Star Trek 2009 timeline disruption, technology alteration

[Mytran]

Interesting! I've often presumed that the Enterprise (in that episode) was able to achieve such a high speed because it was "piggybacking" along the subspace corridor effect left by the alien transporter beam which moved the ship 997 light years in the first place (technology that fierce must generate a considerable after effect).

Maybe the NuEnterprise's engines are able to generate a localised weakness in the subspace layer, allowing it to achieve massively higher speeds than their TOS equivalent? I'm sure this eventually causes massive damage to local subspace (as illustrated in that TNG episode) but that's OK - it's analogous to the environmental damage caused in the 20th Century by early combustion engines; no-one knew better!

 

[blssdwlf]

Don't forget "Breads and Circuses" and "Obsession" which both give a cruising Enterprise a speed about 400,000c. Considering that in TOS traveling a 1,000-1,500 ly in a short time never seemed to be an issue ("Obsession", "That Which Survives", "Arena"). TOS warp drive did slow down dramatically for in-system travel though.

 

[Mytran]

From Bread & Circuses I assume you mean this line:

CHEKOV: Only one sixteenth parsec away, Captain. We should be there in seconds.

That's certainly quite a zippy speed, especially for within close range of a star! Then again, maybe a parsec isn't always a parsec?
http://www.trekbbs.com/showthread.php?t=272386

Obsession is bit more complicated. Later in the episode, when Kirk decides to travel to Tycho IV (the gas creature's homeworld) we are informed that to travel there and back will take 1.7 days. We also know that Tycho IV is 1,000 LY away from the planet at the beginning of the episode. Unfortunately, we do not know exactly where the Enterprise is when it begins the final 1.7 day round trip, since it's been chasing the gas creature for an unknown length of time at this stage.

If we compare it to Arena (almost exactly a year prior, production-wise) then Warp 8 could not have been maintained for long on that initial chase. Fortunately, there's nothing to say how long the chase lasted - it could be several days at Warp Six (which would be slower than 400,000c but still far in excess of TNG speeds)

Of course, all this speculation is solely reliant on Kirk's initial statement that Tycho IV is "over a thousand light years away". Is it really that far? It could be just a bit of 23rd Century space-Navy slang to mean any great distance. Kirk says it again to Chancellor Gorkon in ST6:TUC, a film that had been brought into line with TNG's terminology and scale (or so I thought). But, if Kirk did indeed meet Gorkon at a midway point between the two systems then that could be 2,000 LY separating the respective planets. DS9 did a fairly consistent job at presenting all these locations much closer to each other, so I am inclined to think that on both occasions, Kirk was just employing a bit of space-slang.

 

[Timo]

This could even be applied to "That Which Survives", despite it being Spock doing the hyperbole that time around.

After all, the half-Vulcan did once claim Vulcan was "a million lightyears" away from Sarpeidon...

Perhaps "990.7 ly, to be exact" is how "a thousand lightyears" reads out in Vulcan years? Or then it's the classic Vulcan punchline to the joke.

Timo Saloniemi

 

[Mytran]

While Spock has been shown to have a fairly dry sense of humour at times, I think he would draw the line when it comes to numerical facts - mathematical precision is his bread and butter, at least when he's in his right mind...which brings us to All Our Yesterdays. Here, our good Half Vulcan Science Officer was starting to be affected by being out of touch with the telepathic influence of his homeworld - IOW, going bonkers. As such, I'd permit him a little poetic hyperbole, especially when trying to impress the locals. Or local.

 

[blssdwlf]

From Bread & Circuses I assume you mean this line:

CHEKOV: Only one sixteenth parsec away, Captain. We should be there in seconds.

That's certainly quite a zippy speed, especially for within close range of a star!

Actually it's in line with approaching from outside of a star system. We consistently see the high warp=low c when the ship is really close to the star (like 1 AU or so.)

Obsession is bit more complicated. Later in the episode, when Kirk decides to travel to Tycho IV (the gas creature's homeworld) we are informed that to travel there and back will take 1.7 days. We also know that Tycho IV is 1,000 LY away from the planet at the beginning of the episode. Unfortunately, we do not know exactly where the Enterprise is when it begins the final 1.7 day round trip, since it's been chasing the gas creature for an unknown length of time at this stage.

