Scaling the Excelsior Filming Model

Discussion in 'Trek Tech' started by Praetor, Aug 18, 2013.

  1. blssdwlf

    blssdwlf Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2010
    Yeah - the E-D had trouble upon entering the conduits as well.

    Here's the line you were thinking of:

    SEVEN: When a Borg Cube enters a transwarp conduit it's subject to extreme gravimetric shear. To compensate, the Borg project a structural integrity field ahead of the Cube. By modifying Voyager's deflector we may be able to do the same.
     
  2. Robert Comsol

    Robert Comsol Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2012
    Location:
    USS Berlin
    Gave the Blu-ray disc of ST III a spin last night. The supplementaries have an index section related to the ships. One index (Excelsior) said that transwarp caused unhealthy side-effects for the crew.

    Is this fanwank or where did this idea come from? I can't remember. Sounds like this was the end of transwarp, though I prefer the idea that the bumpers added onto the Enterprise-B contained technology to countermand such unhealthy effects.

    Bob
     
  3. Workbee

    Workbee Commander Red Shirt

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2004
    This is an interesting idea, however some of the dialogue from Styles is difficult to reconcile with this theory.

    First, Styles never specifies any particular warp factor / transwarp factor or speed.

    Since he doesn't specify the speed, and it is understood by the crew that they are now in pursuit of a fleeing ship, this order was essentially "Go fast, and step on the gas until we catch up"

    During the failed attempt to reach transwarp, the computer announces: "Transwarp Drive maximum velocity in five, four, three, two, one." The fact that such a notification would be given indicates that speeds, or at least certain speeds, will have SOME interval of acceleration and will not be achieved instantly.

    At this point, Enterprise had the lead. Excelsior is likely had not yet cleared spacedoors, and Enterprise punches up to full impulse. Even with instantaneous acceleration, he would not know for sure how much time would elapse between Enterprise jumping to warp and the Excelsior achieving Transwarp. Nor could he know for certain that Scotty didn't pull some miracle to get the Enterprise to here maximum warp faster. In order to catch up with the Enterprise with instant acceleration alone, Excelsior would have to intercept before Enterprise reached her maximum warp. Styles did not seem overly concerned about timing. He WAITED for Enterprise to go to warp before he even put the Transwarp drive on standby. No matter what Kirk did, however fast the Enterprise got to her top speed, Styles *knew* that Excelsior WAS going to overtake her.

    This to me tells me above all, Transwarp Drive lets you go faster than conventional warp drive. The continuous variable transmission idea are nice additions, but I the key point driven here is that, as far as any of the characters believed (including Scotty) is that Excelsior can go faster than Enterprise. Period.
     
  4. Workbee

    Workbee Commander Red Shirt

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2004
    duplicate post
     
    Last edited: Aug 26, 2013
  5. Timo

    Timo Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2003
    Trying to argue that the scientific concept behind the various Borg drives is one and the same is pretty futile already, as they behave so differently. That the Excelsior drive would be part of the same family is even more difficult to accept, or our heroes wouldn't be so flabbergasted by the Borg achievements, or would bring up their own achievements in "Descent" already.

    In "Descent", transwarp conduit is accepted as the name for a system that gives the ship "extremely high warp velocity". That's what all transwarp drives so far are credited with, and that's basically the only thing in common for all of them.

    But obviously there's warp involved, or people would die of old age while hopping from planet to planet!

    Anyway, when Scotty describes what he did with the beagle (namely, interplanetary beaming in the Earth to Mars category), he isn't describing what he thinks was possible with transwarp beaming - he's describing what he thinks was easy with transwarp beaming. His real aims appear to be much higher.

    Moreover, he seems to be specifically describing subspace beaming, which is different from standard beaming somehow: a 2250s expert is quoted as thinking a grapefruit can only travel about a hundred miles that way, even though our TOS heroes frequently did what looked and sounded like thousands of miles with their (supposedly non-subspace) transporters. So Scotty is talking about a subset of a subset of an achievement, and not giving us a very clear idea about the transwarp beaming concept at all.

    Excellent point! Although your idea only means that Scotty's transporter ideas and the Excelsior drive are related, not that the other examples of transwarp drive would be part of the same family.

    More specifically, they speak of "breaking the transwarp barrier", but that could well be but a moving goalpost: back in Henry Archer's time, it was Warp 5, then it became Warp 7, and in Janeway's time it's Warp 10 (on the newest scale).

