RSS iconTwitter iconFacebook icon

The Trek BBS title image

The Trek BBS statistics

Threads: 141,589
Posts: 5,515,406
Members: 25,158
Currently online: 498
Newest member: Giarc1982

TrekToday headlines

Two New Starships Collection Ships
By: T'Bonz on Dec 26

Captain Kirk’s Boldest Missions
By: T'Bonz on Dec 25

Trek Paper Clips
By: T'Bonz on Dec 24

Sargent Passes
By: T'Bonz on Dec 23

QMx Trek Insignia Badges
By: T'Bonz on Dec 23

And The New Director Of Star Trek 3 Is…
By: T'Bonz on Dec 23

TV Alert: Pine On Tonight Show
By: T'Bonz on Dec 22

Retro Review: The Emperor’s New Cloak
By: Michelle on Dec 20

Star Trek Opera
By: T'Bonz on Dec 19

New Abrams Project
By: T'Bonz on Dec 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 > Star Trek Movies > Star Trek Movies I-X

Star Trek Movies I-X Discuss the first ten big screen outings in this forum!

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old June 3 2013, 10:09 PM   #16
ConRefit79
Captain
 
ConRefit79's Avatar
 
Re: airlock placemente in TMP Enterprise

We need to also remember, the saucer can be a life boat if the Star Drive must be jettisoned. And likewise, the Secondary hull serves as life boat if the saucer is uninhabitable. So there is another reason for having the airlocks there. And They're at the widest area of the secondary hull. But, I don't know if they were ever meant to be docked with anything but a service pod or shuttle. The gangway doors on the saucer, are much larger and I think allow entry to F and G decks. They're also rectangular so a shuttle or pod could not dock there.
ConRefit79 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 3 2013, 10:33 PM   #17
Timo
Admiral
 
Re: airlock placemente in TMP Enterprise

We don't really know that the secondary hull would do any good in emergency separation. Sure, some TOS references suggest there's plenty of life support capacity down there, possibly including Kirk's cabin in the early episodes. But the cavernous cargo hold in TMP might have done away with much of that. And neither TOS nor TMP gave the secondary hull impulse capabilities, any more than the saucer got warp capabilities.

Doesn't mean there wouldn't be a need for docking ports in both halves in a separation emergency. In a real hurry, it would be way too clumsy to unpark any shuttles from the hangar and use them for shuttling between the hulls, but a slower-paced emergency might benefit from this. And perhaps the ports can handle the unseen but signage-verified lifepods, so that a partially loaded pod can be docked after launch and stuffed with more refugees? Having the docking port right next to the lifepod stations (just like Probert's matte interior suggests) would be helpful there.

We don't know if a docking port can mate with another docking port. It doesn't look like a symmetrical system at all, but we might be mistaken, and the saucer might dock with the secondary hull after separation. Alas, the saucer has no ports capable of reaching any of the secondary hull ports, but still...

Timo Saloniemi
Timo is online now   Reply With Quote
Old June 3 2013, 11:25 PM   #18
Belz...
Fleet Captain
 
Belz...'s Avatar
 
Location: In a finely-crafted cosmos... of my own making.
Re: airlock placemente in TMP Enterprise

Timo wrote: View Post
An obvious rationale for the placement we see is accessibility from the outside. There's already access at the rear of the secondary hull, and there can be none at the front; the empty middles of the sides make the best sense for docking ports in this hull. There are probably various hatches at the bottom, even though their outlines aren't easily spotted in the early movies - the E-A features color-coding suggestive of such things. But docking ports won't work there, because having one flush with the bottom would require gravity adjustment facilities that consume space unduly.
Thers's plenty of hatches on the top of the saucer, and many airlocks on the bottom, as we see in TMP. I'm sure there's many access ports for refueling on the engineering section.

Alas, we haven't seen a shuttle capable of handling cargo that would be too large for a "regular" transporter...
What about the one entering the cargo area after Kirk steps on board in TMP ?
__________________
And that's my opinion.
Belz... is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 3 2013, 11:35 PM   #19
ConRefit79
Captain
 
ConRefit79's Avatar
 
Re: airlock placemente in TMP Enterprise

Belz... wrote: View Post
What about the one entering the cargo area after Kirk steps on board in TMP ?
You mean the Workbee?
ConRefit79 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 4 2013, 12:13 AM   #20
Belz...
Fleet Captain
 
Belz...'s Avatar
 
Location: In a finely-crafted cosmos... of my own making.
Re: airlock placemente in TMP Enterprise

ConRefit79 wrote: View Post
You mean the Workbee?
Yeah. One of them is hauling a pretty hefty load.
__________________
And that's my opinion.
Belz... is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 4 2013, 01:39 AM   #21
ConRefit79
Captain
 
ConRefit79's Avatar
 
Re: airlock placemente in TMP Enterprise

The Enterprise is supposed to have a complement of Workbees.
ConRefit79 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 4 2013, 01:58 AM   #22
Belz...
Fleet Captain
 
Belz...'s Avatar
 
Location: In a finely-crafted cosmos... of my own making.
Re: airlock placemente in TMP Enterprise

And ?

