RSS iconTwitter iconFacebook icon

The Trek BBS title image

The Trek BBS statistics

Threads: 138,386
Posts: 5,357,958
Members: 24,626
Currently online: 602
Newest member: suryaprabu02

TrekToday headlines

The Gene Roddenberry Project Kickstarter
By: T'Bonz on Jul 30

Moore: No Deep Space Nine Regrets
By: T'Bonz on Jul 30

Pegg Star Wars Rumor
By: T'Bonz on Jul 30

Borg Cube Fridge
By: T'Bonz on Jul 29

Free Enterprise Kickstarter
By: T'Bonz on Jul 29

Siddig To Join Game Of Thrones
By: T'Bonz on Jul 29

Sci-Fried To Release New Album
By: T'Bonz on Jul 28

Star Trek/Planet of the Apes Crossover
By: T'Bonz on Jul 28

Star Trek into Darkness Soundtrack
By: T'Bonz on Jul 28

Horse 1, Shatner 0
By: T'Bonz on Jul 28


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 > Welcome to the Trek BBS! > General Trek Discussion

General Trek Discussion Trek TV and cinema subjects not related to any specific series or movie.

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old December 24 2013, 05:14 PM   #16
PicardSpeedo
Lieutenant Commander
 
PicardSpeedo's Avatar
 
Re: Warp 10

King Daniel Into Darkness wrote: View Post
C.E. Evans wrote: View Post
The only consistency about warp speed is its inconsistency--which could be explained if warp factors vary depending on local subspace conditions (Warp 4 here could be faster than Warp 9 there). And some ships may be able to traverse vast distances of the Galaxy very quickly if they know the location of "warp highways" (or subspace shortcuts). A Federation starship stuck in an unfamiliar part of the Galaxy may not, IMO.
This sounds okayish, but I find it hard to believe it could possibly account for the sheer difference in speeds we've seen.

TOS - 1000 LY in 12hrs at warp 8.7 ("That Which Survives")
VOY - 70,000 LY in 75 years at warp 9.975 ("Caretaker")

That's the old Enterprise making Voyager's journey in a month, or Voyager taking a year to cover the 1000 LY distance in TOS.

Mileage may vary, but I see most of Trek fitting nicely into the TOS/TAS/movie framework of much faster warp speeds (with examples like the E-E getting from the RNZ to Earth in FC, the NX-01 taking four days to reach Kronos at warp 5 and nuKirk making it there and back in a day at warp 8) than it does the Voyager mould.
Frankincense + Myrrh wrote:
If this engine (all warp engines) has it's own " personal " warp scale, this could explain Voyagers seeming speed difference at a given warp number in comparison to other ships we've seen.

What do you think?
Maybe if they just left it at "maximum warp" for all Treks (I wish they'd done that!), instead of getting into specific nob-comparison numbers like "warp 9.975" and "fastest ship in the fleet" -type comments.


Ideally, I'd just say Voyager was it's own little universe that operated under a different set of rules to the rest of the Trekverse, but that screws up the many crossovers with other shows and the idea of Trek as one epic saga. By Voyager's way of thinking, TOS and the rest can't possibly have happened as we saw. Hurmph.
What if the fabric of space itself in the Delta Quadrant had more of a damping effect on Voyager's engines than other areas of space, and thus they operated less efficiently (as indirectly suggested by other posters?) Sort of like a sailing ship sailing at full speed against a current, for example.
PicardSpeedo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 24 2013, 05:30 PM   #17
King Daniel Into Darkness
Admiral
 
King Daniel Into Darkness's Avatar
 
Location: England again
Re: Warp 10

I wish they'd said something to that effect on the show. A vague "our warp engines aren't as efficient in this part of space" -type comment would have worked wonders.
__________________
Star Trek Imponderables, fun mashups of Trek's biggest continuity errors! Ep1, Ep2 and Ep3
King Daniel Into Darkness is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 24 2013, 06:54 PM   #18
PicardSpeedo
Lieutenant Commander
 
PicardSpeedo's Avatar
 
Re: Warp 10

I agree, but I feel like Voyager was the point in the series where Berman & Braga pretty much started losing interest in the show, and so quality control started to slip.
PicardSpeedo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 24 2013, 07:15 PM   #19
Push The Button
Captain
 