True. But we do know that at the beginning of the episode the Enterprise is 7 hours away from the Yorktown so we can get a range of speeds because she has to head back to within 7 hours of her starting point of Argus-10 to make the rendezvous. The starting point just helps us narrow it down more.

The Enterprise could have been just a few light years away from Tycho when calculating the 1.7 day (40 hour) round trip back or nearly a 1,000 LY away from Tycho necessitating a 2,000 LY round trip. The speed range could be between 1,000LY / 40 hours (200,000C) and 2,000LY / 40 hours (400,000C).

Of course, all this speculation is solely reliant on Kirk's initial statement that Tycho IV is "over a thousand light years away". Is it really that far?

I'm inclined to think it is because that's consistent with other speeds between star systems in TOS.

It could be just a bit of 23rd Century space-Navy slang to mean any great distance.

Perhaps. But Kirk also was factually correct about the time in the same sentence and he wasn't corrected or called out on being dramatic on either statement.

KIRK: And what if it is the same creature that attacked eleven years ago from a planet over a thousand light years from here?
SPOCK: Obviously, Captain, if it is an intelligent creature, if it is the same one, if it therefore is capable of space travel, it could pose a great threat to inhabited planets.
​

Kirk says it again to Chancellor Gorkon in ST6:TUC, a film that had been brought into line with TNG's terminology and scale (or so I thought). But, if Kirk did indeed meet Gorkon at a midway point between the two systems then that could be 2,000 LY separating the respective planets.

Not sure. I thought in context the dialogue could mean possibly several things:

1. Kirk was able to obtain the ale because he operated 1,000LY away from Fed HQ.
2. They are actually 1,000 LY from Fed HQ (Earth?) at the rendezvous. However this doesn't tell us where they are relative to Earth and Quonos. Are they between them? Or did Gorkon come in from a very indirect route?
3. It doesn't tell us where Quonos is or how far away it is.

KERLA: Captain Kirk, I thought Romulan ale was illegal.
KIRK: One of the advantages of being a thousand light years from Federation headquarters.
​

OTOH, 24 hours seems to be the number Colonel West comes up with for an armed retrieval operation into Klingon space, Quonos, perhaps.

And, in TMP, Vger traveling at warp from Klingon space to Earth takes 3 days so perhaps 1,000 LY isn't too far off for Earth to the border in TUC?

DS9 did a fairly consistent job at presenting all these locations much closer to each other, so I am inclined to think that on both occasions, Kirk was just employing a bit of space-slang.

I count DS9 as different from TOS as it's more from the TNG production so their distances will likely be different, IMO

 

[Mytran]

From Bread & Circuses I assume you mean this line:

CHEKOV: Only one sixteenth parsec away, Captain. We should be there in seconds.

That's certainly quite a zippy speed, especially for within close range of a star!

Actually it's in line with approaching from outside of a star system. We consistently see the high warp=low c when the ship is really close to the star (like 1 AU or so.)

I guess we're not using my parsec theory then? Ah, well

So, let's assume that a Parsec is indeed a Parsec of 3.26 Light Years. Of course, I can't but help agree with your point about ships slowing down near suns. However, we are dealing with the wreckage of a spaceship that was destroyed by the Roman planet and has been drifting for only 6 years. So, surely it's within close range of the sun, right? As a point of comparison to real life, the Voyager 1 probe has travelled 18 billion kilometres in 37 years since its launch. The Beagle wreckage? Well, 1/16 parsec is just under 2 trillion kilometres. TWO TRILLION. That wreckage must have had a hell of a boost at the start, it "drifted" 642 times faster! Maybe a side effect of the main reactor explosion?

But regardless of how the wreckage got there, we still have a rare example of specific time and distance in TOS, as Chekov informs Kirk that the planet is "only 1/16 of a parsec away" and that they should be there in "seconds". Sure enough, after only 30 seconds of continuous dialogue later they are in orbit! 1/16 parsec in 30 seconds is 214,329(c) but I'll follow Blssdwlf's trend and call it 200,000C for simplicity

The Enterprise could have been just a few light years away from Tycho when calculating the 1.7 day (40 hour) round trip back or nearly a 1,000 LY away from Tycho necessitating a 2,000 LY round trip. The speed range could be between 1,000LY / 40 hours (200,000C) and 2,000LY / 40 hours (400,000C).