    Indeed, barrier-breaking was part of "The Cage" already, as we well remember...

    Umm, the countdown is conducted while the ship is essentially immobile. So it could easily mean that at zero, the ship jumps from standstill to "transwarp drive maximum velocity" instantaneously. It would have been possible for Styles to choose an instantaneous jump from standstill to "transwarp drive 20% velocity" as well, I guess, hence the need for the wording.

    As for what this "transwarp drive maximum velocity" might be, we have no idea. It's probably specified in the manual, and is different for every transwarp engine, the way e.g. "ramjet drive maximum velocity" would be today. "All drives available through transwarp drive" doesn't necessarily mean everything from zero to infinite, either - just from zero to maximum, whatever that happens to be. It's a diagnostics message, after all: if it didn't say what it did, it would say things like "speeds from X to Y not available through transwarp drive today - awfully sorry 'bout that, boss".

    Timo Saloniemi
     
  6. Nob Akimoto

    Nob Akimoto Captain Captain

    Joined:
    May 22, 2001
    Location:
    The People's Republic of Austin
    I always rather liked Graham Kennedy's explanation of at least Federation Transwarp drives being ones that allow the use of peak transitional thresholds that exist beyond current subspace. (Hence factors like warp 13 in All Good Things...)

    Curiously we also know that the Voth have some form of transwarp, and they explicitly switch between transwarp and standard warp speeds, which suggests at least, scientifically it's supposed to be something that's not entirely compatible with standard warp drives. (That sounds more like Quantum Slipstream though...)
     
  7. blssdwlf

    blssdwlf Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2010
    Even more specifically, it's not just the "barrier" aka "crossing the threshold." They do two things:
    1. Fly at transwarp (this would be the "first Transwarp Flight")
    2. Cross the transwarp threshold aka Warp 10.

    Here we can see they accelerate at Warp to the "Critical Velocity" which appears to be after Warp 9:
    PARIS: Warp five. Warp six. Warp seven. I've reached critical velocity.
    TORRES: Okay. Everything looks good on this end. Fire up the new engines.
    Then they switch to the Transwarp drive and accelerate with that. Notice that flying at Transwarp speeds they still have to accelerate to the "threshold".
    PARIS: Acknowledged. Engaging transwarp drive in four, three, two... Transwarp on-line. Warp nine point two, nine point three. My vector's drifting.
    KIM: Try to stabilise your field symmetry.
    PARIS: Got it. Warp nine point six, nine point seven. I'm reading a fracture in the port nacelle pylon.
    TORRES: Full power to structural integrity.
    PARIS: Warp nine point nine, nine point nine five. I'm approaching the threshold. But the nacelle isn't holding!
    A later successful simulation run to the "threshold" aka Warp 10.
    PARIS: Warp nine point nine two. The pylons are secure. Everything looks good. Nine point nine seven, eight, nine. Warp ten!
    TORRES: You've crossed the threshold. You've done it. And there's been no damage to the nacelles.
    Later on in the actual flight we see that he accelerates up at Warp to past Warp 9 and then engages Transwarp which then is used to fly up to the threshold/warp barrier/Warp 10:
    PARIS: Cochrane to Voyager. All systems are nominal. I'm increasing speed.
    JANEWAY: We'll keep up with you as long as we can.
    PARIS: Warp seven, warp eight...
    TORRES: How's his dilithium matrix holding up?
    PARIS: Warp nine.
    JONAS: There's a slight variance in the warp field, but nothing to worry about.
    TORRES: Okay. Torres to shuttlecraft Cochrane. You're clear for transwarp velocity.
    PARIS: Acknowledged. Engaging transwarp drive in four, three, two...
    PARIS: Warp nine point seven, nine point eight, nine point nine.
    TUVOK: He's exceeding our maximum velocity. I'm switching to long-range sensors.
    PARIS: Warp nine point nine five!
    TUVOK: He is approaching the threshold.
    PARIS: Engine output at maximum. Velocity, warp ten.
    TUVOK: I don't believe so. Sensors indicate that he did cross the warp threshold.

    Then we get this dialogue that they made the first Transwarp flight which means Excelsior never made a Transwarp flight.
    JANEWAY: You may be interested to know I'm putting you in for a commendation. Regardless of the outcome, you did make the first transwarp flight.
    I suppose you could say "Transwarp" is the speed region between extreme high warp speeds and the "Maximum Warp Barrier" like "Transonic" is the speed region right before the speed of sound. Any drive that flies in that speed range could qualify for "Transwarp".