Push The Button's Avatar
 
Location: Smithfield, Rhode Island USA
Re: Warp 10

My explanation is this: At some point, the Federation switched over to the Metric system, so the inconsistency regarding Warp factors might be from converting MPH to KPH.
__________________
Let's make sure history never forgets...
the name...
Enterprise
Push The Button is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 24 2013, 08:17 PM   #20
C.E. Evans
Vice Admiral
 
C.E. Evans's Avatar
 
Location: Saint Louis (aka Defiance)
Re: Warp 10

King Daniel Into Darkness wrote: View Post
C.E. Evans wrote: View Post
The only consistency about warp speed is its inconsistency--which could be explained if warp factors vary depending on local subspace conditions (Warp 4 here could be faster than Warp 9 there). And some ships may be able to traverse vast distances of the Galaxy very quickly if they know the location of "warp highways" (or subspace shortcuts). A Federation starship stuck in an unfamiliar part of the Galaxy may not, IMO.
This sounds okayish, but I find it hard to believe it could possibly account for the sheer difference in speeds we've seen.
It's very easy if we go with the idea that the Voyager was just traveling carefully through the Delta Quadrant. Even so, there probably were instances in which the Voyager was moving at "plot speed" like other ships, even if only briefly to get from one star system to another.
__________________
"Everybody wants to rule the world..."
C.E. Evans is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 24 2013, 09:41 PM   #21
TheSubCommander
Captain
 
TheSubCommander's Avatar
 
Re: Warp 10

What if the fabric of space itself in the Delta Quadrant had more of a damping effect on Voyager's engines than other areas of space, and thus they operated less efficiently (as indirectly suggested by other posters?) Sort of like a sailing ship sailing at full speed against a current, for example.
I wish they'd said something to that effect on the show. A vague "our warp engines aren't as efficient in this part of space" -type comment would have worked wonders.
Agreed! The fabric of space-time is variable. It could have been made more clear that could account for inefficiency of the engines.

It's very easy if we go with the idea that the Voyager was just traveling carefully through the Delta Quadrant. Even so, there probably were instances in which the Voyager was moving at "plot speed" like other ships, even if only briefly to get from one star system to another.
I think there may have been an episode or two in Voyager that stated this, but weren't they mostly cruising at Warp 6 or 7 most of the show because the ship couldn't go past Warp 8 all the time? So this could account for some of the 70 year trip.

Another thing is that they couldn't always go in a straight line to the Alpha quadrant, let alone straight to Earth. There are bound to be detours, not to mention that the galaxy is 3 dimensional. Sometimes, they had to travel up and down the Z axis of the galaxy, not just the vector straight to earth, right? That is bound to add years, too.
TheSubCommander is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 24 2013, 10:22 PM   #22
C.E. Evans
Vice Admiral
 
C.E. Evans's Avatar
 
Location: Saint Louis (aka Defiance)
Re: Warp 10

TheSubCommander wrote: View Post
C.E. Evans wrote:
It's very easy if we go with the idea that the Voyager was just traveling carefully through the Delta Quadrant. Even so, there probably were instances in which the Voyager was moving at "plot speed" like other ships, even if only briefly to get from one star system to another.
I think there may have been an episode or two in Voyager that stated this, but weren't they mostly cruising at Warp 6 or 7 most of the show because the ship couldn't go past Warp 8 all the time? So this could account for some of the 70 year trip.
Ideally, it would be a case that most ships could safely cruise at Warp 6 indefinitely, but cruise at higher warp speeds for correspondingly shorter and shorter periods of time due to the strain on both engines and spaceframe. Non-canon sources would have a ship's maximum warp reserved for relatively short emergency flights of up to twelve hours or so. But as with most things in Trek, there was never a set rule in regard to warp travel times and distances, although VOY did try more than other shows to keep some consistency to where the ship was in relation to home (in light-years) during its journeys.
__________________
"Everybody wants to rule the world..."
C.E. Evans is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 24 2013, 10:30 PM   #23
Cyke101
Rear Admiral
 
Cyke101's Avatar
 
Re: Warp 10

Someone on this board (don't remember who, unfortunately) likened the label of Warp 10 as analogous to counting to infinity. We have the name and general concept of it, but actually counting to it can't be done because the scale keeps going up and up. You can always change labels and goalposts for new achievements in warp drive, but the concept of omnipresence via warp would remain the same and unreachable.