Of course, coupled with these calculations we have a pretty good stake in the sand for Enterprise's "standard cruising" speed. FWIW, This would put the various Warp Factors in the region of WF^7 (compared to the "official" WF^3). Here's how that looks:

No wonder Scotty was so concerned in Arena about increasing to Warp 8 - that's over a million times faster!

I count DS9 as different from TOS as it's more from the TNG production so their distances will likely be different, IMO

Actually, this need not be the case. DS9's seeming "shrinkage" of the Federation might actually be reversed if we maintain the higher TOS speeds. Anomalies like Voyager taking 75 years to cross (a minuscule) 70,000 LY could be justified through the ship having suffered serious damage by the Caretaker. We also don't know how long starships (especially the TOS-E) have to rest and make repairs after each of their 1,000LY jaunts. Perhaps 400,000(c) is simply not sustainable for consecutive days and their average yearly speed is considerably lower?

There's also the issue of the TNG (re-jigged) Warp Scale, so here's a thought: By putting Warp 10 at "infinity", what if this had the effect of reducing the speed of the relative Warp Factors below number 10?

 

[blssdwlf]

From Bread & Circuses I assume you mean this line:
That's certainly quite a zippy speed, especially for within close range of a star!

Actually it's in line with approaching from outside of a star system. We consistently see the high warp=low c when the ship is really close to the star (like 1 AU or so.)

I guess we're not using my parsec theory then? Ah, well

I think for purposes of this discussion I haven't found anything specific that would change the meaning of "parsec" in TOS so I'm keeping it simple by using 3.26 LY. I've got some comments about your thread but I'll post in there instead of here

So, let's assume that a Parsec is indeed a Parsec of 3.26 Light Years. Of course, I can't but help agree with your point about ships slowing down near suns. However, we are dealing with the wreckage of a spaceship that was destroyed by the Roman planet and has been drifting for only 6 years.

Hmm, upon reviewing the episode again, I'm not sure how the Beagle was destroyed. Merik mentioned the ship damaged by meteors but the ship was intact long enough to eventually beam down the entire crew. Perhaps it self destructed and the explosion sent the debris rocketing out of orbit at 0.03c?

Numbers-wise: Given 6 years and 1/16th of a parsec (0.2 LY), her drift speed out of the system was about 0.03c. Since they're the 4th planet but still Earth identical conditions I figure it's about 1 AU from their sun. My guess is for a 30 second flight time, the first 20 seconds were fast, like average 300,000c and the final 10 second leg their warp drive slowed to average of 700c.

I think the drift speed is reasonable.

The Enterprise could have been just a few light years away from Tycho when calculating the 1.7 day (40 hour) round trip back or nearly a 1,000 LY away from Tycho necessitating a 2,000 LY round trip. The speed range could be between 1,000LY / 40 hours (200,000C) and 2,000LY / 40 hours (400,000C).

Of course, coupled with these calculations we have a pretty good stake in the sand for Enterprise's "standard cruising" speed. FWIW, This would put the various Warp Factors in the region of WF^7 (compared to the "official" WF^3). Here's how that looks:

There is also "That Which Survives" which puts Warp 8.4 at 760,000C (between systems). I'm not sure if there is a straightforward formula other than slow c close to star/planet, high c between stars and slow-modest c between galaxies.

My guess is that even Warp 1 could range from super sublight (like in The Voyage Home where the BOP is at warp but barely leaving orbit) and some high c speed in interstellar space depending on the space weather and conditions.

I count DS9 as different from TOS as it's more from the TNG production so their distances will likely be different, IMO

Actually, this need not be the case. DS9's seeming "shrinkage" of the Federation might actually be reversed if we maintain the higher TOS speeds.

That's an interesting idea!

Anomalies like Voyager taking 75 years to cross (a minuscule) 70,000 LY could be justified through the ship having suffered serious damage by the Caretaker.

Maybe. But it seems like then her Warp 9.x in interstellar space was very slow and matched up to only TNG speeds. Or perhaps her path was so dense with stars that 2 LY/day was the best they could do at Warp 9.x. (Unlike the crazy speeds of ST5 where the Enterprise-A headed into the galactic core.)

We also don't know how long starships (especially the TOS-E) have to rest and make repairs after each of their 1,000LY jaunts. Perhaps 400,000(c) is simply not sustainable for consecutive days and their average yearly speed is considerably lower?

