RSS iconTwitter iconFacebook icon

The Trek BBS title image

The Trek BBS statistics

Threads: 138,151
Posts: 5,343,756
Members: 24,596
Currently online: 563
Newest member: Steve0811

TrekToday headlines

New Funko Trek Figure
By: T'Bonz on Jul 21

Saldana As A Role Model
By: T'Bonz on Jul 21

San Diego Comic-Con Trek Fan Guide
By: T'Bonz on Jul 21

Cumberbatch As Turing
By: T'Bonz on Jul 21

Retro Review: In the Pale Moonlight
By: Michelle on Jul 19

Trek Beach Towel
By: T'Bonz on Jul 18

Two New Starships Collection Releases
By: T'Bonz on Jul 17

Giacchino Tour Arrives In North America
By: T'Bonz on Jul 17

IDW Publishing October Star Trek Comics
By: T'Bonz on Jul 16

Cho As Romantic Lead
By: T'Bonz on Jul 16


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 Fandom > Fan Art

Fan Art Post your Trek fan art here, including hobby models and collectibles.

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old May 12 2009, 05:58 AM   #151
Cary L. Brown
Rear Admiral
 
Location: Austin, Texas
Re: Another take on the Original Enterprise...

Gep Malakai wrote: View Post
Maybe a silly question, but: how good a simulation of reality is this engineering software? By which I mean, if you build something in there, can you operate it and see if it really would work? If so, would it be possible to fuel this thing up and try to fly it/subject it to the g-forces it would experience and see if it would really operate?
It's not "silly" but I'd need rooms full of supercomputers to do that sort of thing. As it is, the Vega got so large that it overwhelmed my system (part of why I'm leaving it... which is a much more complicated ship than this one is... alone for the time being. Until I get a new machine that can handle it!)

What this does is models volumes, and can calculate mass properties (that is... assign the proper material to all your bits and pieces and you'll know exactly how much it weights, what the center of gravity is, the center of inertia, etc, etc.

I can also simulate mechanisms... and basic kinematics. That is.. I can apply a force and it will tell me how the part responds. I can model all sorts of mechanical elements (springs, pins, cams, etc). This lets you do complete mechanisms.

For instance... a transit vehicle door system I did once, I drove through the physical motion by applying an "air pressure" value. This told me how fast, and with what force, the door would operate, given a particular air pressure supplied by the vehicle... and since there are safety regulations dictating that you can't have a door which slams on someone standing in it and cut them in half, is sort of important!

But... "fueling it up?" Not so much. There is other software which CAN do that, but that's a different problem and requires a different means of solution. Propulsion systems... that's really out of the realm of this. At best, I can determine how fast the ship will spin out of control if the impulse engines aren't located properly!
Cary L. Brown is offline  
Old May 12 2009, 06:12 AM   #152
Gep Malakai
Vice Admiral
 
Gep Malakai's Avatar
 
Send a message via AIM to Gep Malakai Send a message via Windows Live Messenger to Gep Malakai
Re: Another take on the Original Enterprise...

Cary L. Brown wrote: View Post
But... "fueling it up?" Not so much. There is other software which CAN do that, but that's a different problem and requires a different means of solution. Propulsion systems... that's really out of the realm of this. At best, I can determine how fast the ship will spin out of control if the impulse engines aren't located properly!
Now that's something I'd be interested in seeing, especially given the seemingly random locations of impulse engines on Starfleet ships.
__________________
"From the darkness you must fall, failed and weak, to darkness all."
-Kataris
Gep Malakai is offline  
Old May 12 2009, 06:18 AM   #153
Cary L. Brown
Rear Admiral
 
Location: Austin, Texas
Re: Another take on the Original Enterprise...