Thus it would seem that Transwarp/slipstream drive < Warp 10, only because Warp 10 is a concept and not an actual measure of speed, whereas transwarp/slipstream and I suppose even time travel can be measured. Things like Warp 13 are not concepts, but measures of speed -- less than omnipresence, but perhaps a more practical term. So to avoid confusion, the label and concept of Warp 10 should probably get a new name.
__________________
“You do not use science in order to prove yourself right, you use science in order to become right.”
Cyke101 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 24 2013, 10:33 PM   #24
King Daniel Into Darkness
Admiral
 
King Daniel Into Darkness's Avatar
 
Location: England again
Re: Warp 10

^^Big problem with that is, we're told Voyager has a "sustainable cruise velocity of warp 9.975" when we first see the ship docked at DS9. That's not even maximum warp, but a cruise velocity they can supposedly maintain. I guess the writers either forgot or decided it was way too fast, since the fastest they ever actually go is warp 9.75 (not 9.975) in "The Swarm"
__________________
Star Trek Imponderables, fun mashups of Trek's biggest continuity errors! Ep1, Ep2 and Ep3
King Daniel Into Darkness is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 24 2013, 10:41 PM   #25
urbandefault
Captain
 
urbandefault's Avatar
 
Location: Chicken pot, chicken pot, chicken pot pie!
Re: Warp 10

I think Voyager was in the Bizarro universe.
urbandefault is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 24 2013, 10:51 PM   #26
C.E. Evans
Vice Admiral
 
C.E. Evans's Avatar
 
Location: Saint Louis (aka Defiance)
Re: Warp 10

King Daniel Into Darkness wrote: View Post
^^Big problem with that is, we're told Voyager has a "sustainable cruise velocity of warp 9.975" when we first see the ship docked at DS9. That's not even maximum warp, but a cruise velocity they can supposedly maintain.
"Sustainable cruise velocity" is really such an ambiguous term, because it could easily mean the highest speed the ship can sustain for any length of time--be it twelve days, twelve hours, or even just twelve minutes for all we know. I think the easiest way is to refer to Warp 9.975 as being the ship's maximum warp, with higher speeds briefly possible but at extreme risk as was the case once with the Enterprise-D.
__________________
"Everybody wants to rule the world..."
C.E. Evans is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 24 2013, 10:55 PM   #27
Cyke101
Rear Admiral
 
Cyke101's Avatar
 
Re: Warp 10

King Daniel Into Darkness wrote: View Post
^^Big problem with that is, we're told Voyager has a "sustainable cruise velocity of warp 9.975" when we first see the ship docked at DS9. That's not even maximum warp, but a cruise velocity they can supposedly maintain. I guess the writers either forgot or decided it was way too fast, since the fastest they ever actually go is warp 9.75 (not 9.975) in "The Swarm"
If we're going on a large enough scale, there's a big difference between Warp 9.975 and, say, Warp 9.9975, even if seems miniscule on paper because we're adding only .0225.

For example, assuming that Voyager maintained Warp 9.975, it would have a speed of 5551.9 times c*. But adjusting it slightly to Warp 9.9975 almost triples the ship's speed, or 14781.9 times c

In essence, if a ship even went to Warp 9.999999999, that's still an infinitesimal way to go before "attaining" the omnipresence of Warp 10. And I'm sure there's math out there that the E-D in "Where No One Has Gone Before" reached Warp 9.9999(-to whatever decimal point) to travel 3 million light years (M33) in 10 seconds, which is one of the reasons why dialog of speed was so vague ("We never went past Warp 1.5" or "We're passing [as opposed to reaching] Warp 10" or "We are off the scale"). We do know, however, that whatever Warp 13 or Transwarp is, it's not omnipresence.