I think that makes sense. Every time there is a high speed chase or run Scotty is constantly checking on the engines and there is dialogue explaining the dangers of a sustained run at Warp 8. Warp 6 seems to be sustainable so perhaps something along the lines of 200-300 LY per day for cruising around. (That might change if they incorporated Kelvan technology.)

There's also the issue of the TNG (re-jigged) Warp Scale, so here's a thought: By putting Warp 10 at "infinity", what if this had the effect of reducing the speed of the relative Warp Factors below number 10?

Wouldn't this squeeze down the curve so that lower warps become even faster? This is assuming that unlike the TNG:TM it isn't logarithmic at W9 but the full range is spread from 0-10...

 

[Mytran]

I guess we're not using my parsec theory then? Ah, well

I think for purposes of this discussion I haven't found anything specific that would change the meaning of "parsec" in TOS so I'm keeping it simple by using 3.26 LY. I've got some comments about your thread but I'll post in there instead of here

That's OK, upon reviewing it again I've noticed a couple of errors and the theory is so 2015! In any case, I'm enjoying where this current discussion is going more.

There is also "That Which Survives" which puts Warp 8.4 at 760,000C (between systems).

Yeah, even as I was putting together that chart TWS was bugging the back of my mind - for once, the speed is actually too slow! Under the WF^7 system, Warp 8.4 is just under 3 million (c), so they should have completed the return trip in around 14 seconds! However, we do have the wild card of the mega-transporter beam that moved the ship 990.7 LY in the first place. Perhaps ploughing through the (widespread) distortion effect left behind by the alien transporter beam had the effect of drastically slowing the ship down, akin to being near a star?

I'm not sure if there is a straightforward formula other than slow c close to star/planet, high c between stars and slow-modest c between galaxies.

Possibly, but there has to be some correlation between speed and WF, otherwise Kirk would just order "warp speed" all the time without specifying a factor. Or are you suggesting we revisit the old theory about WF actually being levels of power generation then velocity?

Anomalies like Voyager taking 75 years to cross (a minuscule) 70,000 LY could be justified through the ship having suffered serious damage by the Caretaker.

Maybe. But it seems like then her Warp 9.x in interstellar space was very slow and matched up to only TNG speeds. Or perhaps her path was so dense with stars that 2 LY/day was the best they could do at Warp 9.x.

I'll take your word for it, since I haven't done the research into mentions of "light years" across the franchise. This is why I chose parsecs!
The one specific mention of Voyager's speed is in The 37s, where Paris says that Warp 9.9 is 4 billion miles a second (21,473c). Maybe he's talking about itra-system velocities?

Unlike the crazy speeds of ST5 where the Enterprise-A headed into the galactic core.

Yeah, I'm still calling hijinks on that one - even at a sustained 400,000c The Enterprise would take 230 days to reach the centre of the galaxy. As far as I'm concerned, Sybok took them to the centre of a weird nebula known as the Galaque Sea. The name is less confusing in the original Vulcanian

There's also the issue of the TNG (re-jigged) Warp Scale, so here's a thought: By putting Warp 10 at "infinity", what if this had the effect of reducing the speed of the relative Warp Factors below number 10?

Wouldn't this squeeze down the curve so that lower warps become even faster? This is assuming that unlike the TNG:TM it isn't logarithmic at W9 but the full range is spread from 0-10...

Well, since you can't divide infinity it would make all warp factors the same speed - namely, infinity!

Actually, what I had in mind was that most of the higher "ludicrous" speeds were collected together under 9.x category, which left Warp 1-8 for more conventional speeds used by most freighters, civilian ships etc.

 

[Mytran]

...there has to be some correlation between speed and WF, otherwise Kirk would just order "warp speed" all the time without specifying a factor. Or are you suggesting we revisit the old theory about WF actually being levels of power generation then velocity?

I'm quoting myself because I've realised that by using the "proximity to nearby star" or "Cochrane factor" or "subspace fluctuation" or whatever to act as a variation factor, we are already rendering WF=speed meaningless anyway!

So, we're already in the WF=power level zone.

Yes there is some connection of speed to Warp Factor, but it is meaningless without specific knowledge of local conditions (AKA space-weather).


In a vaguely related matter, I got curious as to just how far the Enterprise travels in TPS when en route to the asteroid:

• The fastest known asteroid travels 70 KMS
• It was 60 days away from the planet
• Which is 3½ billion kilometres
• Enterprise was en route for "several hours" (assume 3) which means its Warp 9 intra-system speed is 0.11c

That's pretty pathetic

Maybe the asteroid was unrealistically speedy? Say, 1% of lightspeed?

