Hmm, well, I was basing my assumption on White's 2012 paper, specifically this part: Since the warp bubble was symmetrical with no intrinsic way to steer, I just assumed it would be on a set trajectory. Has White released more recent work that covers what happens if the ship changes course?
No. But I don't think the ship has the limitation you infer in the first place. Yes, the warp bubble is symmetrical, without a way to steer it off-axis, but there's nothing that insists that the bubble is locked into the orientation it had when it was activated. It's a localized effect. That's why I suggested rockets for a reaction control system that can steer the ship. Point the ship in a new direction, and the bubble will point that way, too. In the process, perhaps some of those accumulating relativistic particles will be shed, too.
White does suggest that the buildup of particles can be minimized by cycling the warp bubble on and off repeatedly while in motion.
Yeah, I've had the thought that Alcubierre drives might be better suited for short hops than long trips. In a spec novel I've written, I've established that the starfaring community prefers wormholes for long-distance travel and uses warp more for local, even intrasystem travel. (As I said, it makes an excellent sublight gravity drive, without the complications that arise at effective superluminal velocities.)
Nope, you misread the intent. He suggests cycling it rapidly while in use. Not limiting it to short trips. Here's a presentation he gave in 2013 worth watching: [yt]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9M8yht_ofHc#t=2770[/yt]
^I didn't "misread" it, I just discussed another aspect of the idea. Cycling it on and off during long trips is, in fact, the way I have it work in my spec novel, for journeys where a wormhole route isn't available. The point is that a long trip would be made up of a series of short hops. Although I envisioned it more as taking a break every couple of light years, like rest stops on a long highway drive.
Interesting ideas, guys. I especially like the idea of having to travel in short hops, and not being able to stop on a dime, in orbit exactly where they want. Been working on my EM Shield array... More later. Trying to figure out a good way to connect these at the back. I might end up spreading each side out, like was suggested before. What do ya'll think? -Ricky
I definitely like it as a full ring. Are you planning on filling in the gaps in the ring or leaving it largely empty? One cool thing about this would have to be ensuring that there are airlocks and safety rails that the crew could use to conduct EV repairs.
Actually, I've been thinking for the longest time that if you were to REALLY redo Trek technology, "warp drive" would not be a setting for a set speed, and "warp factor" would be equivalent to an acceleration setting. So a ship traveling at "warp one" would be accelerating between .5 and 2Gs, depending on the density of the interstellar medium, local magnetic fields and gravity fields, etc. A ship at warp ten would be accelerating much faster, maybe 25Gs or something. Either way, it's a rate of acceleration that, being an alcubierre-style space warp, could reach substantial FTL velocities with enough run-up time. This would also somewhat remove the need for an impulse drive for sublight speeds; you'd just use the warp drive all the time for orbit changes or maneuvers and thrusters to control orientation. An alternative to this model would be a "pulsed" warp drive in which the ship in question "fires" its warp drive for a single second, during which the ship effectively jumps into a new reference frame that is moving forward at arbitrary speed. So use of warp drive is a matter of pointing your ship in a particular direction, entering a desired speed, powering up the engines for a burst and then "engage warp!" in an instant, you're coasting at 28 times the speed of light, and you're going to stay that way until you fire your engines again to stop yourself or until you hit something, whichever comes first.
Or, better yet, give the crew something that ST has always lacked but that any spacecraft in the future would realistically be expected to have: maintenance robots. No need to risk sending people out to do EV repairs when they can just control a drone by telepresence, or just instruct an autonomous drone to do the repair itself.
Warp drive imparts no momentum. the minute you disengage it you return to whatever velocity vector you had previous to it's use.
Hey guys... a little more progress last night. Playing with what the main hull should look like. This is what I'm thinking: Too much? I want it to look like it's actually constructed out of parts, not just one smooth surface. I was looking at "The Globe" in Stockholm as an example. Later Guys, -Ricky
I remember the game I had forgotten earlier. Someone did a starship for SPORE somehow... That might simply be a ring shaped space station, with the habitation ring serving dual purpose as the warp ring--perhaps not occupied during transit--if field effects are bad. When you tell folks to re-imagine the Enterprise, that can mean many different things to folks. In some respects, The Protector from Galaxy Quest is an answer. A ship that has a very lovely sense of sweep, as does the ship from Planetary Traveller http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0168124/reviews http://www.dvdtalk.com/reviews/180/infinitys-child/ According to CINEFEX, some of the early Protector sketches were too Enterprise-like--but they never showed them! Augh! The deep keel Kryptonian spacecraft from Man Of Steel also have a visually interesting look. For more conventional tastes, there was a pamphlet in the Bandai NX-01 offering that had nice art--and I can't find that anywhere on line. One wonders what Richard Taylor would have wanted for TMP, if he had his way. Maybe a Foss design?
True, being the captain of a starship means responsibility. If some extra-terrestial ship were to come out of warp and damage or annihilate life on our planet, we wouldn't want the commanding officer to just receive a slap on the wrists. We'd expect someone to pay, perhaps with his life. That said, I'm curious if perhaps these high energy particles could be absorbed as a power/fuel source. I'd imagine enough advanced might render the danger not only mute, but maybe an advantage.
I can see the aesthetic value of giving the hull some texture, but we're already in the age of composite hulls made as single preformed pieces. In the future, there'd be little reason to build a ship hull out of multiple parts with lots of seams to serve as weak points. A hull would most likely be a single continuous piece with any necessary openings or depressions or extrusions molded into it. Come to think of it, though, maybe the inner hull could be such a continuous piece, while the outer layer could be a set of ablative armor "scales" designed to be removed and replaced individually as they wore out. Although if it's armor, giving it a bunch of seams is still potentially a problem.
Dandridge Cole wanted hollowed out asteroids: http://planetarydefense.blogspot.com/2007/11/concept-from-yesterday-colonies-from.html Lots of thickness to the hull. Why have the Ent--when you can have the Doomsday Machine? Cute http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VRhfF9yRGQg http://www.foundation3d.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=33286&d=1258255939 http://makezine.com/2012/02/07/upcycled-star-trek-model-ship/ http://www.trekbbs.com/showpost.php?p=5390470&postcount=15 http://www.scifi-meshes.com/forums3d-wips/93-hybrid-enterprise-42.html