Maybe I misinterpreted Timo's comment, then ?
__________________
And that's my opinion.
Belz... is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 4 2013, 02:08 AM   #23
ConRefit79
Captain
 
ConRefit79's Avatar
 
Re: airlock placemente in TMP Enterprise

Belz... wrote: View Post
And ?
Maybe I misinterpreted Timo's comment, then ?
I was pointing out that the ship has them. So if there was a need to transport cargo pods from one ship to another you don't have to go to the local Starbase.
ConRefit79 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 5 2013, 10:30 PM   #24
Timo
Admiral
 
Re: airlock placemente in TMP Enterprise

The thing is, the load of the workbee isn't outsize for transporters. That is, it could easily be beamed aboard container by container, by using one of those standard six-pad things.

Beaming eight containers aboard would probably also be quicker than towing that eight-container "train" all the way from the nearby space station. Not to mention that the transporter could take those containers to and from a planetary surface, while the workbee doesn't look at all like it could handle planetary takeoff and landing, atmospheric flight etc.

Then again, Khan's hut in ST2 appears to consist of exactly this sort of a container train - the mounting beam is still in place, and even has the clamps for a workbee at one end (although the bee itself is missing). Moving this cluster down would not have been possible with a six-pad transporter. But moving it down by a workbee doesn't seem plausible, either...

Timo Saloniemi
Timo is online now   Reply With Quote
Old June 6 2013, 12:58 AM   #25
ConRefit79
Captain
 
ConRefit79's Avatar
 
Re: airlock placemente in TMP Enterprise

Timo wrote: View Post
The thing is, the load of the workbee isn't outsize for transporters. That is, it could easily be beamed aboard container by container, by using one of those standard six-pad things.

Beaming eight containers aboard would probably also be quicker than towing that eight-container "train" all the way from the nearby space station. Not to mention that the transporter could take those containers to and from a planetary surface, while the workbee doesn't look at all like it could handle planetary takeoff and landing, atmospheric flight etc.

Then again, Khan's hut in ST2 appears to consist of exactly this sort of a container train - the mounting beam is still in place, and even has the clamps for a workbee at one end (although the bee itself is missing). Moving this cluster down would not have been possible with a six-pad transporter. But moving it down by a workbee doesn't seem plausible, either...
Timo Saloniemi
There are cargo transporters near the cargo bay. But moving from a StarBase to the ship would probably be more energy efficient by Workbee. While moving from ship to planet or vice versa would, the cargo transporter is probably more efficient.
ConRefit79 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 6 2013, 02:25 AM   #26
Belz...
Fleet Captain
 
Belz...'s Avatar
 
Location: In a finely-crafted cosmos... of my own making.
Re: airlock placemente in TMP Enterprise

It's not canon, but Mister Scott's Guide to the Enterprise shows cargo transporters with much bigger pads.
__________________
And that's my opinion.
Belz... is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 6 2013, 03:57 PM   #27
Timo
Admiral
 
Re: airlock placemente in TMP Enterprise

...It's too bad that TOS showed cargo being handled with a six-pad unit in "Dagger of the Mind". I mean, it was a unique set (the back wall with the circuit board was never seen in transporter rooms that handled personnel) and could have been the ship's dedicated cargo transporter, but it didn't look the part. The pad was still small, it was still two steps up from the floor level, and there were no doors wider than the standard size to allow the cargo to be moved beyond the room.

This all sort of undermines the idea that the TOS ship would already have had dedicated large cargo transporters, although it doesn't make their existence impossible. And I really hope such things existed both in TOS and TMP despite remaining unseen.

But moving from a StarBase to the ship would probably be more energy efficient by Workbee.
Would our heroes be concerned with energy efficiency, though? It's not as if Starfleet would ever consider the energy costs of anything when pondering alternate courses of action - except in those rare situations where energy was too low to do anything much, due to some emergency.

The workbee looks cool and all, but it really dumbs down Star Trek technology. In the 2260s, we see a fantastic flying saucer with cigars bolted on dashing between stars and teleporting people at will - and suddenly in the 2270s (or perhaps 2280s), we are back to docking ports, airlocks and flimsy little pods maneuvering on puffs of rocket thrust. It's as if space technology went back two centuries!

Timo Saloniemi
Timo is online now   Reply With Quote
Old June 6 2013, 04:45 PM   #28
Belz...
Fleet Captain
 
Belz...'s Avatar
 
Location: In a finely-crafted cosmos... of my own making.
Re: airlock placemente in TMP Enterprise

To be fair they did have their share of transporter troubles in TOS.
__________________
And that's my opinion.
Belz... is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Tags
ncc-1701, ncc-1701-a, shane johnson, starship design

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 03:23 PM.

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