Gep Malakai wrote: View Post
Cary L. Brown wrote: View Post
But... "fueling it up?" Not so much. There is other software which CAN do that, but that's a different problem and requires a different means of solution. Propulsion systems... that's really out of the realm of this. At best, I can determine how fast the ship will spin out of control if the impulse engines aren't located properly!
Now that's something I'd be interested in seeing, especially given the seemingly random locations of impulse engines on Starfleet ships.
This is why I'm a big fan of multiple impulse-engine emplacements... something seen on the 1701-D and which I implemented on Vega... where you can simply adjust thrust on a per-unit basis to handle all of this... no "nozzle vectoring" required.

In the case of the 1701, we'll have to have some vectoring, upwards or downwards... meaning the ship may occasionally fly "nose down" if he cargo deck is heavily loaded (see the opening credit sequences, though, where it seems to be doing that!). But the nacelles are, combined, volumetrically equivalent to the secondary hull, and they're probably much more dense, so my assumption is that the ship will be pretty well balanced for its engine location. (And if it's not... just make the engines heavier!)
Cary L. Brown is offline  
Old May 12 2009, 06:24 AM   #154
Gep Malakai
Vice Admiral
 
Gep Malakai's Avatar
 
Send a message via AIM to Gep Malakai Send a message via Windows Live Messenger to Gep Malakai
Re: Another take on the Original Enterprise...

Cary L. Brown wrote: View Post
This is why I'm a big fan of multiple impulse-engine emplacements... something seen on the 1701-D and which I implemented on Vega... where you can simply adjust thrust on a per-unit basis to handle all of this... no "nozzle vectoring" required.
The other option being the ever-popular fan theory that the glowy red parts of the impulse engines don't provide thrust at all and just dump waste heat, while the actual propulsion it handled by some kind of non-Newtonain subspace magic. Which would also explain how ships can stop dead without forward-facing engine outlets or spinning 180 degrees to decelerate.
__________________
"From the darkness you must fall, failed and weak, to darkness all."
-Kataris
Gep Malakai is offline  
Old May 12 2009, 06:43 AM   #155
Cary L. Brown
Rear Admiral
 
Location: Austin, Texas
Re: Another take on the Original Enterprise...

Gep Malakai wrote: View Post
Cary L. Brown wrote: View Post
This is why I'm a big fan of multiple impulse-engine emplacements... something seen on the 1701-D and which I implemented on Vega... where you can simply adjust thrust on a per-unit basis to handle all of this... no "nozzle vectoring" required.
The other option being the ever-popular fan theory that the glowy red parts of the impulse engines don't provide thrust at all and just dump waste heat, while the actual propulsion it handled by some kind of non-Newtonain subspace magic. Which would also explain how ships can stop dead without forward-facing engine outlets or spinning 180 degrees to decelerate.
Which is just fine if you don't call it "impulse." Because the word "impulse" is a real, technical term with a real, established meaning.

An impulse is a force applied over time. It's inherently a Newtonian term. It is utterly fundamental to all mechanics. If someone's talking about this and isn't familiar with the term, they should read up on it.

Call your propulsion system something else... "sublight drive" or whatever... and you can get away with that. But you can't take a real word and totally bastardize the meaning of the word. That's like saying a "light" is something where you turn a knob and water comes out.
Cary L. Brown is offline  
Old May 12 2009, 06:48 AM   #156
Gep Malakai
Vice Admiral
 
Gep Malakai's Avatar
 
Send a message via AIM to Gep Malakai Send a message via Windows Live Messenger to Gep Malakai
Re: Another take on the Original Enterprise...

Cary L. Brown wrote: View Post
Which is just fine if you don't call it "impulse." Because the word "impulse" is a real, technical term with a real, established meaning.
I know. But the way Trek uses it is just dumb.

