confine the content of such a thread to one exclusive topic (which I don't necessarily think is a bad thing and rather appreciate and enjoy the fresh ideas and inspiration that come out of it).

If a topic revolves around taste or conflicting issues which have been abundantly discussed, a poll is useful to approximate which "side" apparently had the better arguments or to grasp the audiences taste. But I'm honestly unable to see the conflicting or taste element in your poll.

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; September 3 2013 at 01:19 PM.
Robert Comsol is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 3 2013, 02:41 PM   #30
Masao
Fleet Captain
 
Masao's Avatar
 
Location: Tokyo
Re: Where's the M/AM reaction in TOS Enterprise?

Bob: I don't hang out in this forum so am not up on all your very thorough and inspiring discussions. I explained the purpose of my poll several times, often in direct response to your complaints. Most posters understood. Your unwillingness or, I suspect, inability to understand is no longer my concern.
__________________
"Jesus said the meek would inherit the earth, but so far all we've gotten is Minnesota and North Dakota." -- Garrison Keillor
Masao 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 01:51 AM.

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