*using ditl.org's warp speed calculator. I use it not for accuracy or canon evidence (because there is none, really -- as was pointed out earlier, warp is not portrayed consistently), but to demonstrate what speed would look like on an upward, always increasing scale. Funnily enough, ditl.org's warp scale only goes up to 4 decimal points, so it stops displaying calculations between 30 years of warp and 3 years of warp to traverse 3 million ly, which is still a lot of speed used for time saved.
__________________
“You do not use science in order to prove yourself right, you use science in order to become right.”
Cyke101 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 31 2013, 02:49 PM   #28
PicardSpeedo
Lieutenant Commander
 
PicardSpeedo's Avatar
 
Re: Warp 10

It could be that there's just some kinda bad juju about going Warp 10. It might be that going Warp 9.9999999999999 is safe, and going Warp 13 is safe, but if you go Warp 10, you turn into a lizard and occupy every point in the universe simultaneously. That would explain why starships are often seen going faster than Warp 10 without lizardification happening to the crew. Warp 10 is simply the "brown note" of space travel.

EDIT to add: I can manifest the same phenomenon in my 1993 Isuzu Wizard as what happens with the Warp 10 'brown note.' At speeds below 65 MPH, the truck runs fine. But between 65 and 70 MPH, the truck bucks and shudders and makes burning smells. However, once above 70 MPH, it runs well again.

Last edited by PicardSpeedo; December 31 2013 at 07:18 PM.
PicardSpeedo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 3 2014, 06:14 AM   #29
Darkwing
Commodore
 
Location: This dry land thing is too wierd!
Re: Warp 10

King Daniel Into Darkness wrote: View Post
Warp 10 is infinite speed in Voyager and the non-canon Okuda technical manuals. In the rest of the franchise it's a different story. TOS and TAS passed warp 10 all the time without salamander transformations or infinity speed, and TNG did it in "Where No One Has Gone Before" and "All Good Things"
TOS & TAS used a different warp scale, where WF^3 X Chi factor X C = velocity in multiples of C. TNG+ used a table with asymptotes that worked out to roughly WF^3.3 X C, no Chi Factor. AGT apparently revamped the warp scale again. But Roddenberry was dead by that time, and the "No warp 10" thing was his rule. The new scale was a bad idea, IMO; they should have just capped it at 20 old-scale.

Voyager also massively slowed warp speed down, making crossing the galaxy a lifelong journey despite TOS, TAS and the classic movies zipping to the rim of the galaxy, back to Earth and to the centre effortlessly.
WNMHGB didn't make it seem effortless and quick, IMO. Now, TFF and TMoMT did make the trip to the core in no time, and encountered two entirely different things in the same place.

Just chalk it up to one of those weird unexplained and best-left-unsolved discontinuities, like "The Alternative Factor" where one drop of antimatter could destroy the whole universe, when in every other episode it's common starship fuel.
Can't really argue this once we've cleared up the few discrepancies that can be resolved.
__________________
If you don’t drink the kool-aid, you’re a baaad person - Rev Jim Jones
Almond kool-aid, anyone? Or do you prefer pudding?- Darkwing
Darkwing is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 4 2014, 01:12 PM   #30
USS KG5
Vice Admiral
 
USS KG5's Avatar
 
Location: England's green and pleasant land.
Re: Warp 10

King Daniel Into Darkness wrote: View Post
TOS - 1000 LY in 12hrs at warp 8.7 ("That Which Survives")
VOY - 70,000 LY in 75 years at warp 9.975 ("Caretaker")
It also means that the original ENT could travel the entire width of the Milky Way in 50-60 days, making our Galaxy far too small for the purposes of the "expanded" show. Really the 60s show made warp too fast, Voyager got it right.

I once in a sadder moment used the chart in the Encyclopedia to work out how fast voyager would actually be going to do the journey in 75 years, an average of Warp 5 or 6 - which actually makes sense. If we imagine Stotti is bragging a bit, and take into account what other posters have said, then warp 9.975 is Voyager's equivalent of the Ent-D's Warp 9.6, they can keep it up for a while but then they have to stop or blow up. Also it is on screen in TNG that hammering around damages the engines (The Chase).

So Voyager could realistically at "maximum" average around Warp 5 to 6 on it's way home, this also ties in with travel times in general in TNG and DS9.

The newer shows and movies fudge this a bit, but you actually have to take things very literally to assume Earth-Kronos take "minutes", assuming a bit of time compression it certainly didn't take long, at most an hour or so, but we can safely assume that nu-trek does it's own thing!
__________________
I believe in a better world, so I love Star Trek. I have to live in this one, so I love Battlestar Galactica.
USS KG5 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 08:41 PM.

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