Cary L. Brown wrote: View Post
An impulse is a force applied over time. It's inherently a Newtonian term. It is utterly fundamental to all mechanics. If someone's talking about this and isn't familiar with the term, they should read up on it.
Of course, As Laurence Krauss pointed out in "The Physics of Star Trek," the way "impulse" is used in Trek would more properly be called "thrust," since (if I'm remembering the chapter properly) they sacrifice building force over time for quick acceleration. So, you know, Trek strikes out again...
__________________
"From the darkness you must fall, failed and weak, to darkness all."
-Kataris
Gep Malakai is offline  
Old May 12 2009, 08:22 AM   #157
Gagarin
Commander
 
Re: Another take on the Original Enterprise...

Lots of goodies in your post, Cary, especially with the impusle engines and reactor stuff. Which reminds me - what about RCS stuff? When or how are you planning to tackle them? (Sorry if you've already gotten to that issue in this thread, the eye candy is distracting).
Gagarin is offline  
Old May 12 2009, 09:55 AM   #158
Herkimer Jitty
Rear Admiral
 
Herkimer Jitty's Avatar
 
Location: Dayglow, New California Republic
Send a message via Windows Live Messenger to Herkimer Jitty
Re: Another take on the Original Enterprise...

Cary L. Brown wrote: View Post
Which is just fine if you don't call it "impulse." Because the word "impulse" is a real, technical term with a real, established meaning.
.
If someone really wanted to use a magic non-Newtonian drive, they could retcon impulse to an acronym, like how Phaser was meant to be a portmanteau of "phased" and "laser" and got retconned to PHASed Energy Rectification.
__________________
"What?" - { Emilia }
Herkimer Jitty is offline  
Old May 12 2009, 12:39 PM   #159
EJD1984
Commander
 
EJD1984's Avatar
 
Location: Baltimore, MD
Re: Another take on the Original Enterprise...

Looks like you're using ProE Wildfire.
__________________
NXX-1701
EJD1984 is offline  
Old May 12 2009, 06:54 PM   #160
Praetor
Vice Admiral
 
Praetor's Avatar
 
Location: The fine line between continuity and fanwank.
Re: Another take on the Original Enterprise...

Cary, I'm really liking this engineering setup at the back of the saucer, and the capabilities that you're giving the power/propulsion systems regarding power adaptability/reconnectivity and generating a low-level warpish field via fusion power. They seem to foggily fit well with the varying depictions of impulse power being used for interstellar travel when maybe it really shouldn't have been. And kudos for making the impulse engines VASIMRs. I think they're a good modern fit.
__________________
"If you can't take a little bloody nose, maybe you ought to go back home and crawl under your bed. It's not safe out here. It's wondrous, with treasures to satiate desires both subtle and gross; but it's not for the timid." - Q
Praetor is offline  
Old May 12 2009, 07:24 PM   #161
BK613
Captain
 
BK613's Avatar
 
Location: BK613
Re: Another take on the Original Enterprise...

Cary L. Brown wrote: View Post
But you can't take a real word and totally bastardize the meaning of the word.
But we do that all the time. Whenever something new comes along, either new terms are invented or old terms are adapted/reinvented. Just some examples:

-ping, which came from the operation of sonar and now is also a ICMP command for testing connectivity
-boot, which now means "start the device" but comes from "bootstrap program" which in turn comes from the phrase "pull one up by one's bootstraps"
-switching, which went from railroad to telephony to networking
-aircraft, wow, do we even want to go here, with port/starboard, rudder, pilot, hull, cockpit, turret, etc. all being borrowed from nautical terminology, and some of those, like turret, were in turn borrowed and redefined from earlier times.

So the idea that "impulse" could have a broader--or even completely different-- connotation than the classic Newtonian one is, to me anyway, entirely reasonable.
__________________
-------------------
"The single biggest problem with communication is the illusion that it has taken place." - George Bernard Shaw
BK613 is offline  
Old May 12 2009, 07:52 PM   #162
Santaman
Rear Admiral
 
Santaman's Avatar
 
Location: A little while in the past.
Re: Another take on the Original Enterprise...

