RSS iconTwitter iconFacebook icon

The Trek BBS title image

The Trek BBS statistics

Threads: 138,267
Posts: 5,349,613
Members: 24,609
Currently online: 598
Newest member: robyn

TrekToday headlines

Retro Review: His Way
By: Michelle on Jul 26

MicroWarriors Releases Next Week
By: T'Bonz on Jul 25

Ships Of The Line Design Contest
By: T'Bonz on Jul 25

Next Weekend: Shore Leave 36!
By: T'Bonz on Jul 25

True Trek History To Be Penned
By: T'Bonz on Jul 25

Insight Editions Announces Three Trek Books For 2015
By: T'Bonz on Jul 24

To Be Takei Review by Spencer Blohm
By: T'Bonz on Jul 24

Mulgrew: Playing Red
By: T'Bonz on Jul 24

Hallmark 2015 Trek Ornaments
By: T'Bonz on Jul 24

Funko Mini Spock
By: T'Bonz on Jul 23


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?

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old August 12 2007, 11:44 PM   #31
FalTorPan
Vice Admiral
 
FalTorPan's Avatar
 
Location: Out there... thataway.
Re: Andy Probert releases prelim plans for USS Ambassador ki

Trekker4747 said:
ancient said:
I like to pretend that the ENT-B modifications were a continuation of the failed transwarp perogram. Thus the extra glowies on the saucer, built up nacelles, re-inforced hull, etc.

In the 24th Century all the Excelciors seem to be without the ENT-B stuff, so they just...ripped it back off after they were done fooling around.

Yay for fanon explanations!
And, see, I always thought the "transwarp" program was a huge sucsess in that for them "transwarp" became what we know as the revised TNG Warp Scale.
Throughout Trekkiness, the term "transwarp" seems to have been used as a blanket term to mean just about any propulsion technology that exceeds the capabilities of then-modern warp drive. As to the "truth" of Arnold's claim... I don't care either way.

Back on-topic, the Ambassador is looking very cool. I really look forward to seeing how the engineering hull and nacelle pylons flow together.
__________________
Watch ASTRONUTS! Visit Trekplace! Check out my personal website!
FalTorPan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 13 2007, 05:01 AM   #32
Unicron
Continuity Spackle
 
Unicron's Avatar
 
Location: Cybertron
Send a message via ICQ to Unicron
Re: Andy Probert releases prelim plans for USS Ambassador ki

Yeah, personally I like Tigger's take on tranwarp in his Excelsior entry on for the ASDB manuals. Transwarp did work, it's just that they couldn't get the kind of superior performance they wanted on a large scale product like the starship prototype. So not a flop at all, simply a concept that didn't work quite as well on a large scale. The TNG warp scale is a good alternative.

__________________

"My dream is to eat candy and poop emeralds. I'm halfway successful."


Catbert, Evil Director of Human Resources
Unicron is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 13 2007, 01:15 PM   #33
Vance
Vice Admiral
 
Re: Andy Probert releases prelim plans for USS Ambassador ki

Considering that TNG completely changes warp scale, and it's treated that the new scale, etc, were there for a long time... I'm left to the conclusion that Transwarp (ST:III) actually DID work, and that the engineers made a new warp scale accordingly.

I mean, seriously, the TNG Tech Manual is full of crap anyway, why rely on it for something like this?
Vance is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 13 2007, 05:49 PM   #34
Rick Sternbach
Fleet Captain
 
Re: Andy Probert releases prelim plans for USS Ambassador ki

FalTorPan said:
Arpy said:
Was it Probert or Sternbach that said they designed the E-C by superimposing images of the E-B and E-D and connecting the lines? If that's the case, you can see where the thin nacelles and girthy stardrive come from - ditto the thin, squarish nacelle pylons, come to think of it.
I think both designers adopted that approach -- Probert in 1987, and Sternbach in 1989 or 1990.
I didn't. I developed the Ent-C by looking at the Ent-B and Ent-D with my plain old Mk. I eyeballs and sketching. No superimposing of drawings, just melding elements I saw in both ships and adding them to the solid foundation provided by Andy's color sketch. Since the color sketch was nearly edge-on, there wasn't a lot of data to be gleaned about the saucer shape or the exact form of the nacelles, etc. The final blueprint lines had to be created that would work in shapes from the color sketch and allow us to get a miniature built under TV time pressures (circular saucer, circular cross-section eng. hull). IIRC, the producers weren't keen on making a new ship, so I'm happy that we got what we got.