    As to AbramsTrek - their Warp is quite different and more akin to Stargate's/Star Wars hyperdrive so their "Transwarp" probably means and does something different than what is shown in previous Trek instances.
     
  8. Praetor

    Praetor Vice Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Apr 18, 2004
    Location:
    The fine line between continuity and fanwank.
    To the topic of transwarp momentarily. But first...

    This was mostly my conclusion, too.

    What's that now?

    You may be onto something.

    To me, transwarp has always implied deeper manipulation of subspace; warp ostensibly pushes and pulls the subspace field generated by the ship around it; maybe transwarp pushes the ship so far into subspace so as to create a corridor. And, perhaps, bringing it all around, this allows the use of any warp factor through a transwarp "conduit."

    Further, transwarp conduits can be either generated by the ship, or by something external, such as the Borg's hubs.

    But, "Threshold" also establishes transwarp flight to be at warp 10. Now, I'm apt to include what can be gleaned from "Threshold" somehow, lizards aside. Can we somehow marry warp 10 with transwarp and transwarp corridors?

    So therein, coupled with what we saw in "Descent" and "Threshold," I think we have sufficient evidence that deeper subspace immersion has negative effects firstly on the dilithium through which the reaction takes place, and also on structural integrity of the ship overall.

    I think that's based on the lizards of "Threshold." If the bumpers had transwarp safety equipment, then why wouldn't all Excelsiors have them?

    Great point to consider. I think it lines up somewhat with Transwarp = Warp 10.

    I think you're right. It seems like Styles might have planned to drop into transwarp (into a corridor maybe) and then pop out ahead of the Enterprise.

    Interesting - so in this case, it would be yet another recalibration to discover, newer, better peak transitional thresholds?

    Thank you for this writeup. I ain't even touching what the Abramsverse does with transwarp. Not that I don't care or anything. :)

    From everyone's observations so far, I am starting to see a new pattern:

    1. Transwarp drive use deeper subspace immersion to push the ship even faster than the conventional range.
    2. Transwarp drive can either (a) be generated by a starship (requiring the ship to accelerate to the warp 9.9+ range before engaging transwarp drive) or (b) without acceleration, making use of a subspace network of conduits (i.e. the Borg method.)
    3. Transwarp drive (a) appears to not create a visibile conduit at all.
    4. Transwarp drive is hazardous to a ship's dilithium and structural integrity. Higher grade dilithium and structural integrity improvements can alleviate these.
    5. Transwarp drive (a) can be installed alongside a conventional warp drive.
    6. Transwarp drive (b) requires no special hardware.
    7. Warp 10 is considered the transwarp barrier. The first successful flight was made by the Shuttlecraft Cochrane, albeit with unforeseen consequences.
    8. Quantum slipstream is another way of doing the same thing, but may be a compromise between (a) and (b); it appears that it enables the ship to generate its own conduit.
    So, I'm now seeing that Excelsior may have been equipped with a fancy-shmancy new warp core, designed to generate sufficient power to (1) propel the ship to warp 9.9 on the new scale, and (2) power a transwarp drive once it got there. Therefore, the Excelsior can be both the testbed for a next generation of warp drive, necessary for facilitating the transwarp experiments, and for a failed transwarp drive. "The Great Experiment" indeed.

    I'm uncertain, however, on just what form the failed transwarp drive may've taken. I wonder how the Shuttlecraft Cochrane's "new engines" would have worked? Presumably, there was some component installed in the nacelles in addition to the warp coils, since reference was made to them shearing off. Perhaps this in tandem with some deflector modifications?

    Thoughts?
     
  9. Avro Arrow

    Avro Arrow Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2003
    Location:
    In Diefenbaker's Nightmares
    Sorry 'bout that. It was a reference to one of my favourite Trek novels, Prime Directive by Garfield and Judith Reeves-Stevens. One of the guest characters was Lt. Styles of the USS Monitor... and the book showed he was an asshat well before he made captain! :lol:
     
  10. blssdwlf

    blssdwlf Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2010
    I took it that "Threshold" established Transwarp flight to be anything above the top speed of warp drive all the way up to the barrier. When Paris engaged the Transwarp drive, he still had some acceleration to go before hitting the barrier so he was flying at Transwarp at the time. He just pushed it all the way up to the barrier. In the same sense, "Descent" showed that the Borg Transwarp "Conduits" accelerated ships in it to speeds many times faster than their fastest warp drive. They both are operating at Transwarp speeds.

