RSS iconTwitter iconFacebook icon

The Trek BBS title image

The Trek BBS statistics

Threads: 149,537
Posts: 5,944,395
Members: 26,480
Currently online: 419
Newest member: kchage

TrekToday headlines

Abrams On Star Trek Into Darkness Flaws
By: T'Bonz on Nov 25

Star Trek Beyond In IMAX
By: T'Bonz on Nov 25

Red Shirt Diaries: The Return of The Archons
By: T'Bonz on Nov 23

Abrams Loves His Lens Flares
By: T'Bonz on Nov 23

Elba Star Trek Beyond Character Speculation
By: T'Bonz on Nov 23

Retro Review: Meld
By: Michelle Erica Green on Nov 20

Borg Cube Paper Lantern
By: T'Bonz on Nov 20

Takei Responds To Internment Comments
By: T'Bonz on Nov 19

Four New Starship Models
By: T'Bonz on Nov 18

February IDW Publishing Comics
By: T'Bonz on Nov 18

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?

Thread Tools
Old March 22 2013, 04:38 AM   #181
Warped9's Avatar
Location: Brockville, Ontario, Canada
Re: Earth ship Valiant

There is a limit to what I can contribute to this subject simply because I simply can't give any credibility to later contemporary sources regarding the subject. In my opinion by that time they were just way too off-base. If I were to sit down to seriously design the Valiant I'd ignore pretty much most everything that followed, especially FC and ENT.
STAR TREK: 1964-1991, 2013-?
Warped9 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 22 2013, 05:01 AM   #182
Wingsley's Avatar
Location: Wingsley
Re: Earth ship Valiant

Oh, I'd say the contradictions and discontinuity are there, and they do tend to rear their ugly heads from time to time, much to our annoyance , but TOS had contradictions aplenty within itself and I'm always pleasantly surprised when Berman & Co. did manage to get something right.
"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.

Last edited by Wingsley; March 22 2013 at 05:02 AM. Reason: typo
Wingsley is online now   Reply With Quote
Old May 23 2013, 12:44 AM   #183
Fleet Captain
Location: Charlotte, NC
Re: Earth ship Valiant

Timo wrote: View Post
Warp 1+ might be anything up to warp 5-, really.

The freighters of ENT are limited to warp two, but Starfleet vessels might do much better. We never hear it explicitly said that warp 2 would be a limit. It's just a milestone in the development of Henry Archer's warp five engine - but it may have previously been a milestone in the development of Bobby McDillan's warp four engine, and before that a milestone in the development of Lucienne Ferrero's warp three engine, each of these programs involving a testbed that had to reach warp two before it reached the higher speeds.

Whether warp 5- would be enough for meaningful interstellar exploration, well, probably not - Archer's engine is said to represent a breakthrough in exploration, after all. But warp 5- would get the Valiant out far enough to encounter those exotic phenomena that whisk ships to the other end of the galaxy, without Earth immediately learning the full truth of this incredible journey.

In any case, Earth apparently had warp 9+ engines in the 2060s already. Perhaps they just didn't work well with live crew - but they were good enough to propel an unmanned probe across the galaxy in mere decades, as per VOY "Friendship One".

How far the Valiant actually got probably had absolutely nothing to do with her intended mission or her built-in performance. Kirk was adamant that the Valiant being where she was should have been "impossible".

Timo Saloniemi
I HATE Bobby McDillan! He's such a tool! :P
Irishman is offline   Reply With Quote


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 01:34 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
FireFox 2+ or Internet Explorer 7+ highly recommended.