The slightly hefty nacelles in the final ship were likely a result of Starfleet wanting to go faster, but had to make the coils bigger, and only after the class was in production did they come up with a more efficient alloy vapor-deposition technique that led to the thinner (by comparison) nacelles for the U.S.S. Galaxy.

Rick
www.spacemodelsystems.com
__________________
Senior Illustrator Emeritus
Star Trek 1978-2001
Rick Sternbach is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 14 2007, 05:20 AM   #35
Captain Robert April
Vice Admiral
 
Location: In selfless service to fandom, on the road to becoming a Star Trek trivia god...
Re: Andy Probert releases prelim plans for USS Ambassador ki

Ya never do lose the knack for technobabble, do ya?
Captain Robert April is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 14 2007, 09:16 AM   #36
GodThingFormerly
A Different Kind of Asshole
 
Location: An "American" in Friedrichshafen, Deutschland
Re: Andy Probert releases prelim plans for USS Ambassador ki

Captain Robert April said:
Ya never do lose the knack for technobabble, do ya?
As was noted at TrekBBS.com a couple of years ago by no less a poster than Rick Sternbach himself, technobabble is only technobabble if it doesn't make any sense. Microgravity vacuum-vapor deposition, on the other hand, is a perfectly legitimate real-world space manufacturing proposal dating back to at least the L5 movement of the 1970s:



Illustration scanned from Colonies in Space by T.A. Heppenheimer (Stackpole Books, 1977).

TGT
GodThingFormerly is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 14 2007, 04:25 PM   #37
Rick Sternbach
Fleet Captain
 
Re: Andy Probert releases prelim plans for USS Ambassador ki

The God Thing said:
Captain Robert April said:
Ya never do lose the knack for technobabble, do ya?
As was noted at TrekBBS.com a couple of years ago by no less a poster than Rick Sternbach himself, technobabble is only technobabble if it doesn't make any sense. Microgravity vacuum-vapor deposition, on the other hand, is a perfectly legitimate real-world space manufacturing proposal dating back to at least the L5 movement of the 1970s:

<snip>

TGT
I learned about plasma spraying of space inflatables in 1972 or thereabouts, as a technique for building the big 1000' diameter fuel sphere for an Enzmann starship. With balloons as big as Echo back in the early days, the idea of making a big metallic sphere doesn't seem so distant now.

And yeah, it's only technobabble in the wrong hands. There were days when I truly believed that Trek was like a chimpanzee with a Stradivarius. Fortunately those days weren't too frequent.

Rick
www.spacemodelsystems.com
__________________
Senior Illustrator Emeritus
Star Trek 1978-2001
Rick Sternbach is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 14 2007, 04:51 PM   #38
Unicron
Continuity Spackle
 
Unicron's Avatar
 
Location: Cybertron
Send a message via ICQ to Unicron
Re: Andy Probert releases prelim plans for USS Ambassador ki

Yeah, I think sometimes it's too tempting to just say any significant amount of technical talk in an ep is technobabble, but I don't think that's always true. Anyone who's ever watched the CSI shows will hear a fair amount of forensic lingo, and it's not always explained in a given ep. Gun shot residue is frequently abbreviated GSR for example.

__________________

"My dream is to eat candy and poop emeralds. I'm halfway successful."


Catbert, Evil Director of Human Resources
Unicron is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 15 2007, 03:45 AM   #39
Rick Sternbach
Fleet Captain
 
Re: Andy Probert releases prelim plans for USS Ambassador ki

Unicron said:
Yeah, I think sometimes it's too tempting to just say any significant amount of technical talk in an ep is technobabble, but I don't think that's always true. Anyone who's ever watched the CSI shows will hear a fair amount of forensic lingo, and it's not always explained in a given ep. Gun shot residue is frequently abbreviated GSR for example.


CSI was a good example of using terminology that was internally consistent. Same with The West Wing. I didn't understand 100% of the politcal discussions or how things in Congress worked, etc., but after a while, I got the gist of it. One of the problems with the modern-era Trek writing was that there were terms thrown in that made no real sense, like isogenic or metagenic or blahblahgenic or stuff I never would have offered to the folks banging keyboards in the Hart Building. We talked about the junk terminology here long ago, so there's no real need to go over it a whole lot more.

