NCC = Not Constitution Class?

Discussion in 'Trek Tech' started by Robert Comsol, Sep 12, 2012.

  1. Robert Comsol

    Robert Comsol Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2012
    Location:
    USS Berlin
    From what I can see this vessel had two long structures port and starboard, probably paired warp engines of a somewhat different configuration.

    Alright, please allow me to take the debate to a different point of view.

    It has been observed (correctly, IMHO) that there are design elements in Matt Jefferies' TOS Enterprise that most cleverly create a familiarity with the design on the subconscious level (I prefer "unconscious" according to Professor Freud) namely for the female and male design "elements" (e.g. warp nacelles "caps", lower sensor "dome").

    If I continue these human body allusions, a pair of warp nacelles carries the allusion to a pair of walking legs, which perfectly fits the context as their prime function is to enable movement, too.

    However, a single warp nacelle design no longer carries this ambiguous allusion but limits itself to just the one "male" design element.

    Considering the size and proportions of the single nacelle in nuTrek I can't help the suspicion that someone tried to compensate for...okay, I better stop before I get a "R" rating or worse from the moderator. ;)

    Deanna Troi once said "sometimes a cigar, is just a cigar [and not a Freudian symbol]". In the case of the single warp nacelle design, however, I'm honestly not that sure.

    Bob
     
  2. blssdwlf

    blssdwlf Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2010
    Using that logic, the warp engines on the Klingon BOP in ST3 were the wingtip disruptor pods.

    Having a pair of warp engines AFAIK doesn't appear to be a requirement in Star Trek. Having FTL diversity is a plus, IMHO.
     
  3. Dukhat

    Dukhat Rear Admiral Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2007
    Location:
    Baltimore, MD
    Well, I've never been able to figure out what those long thin things are either, but what's quite clear are the large rocket engines at the aft of the ship, which seems to indicate the vessel's primary means of propulsion. FTL? Doubtful.
     
  4. Robert Comsol

    Robert Comsol Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2012
    Location:
    USS Berlin
    :confused: The two structures of the Merchantman vessel gain in volume the closer these get to the bow. What we see in the bottom view could be components of its warp engines.

    Unlike the wingtips of the Klingon BOP in ST III the purpose of these structures on the Merchantman is obviously conjectural and therefore open to interpretation.

    Bob
     
  5. Dukhat

    Dukhat Rear Admiral Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2007
    Location:
    Baltimore, MD
    Actually it's entirely possible that the whole wingspan area of those structures are the nacelles, since the Merchantman is obviously a Cardassian ship since the Union was still using the exact same design 100 years later.
     
  6. timelord1010

    timelord1010 Captain Captain

    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2004
    Location:
    Sector 001
    On the Star Trek: Enterprise season 3 episode "Twilight" the Enterprise was damaged and only had one operational nacelle and could only travel at a low warp speed so it was shown that a starship could travel with one nacelle.

    As for the ring ship the Vulcans had been using ring ships thruout ST:E run and it would stand to reason that this is where humans got the idea of the ring ship from.
     
  7. King Daniel Beyond

    King Daniel Beyond Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Nov 5, 2008
    Location:
    #istandwithcbs
    No doubt shipping Cardassian Sunrise to the worlds on the Klingon border;)
     
  8. Sean_McCormick

    Sean_McCormick Captain Captain

    Joined:
    Aug 28, 2007
    Regarding the Kelvin in nuTrek i know of the theory that the ship has two sets of warp coils, just not in separate nacelles but one set inside the other (basically like the different compressor stages in a modern jet engine).
     
  9. Dukhat

    Dukhat Rear Admiral Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2007
    Location:
    Baltimore, MD
    That's totally what those guys in STIII were doing before their ship got destroyed ;)

    iIRC, that info was just on a promotional website for the film (undoubtedly created by someone who felt they had to adhere to Gene's rule) and was not official in any way.
     
  10. Robert Comsol

    Robert Comsol Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2012
    Location:
    USS Berlin
    I have heard of that one, too. One of the reasons I feel so uncomfortable with this concept is because it additionally adds to the unpleasant "concept erosion" we already had to endure, IMHO.
    • The humanoid TOS FTL ships (U.S.S. Enterprise, Klingon Battlecruiser, "The Deadly Years" Romulan Bird of Prey, the S.S. Aurora) had warp engines spaced noticably apart from each other
    • For the TMP Enterprise Andrew Probert felt that the hazardous warp field creation between those nacelles was the major reason to do so, accordingly his Romulan Warbird design features empty space between its warp engines
    • Already with the Klingon Bird of Prey (humpbacked warp engines, apparently, unless the wings are warp drive components of some sort) the concept erosion took place and many new TNG designs (e.g. Romulan Scout) no longer followed this rule
    Proposing a concept where these warp components no longer need to have space in-between each other for warp field creation (e.g. vessels with single warp nacelle) has an inevitable retroactive continuity effect which I personally find impossible to tolerate:

    Why, then, were the warp engines of the TOS (and TMP) ships spaced apart from each other so much?!?!? :confused:

    This design adds surface space and probably has undesired effects in terms of deflector shield power consumption and defense (wider areas for enemy's targeting).

    From a practical point I'm confident that no Starfleet, Klingon or Romulan engineer would have constructed their ships the way they did, unless it was absolutely necessary for optimal FTL performance.

    Bob
     
    Last edited: Jan 20, 2014
  11. Robert Comsol

    Robert Comsol Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2012
    Location:
    USS Berlin
    Tonight we had our quarterly home theatre evening at my friend's house together with our lawyer. The Sony 4K's upscaling provided a little more clarity concerning the issue.

    We replayed the decisive scene several times (training our eyes to track the important lines and fix on the registries) and it became obvious that it is "1664". :)

    Curiously, that wasn't that clear early on with "1X97". But eventually we agreed that what was on the screen was a "1697" and not an "1897".

    Bob
     
  12. blssdwlf

    blssdwlf Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2010
    If all the ships portrayed in TOS has 2 nacelles widely spaced from each other, that would be true as a retcon. However with the existence of the no-nacelle Mudd's ship and other starships that lack nacelles (First Federation cube probe, Fesarius, Tholians, Eymorg Ion ship, etc) that puts the idea of paired nacelles as a necessity as a post-TOS myth, IMHO.

    If there was an optimal shape or design for FTL performance we'd see all races use it. Instead we get the saucer Earth ships, the long-necked Klingons, the arrow-like Tholians, the spherical First Federation, etc.
     
  13. Ronald Held

    Ronald Held Rear Admiral Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Feb 21, 2005
    Location:
    On the USS Sovereign
    Why not form reflects function? Attack or military craft might have one ftl configuration while an exploration vessel a second and slow freighters a third?
     
  14. Robert Comsol

    Robert Comsol Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2012
    Location:
    USS Berlin
    Agreed, it may not be necessary for FTL performance but might be a proven reliable Federation design and eases the task of performing maintenance and repair for Starfleet engineers.

    Someone like Scotty could fast and easily fix (or sabotage) the warp drive of the Enterprise, the Reliant or the Excelsior but might find this more difficult and time-consuming with an alien design and/or one that has less than two warp nacelles.

    Bob
     

Share This Page