    The "barrier" or "threshold" would technically be going faster than Transwarp. I guess Janeway's commendation should've been instead, "Regardless of the outcome, you did break the Transwarp Barrier" or something like that.

    I was envisioning it more like the Excelsior engaging Transwarp and then surging ahead and blowing by the Enterprise only to have to slow down for the Enterprise to catch up. From the different times we've seen Transwarp in action it still is interacting with normal space in some sense.

    The difference between the Excelsior and "Threshold" could be that in TSFS they lacked a sufficiently stable dilithium crystal.
    PARIS: We discovered a new form of dilithium in the asteroid field we surveyed last month. It remains stable at a much higher warp frequency.
    So it would seem you need better dilithium and reinforcement of the hull so it doesn't fly apart and a fast warp drive plus a Transwarp drive. Perhaps they just built a shuttle-sized Transwarp drive from the Excelsior's blueprints?

    Conduits you just need possibly a Transwarp coil, better deflectors and a conduit?
     
  11. Crazy Eddie

    Crazy Eddie Vice Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2006
    Location:
    I'm in your ___, ___ing your ___
    Why would you expect them to behave the same? "The normal subspace limitations don't apply" is vague at best, since many of those limitations may or may not have anything to do with speed. As with transonic fuel injection: an internal combustion engine doesn't behave anything like a supersonic aircraft, even if they use the same principal in their design.

    It's not. It's a drive that uses transwarp physics to enhance the performance of a conventional warp drive in some significant way. Borg transwarp conduits also use transwarp physics, but they obviously apply it in a different way and are thus a totally different drive system.

    No, it's accepted as the name of a STRUCTURE through which the Enterprise traveled. As far as we can tell, there isn't an enormous difference between a transwarp conduit and a wormhole, except the former is implies transwarp physics and the latter uses relativistic physics.

    Do people age during beaming?:confused:

    SCOTTY: I had a little debate with my instructor on the issue of relativistic physics and how it pertains to subspace travel. He seemed to think that the range of transporting something like a, like a grapefruit, was limited to about a hundred miles. I told him that I could not only beam a grapefruit from one planet to the adjacent planet in the same system, which is easy by the way, I could do it with a lifeform. So, I tested it on Admiral Archer's prized beagle.

    Beaming a grapefruit is easy. Beaming a Beagle is hard. And Scotty's point appears to be that transwarp physics would allow for a transporter system to bypass the normal limitations of relativity.

    They're definitely not part of the same family. But the same scientific concepts almost certainly apply to both.


    Or that their computer drive was so screwed up by Scotty's sabotage that it had no idea what the hell was going on.
     
  12. Crazy Eddie

    Crazy Eddie Vice Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2006
    Location:
    I'm in your ___, ___ing your ___
    In which case it might be as simple as "transwarp drive" being "Any warp drive capable of exceeding warp nine."

    It seems a conventional warp drive overclocked to the point of almost destroying itself could do this too (see Babel and That Which Survives) but a specifically named "transwarp" drive is a drive system that can do this as a matter of course. This would be the difference between, say, a jet aircraft that can achieve supersonic speed in a dive (e.g. F-86 Saber) and an aircraft that can do it in level flight (e.g. F-100 Super Saber).
     
  13. Praetor

    Praetor Vice Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Apr 18, 2004
    Location:
    The fine line between continuity and fanwank.
    That works for me. :techman:

    That... makes perfect sense. I guess I'll need to decide what the transwarp element actually would be in the nacelles... unless it's just "changing gears" in the nacelles, somehow.

    I like it. :techman:

    I've started thinking - just like the original Enterprise and Enterprise-D are not truly represented by one model, neither is the Excelsior. The dozens of CGI Excelsiors were based on the Jein model, after all - a fact which escaped me when I formulated my original premise and chose to ignore it.

    The real goal of this thread was to find if the Excelsior might be a different size than what has been established, as it affects me going forward with my TM project.The preponderance of evidence may simply make it easier to keep the ship at 467 meters.

    I'm going to try scaling the Jein model as best I can and see what I come up with. I'm hoping Mr. Jein used a "corrected" bridge dome size on the model, much as he corrected the window rows to better fit a 467 meter size. I'm somewhat afraid if I pull at this thread, I might wind up rescaling every ship whose size is not canonically known... and that's something I just am not prepared to do.