Rick
www.spacemodelsystems.com
__________________
Senior Illustrator Emeritus
Star Trek 1978-2001
Rick Sternbach is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 15 2007, 12:49 PM   #40
Cary L. Brown
Rear Admiral
 
Location: Austin, Texas
Re: Andy Probert releases prelim plans for USS Ambassador ki

Yep...

On-screen science talk should (1) be present because it MATTERS, and (2) should be consistent with real science.

The points made above are really spot-on. It's best to AVOID talking science in fiction, unless the fiction requires it... this is something that Roddenberry originally "got" but which got left behind later on. The idea was, in TOS, they'd never really explain what a phaser was. All the audience needed to know was what it DID. Nobody cared about "rapid nadion traces." They just cared that you'd point it, shoot it, and stun the bad guy.

I seem to recall a Roddenberry memo from "The Making of Star Trek" which pointed out how ludicrous it would have felt if, in a John Ford western, the hero were to stop and explain how his Colt pistol worked.
Cary L. Brown is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 15 2007, 05:04 PM   #41
Unicron
Continuity Spackle
 
Unicron's Avatar
 
Location: Cybertron
Send a message via ICQ to Unicron
Re: Andy Probert releases prelim plans for USS Ambassador ki

True. In fairness though, I don't mind a small amount of technobabble that uses futuristic terms like isogenic, provided it doesn't get used too often.

__________________

"My dream is to eat candy and poop emeralds. I'm halfway successful."


Catbert, Evil Director of Human Resources
Unicron is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 15 2007, 06:29 PM   #42
Rick Sternbach
Fleet Captain
 
Re: Andy Probert releases prelim plans for USS Ambassador ki

Cary L. Brown said:
Yep...

On-screen science talk should (1) be present because it MATTERS, and (2) should be consistent with real science.

The points made above are really spot-on. It's best to AVOID talking science in fiction, unless the fiction requires it... this is something that Roddenberry originally "got" but which got left behind later on. The idea was, in TOS, they'd never really explain what a phaser was. All the audience needed to know was what it DID. Nobody cared about "rapid nadion traces." They just cared that you'd point it, shoot it, and stun the bad guy.

I seem to recall a Roddenberry memo from "The Making of Star Trek" which pointed out how ludicrous it would have felt if, in a John Ford western, the hero were to stop and explain how his Colt pistol worked.
True enough, and on the show, we who helped in the tech area knew that six-shooter lesson very well. However, if a mysterious energy blast had to be analyzed to discover, for instance, who fired and with what weapon, we had to have at least some of the science worked out so that it didn't end up sounding stupid and only half-heartedly invented. There's more than enough crappy science in media SF out there; I didn't want to contribute to the steaming pile.

Rick
www.spacemodelsystems.com
__________________
Senior Illustrator Emeritus
Star Trek 1978-2001
Rick Sternbach is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 15 2007, 08:03 PM   #43
SonicRanger
Rear Admiral
 
SonicRanger's Avatar
 
Location: Sheffield, England
Re: Andy Probert releases prelim plans for USS Ambassador ki

Wait, wait -- the isogenic emitters are where on the Ambassador?




__________________
"STAR TREK is... Action - Adventure - Science Fiction."
-- Gene Roddenberry, 1964, top of the first page of his original pitch and outline for Star Trek
SonicRanger is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 16 2007, 02:57 AM   #44
GodThingFormerly
A Different Kind of Asshole
 
Location: An "American" in Friedrichshafen, Deutschland
Re: Andy Probert releases prelim plans for USS Ambassador kit!

http://www.probertdesigns.com/Folder...sador_Kit.html

The image has been updated with close-up views of the bridge superstructure and sensor radome. Just FYI.

TGT
GodThingFormerly is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 16 2007, 03:17 AM   #45
RAMA
Vice Admiral
 
RAMA's Avatar
 
Location: NJ, USA
Re: Andy Probert releases prelim plans for USS Ambassador ki

The God Thing said:
http://www.probertdesigns.com/Folder...sador_Kit.html

The image has been updated with close-up views of the bridge superstructure and sensor radome. Just FYI.

TGT
Beautiful...brings a tear to me eye! :thumbsup:
__________________
It is far better to grasp the universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring. Carl Sagan
RAMA 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 02:28 PM.

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