Interplanetary Medium Power Unified Large coil Sub Light Energy drive?
__________________
"Sword is personal, brings slicing to a man, you getta that personal feedback, nuclear weapons?.. Meh, goes off big bang and you don't get any feeling.."
Santaman is offline  
Old May 12 2009, 09:58 PM   #163
Wingsley
Commodore
 
Wingsley's Avatar
 
Location: Wingsley
Re: Another take on the Original Enterprise...

RIKER: "Increase to Warp 6"

LAFORGE: "Aye, sir. Full impulse."

TNG - "Conspiracy"


-
__________________
"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.
Wingsley is offline  
Old May 13 2009, 12:01 AM   #164
Cary L. Brown
Rear Admiral
 
Location: Austin, Texas
Re: Another take on the Original Enterprise...

Wingsley wrote: View Post
RIKER: "Increase to Warp 6"

LAFORGE: "Aye, sir. Full impulse."

TNG - "Conspiracy"

I think that's a great example of the "Peter Principle!"


Honestly, we all know that Trek is chock-full of inconsistencies. It's not actually REAL, after all, and hell, half the world doesn't even care to keep their opinions about "reality" consistent with reality. So it's largely pointless to expect there to never be anything inconsistent with "Treknology."

Still, given all the stuff that's built up over the years, the original concepts (whether we're talking Jefferies, Chang, Minor, Probert, Sternbach, Okuda, etc) are often very well-thought-out... and the inconsistencies crop up later due to other folks not paying attention to the original, well-thought-out concepts. In those cases, I tend to disregard the "bad writing" or "bad directing" or "bad effects" or "bad production" elements and try to stick with the original idea as closely as possible. I don't totally toss the "bad stories" so much as mentally "retcon" them.

For instance, I'm sure that in "real" Star Trek reality (ahem), "Spock's Brain" really happened. But I'm sure that the "real" events were dramatically different than what we saw on-screen. Sort of like what we saw was a really poorly-done "documentary" performed in some 24th-century kid's basement on his eyeball-top-computer.

Actually, "Spock's Brain" could be turned into a decent... even very effective... story. You'd have to totally rewrite it, lose the "Robo-Spock" bit... but the idea of stealing a brain to become the central element of a computer system isn't inherently a bad one, nor is the idea of a society where knowledge has been kept away from the population and only granted... "doled out" so to speak"... when some central power decides it's appropriate.

That would be an interesting project... especially for those here who are more prose-oriented than I am. I'm a big-picture guy and a tech guy... I can come up with great ideas and stories, and I can come up with all variety of technological concepts, but I can't write dialog if my life depends on it!

My point... I engage in "selective mental rewriting" of elements which simply don't work, either in terms of believability or execution. I certainly don't believe that the 1701-D fires phasers from its torpedo tubes, nor that the defiant randomly changes size, nor that every single woman on the "real" TOS Enterprise got the job on some 23rd-century equivalent of Gene Roddenberry's casting couch!

And "Warp 6"... "Full Impulse" is just one of those.

(Either that or Geordi had been drinking... which does raise some interesting "rewriting" options, too!)
Cary L. Brown is offline  
Old May 13 2009, 12:12 AM   #165
Praetor
Vice Admiral
 
Praetor's Avatar
 
Location: The fine line between continuity and fanwank.
Re: Another take on the Original Enterprise...

Cary L. Brown wrote: View Post
For instance, I'm sure that in "real" Star Trek reality (ahem), "Spock's Brain" really happened. But I'm sure that the "real" events were dramatically different than what we saw on-screen. Sort of like what we saw was a really poorly-done "documentary" performed in some 24th-century kid's basement on his eyeball-top-computer.
You've single-handedly summarized the way I like to look at irreconcilable Trek continuity gaffs for my own 'canon.'
__________________
"If you can't take a little bloody nose, maybe you ought to go back home and crawl under your bed. It's not safe out here. It's wondrous, with treasures to satiate desires both subtle and gross; but it's not for the timid." - Q
Praetor is offline  
Closed Thread

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 02:34 PM.

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