    Does anyone have a top view of the Jein Excelsior?
     
    Last edited: Aug 27, 2013
  14. Robert Comsol

    Robert Comsol Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2012
    Location:
    USS Berlin
    I don't but digging through my ST III materials (still looking for the trading cards) I found my color xerox blow ups of the trading cards with perfect top and bottom views (part of the chasm included) of NX-2000. I'll send you these later today.

    In the Cinefantastique magazine, next to the original ILM size comparison chart enhanced by Andrew Probert, there is also a size comparison chart with Earth Spacedock measurements and - the Excelsior (no measurements). Compared to the popular size comparison chart the illustration is rather vague and rough but I'll provide the measurements anyway, just to be on the safe side. ;)

    Bob
     
  15. Praetor

    Praetor Vice Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Apr 18, 2004
    Location:
    The fine line between continuity and fanwank.
    Thanks, Bob.

    Well, I found two pictures of the top of the Jein version. (You can tell by the fact that the name lettering is not curved like the registry.) I'll post them later, but sufficed to say the bridge dome looks pretty much the same as it does on the larger ILM model. Daaaaaamn.

    So even though it appears Jein tried to correct the scale of the model to the official 467 meter size via the window rows, the bridge module still keeps the futzed up, tiny shape.

    That leaves us with three choices, as I see it:

    1) Scale the ship to the ILM window rows, and ignore the bridge module
    2) Scale the ship to the Jein window rows, and ignore the bridge module
    3) Scale the ship to the official size, and ignore the bridge module

    Sigh.

    I may go ahead and try the second choice, for fun. It may end up coinciding with 467 meters.
     
  16. Crazy Eddie

    Crazy Eddie Vice Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2006
    Location:
    I'm in your ___, ___ing your ___
    I still think it works a little bit better at one of the larger proposed scales, somewhere upwards of 500 meters or more. My current unsolicited opinion is that it works better at that size and the lower "conservative" scale is at least partially a reaction to nerd rage "How could they build something that much bigger than the Enterprise?!" from the fans.
     
  17. Praetor

    Praetor Vice Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Apr 18, 2004
    Location:
    The fine line between continuity and fanwank.
    I think I'm going to do some simple scalings of the exterior view of the ship against the Enterprise, the Galileo-5 shuttle, and other ships at different sizes. At this point, the only thing that 467 meters has going for it, in my mind, is that it's "official." There's enough evidence for both sizes that I think any is supportable.
     
  18. Praetor

    Praetor Vice Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Apr 18, 2004
    Location:
    The fine line between continuity and fanwank.
    Ok, forgive me for double posting.

    These are the images of the Jein Excelsior model I spoke of earlier. Among other things, you can tell it's the Jein model by the fact that the name lettering is straight instead of curved. There are also minor details in paint scheme and such.

    [​IMG][​IMG]

    That bridge dome is too narrow at any of the supposed sizes, and really too small overall.

    This, meanwhile, is the relativistic comparison I mentioned earlier.
    [​IMG]

    This presupposes a 305 meter Enterprise refit and 642 meter Enterprise-D, as well as a 3800 meter diameter for Spacedock.

    The two versions of Excelsior shown are scaled to 467 meters and King Daniel's IMO excellent 622 meter size, which fits nicely with the ILM model scaling. The Space Dock doors (assuming they are somewhat accurate) are too small for either version. I'm torn between the two sizes. The details seem to fit better with the Constitution at the smaller size.

    Thoughts?
     
  19. Nob Akimoto

    Nob Akimoto Captain Captain

    Joined:
    May 22, 2001
    Location:
    The People's Republic of Austin
    Regardless of the size of the ship, this actually reminds me of just how absurdly large Spacedock (and subsequent variations as starbases) are. Just in terms of sheer habitable volume, these things are more space colonies than starbases.
     
  20. King Daniel Beyond

    King Daniel Beyond Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Nov 5, 2008
    Location:
    #istandwithcbs
    There's a further possibility, albeit one that requires completely ignoring the MSD at the back of the Enterprise-B bridge - wider deck spacings. Scale it to the tiny bridge module (I think I worked out 777m) and add gaps between decks for machinery etc, while still lining up with window rows. It's how the new movie Enterprise is arranged, going by the 725m size and atrium set, which works out a perfect match for the saucer-rim windows.
    [​IMG]