• This fantasy asteroid travels 300KMS
• It was 60 days away from the planet
• Which is 15½ billion kilometres
• Enterprise was en route for "several hours" (assume 3) which means its Warp 9 intra-system speed is 0.48c

Still not great, but eerily familiar to the "Warp 0.5" ordered by Kirk in TMP. Is there some natural speed limit in effect between 1AU (Earth) and 5AU (Jupiter)?

At first glance, it might seem odd that Spock (in TPS) didn't just use the Impulse Engines to achieve WF0.5 . However, we know that from Scotty in EOT that under normal circumstances the Enterprise would use its Warp Drive "exclusively", even intra-system. Perhaps, (despite the strain that Spock's orders placed on the engines during TPS) it is actually a safer option to use the Warp Engines above 0.25c?

 

[blssdwlf]

However, we do have the wild card of the mega-transporter beam that moved the ship 990.7 LY in the first place. Perhaps ploughing through the (widespread) distortion effect left behind by the alien transporter beam had the effect of drastically slowing the ship down, akin to being near a star?

It's possible although I'd feel better if there was some dialogue pointing to the ship being slowed down by the transporter. The dialogue points more to the ship just not feeling right in general instead of something immediately measurable like a difference in speed.

Possibly, but there has to be some correlation between speed and WF, otherwise Kirk would just order "warp speed" all the time without specifying a factor. Or are you suggesting we revisit the old theory about WF actually being levels of power generation then velocity?

I do think that warp factors is first a power level which then translates to a speed that is adjusted by space conditions. The higher the warp factor, the faster you could potentially go given identical space conditions.

The speed curve might be kind of flat, though. For example, in chase scenarios like "Arena", going from Warp 6 to 7 or 7 to 8 should have resulted in the Enterprise blowing by the Gorn ship if the warp factor was exponential or even logarithmic. Instead there seems to be alot more gradual change in distances and all very controllable as well.

The one specific mention of Voyager's speed is in The 37s, where Paris says that Warp 9.9 is 4 billion miles a second (21,473c). Maybe he's talking about itra-system velocities?

There is another one from "Maneuvers" but it doesn't mention what warp factor:

KIM: Maybe, but at a relative speed of two billion kilometers per second, it's pretty tough to get a lock on somebody.
​

(BTW, I was just joking about ST5 )

Actually, what I had in mind was that most of the higher "ludicrous" speeds were collected together under 9.x category, which left Warp 1-8 for more conventional speeds used by most freighters, civilian ships etc.

Ahh... so the scale in TNG basically took TOS Warp 2 thru 15 and squeezed it all under TNG Warp 9-10?

At first glance, it might seem odd that Spock (in TPS) didn't just use the Impulse Engines to achieve WF0.5 . However, we know that from Scotty in EOT that under normal circumstances the Enterprise would use its Warp Drive "exclusively", even intra-system. Perhaps, (despite the strain that Spock's orders placed on the engines during TPS) it is actually a safer option to use the Warp Engines above 0.25c?

My speculation is that since Impulse power seems to take a while to regenerate/replenish compared to Warp power that Spock left the impulse engines as a backup in case he burned the warp drive out. If he had used impulse to get there he probably wouldn't have been able to spare any extra energy to recharge the impulse drive for the return trip.

MCCOY: It might also cripple the ship, and we would be crushed by the asteroid.
SPOCK: Incorrect. We'll still be able to get out of its path by use of impulse power.
​

My rough calculations would be for an interplanetary trip across or near the star resulting in an average of 5c at Warp 9 for about 3 hours. That's about 0.0017 LY traveled. Return trip at 1421.3 hours results in a speed of approx 0.01c which isn't super fast but very conservative if Spock also needed to reserve energy to blast out of orbit from the planet after rescuing Kirk and then proceeding to the nearest starbase or friendly system. This does make the asteroid very fast moving but it might also help explain how it is having such an effect on the planet while many hours away.

Warp 9 at 5c is about the same speed I get calculating out from "Tomorrow is Yesterday" and "Operation Annihilate" for flying right at the sun/star.

 

[Go-Captain]

Possibly, but there has to be some correlation between speed and WF, otherwise Kirk would just order "warp speed" all the time without specifying a factor. Or are you suggesting we revisit the old theory about WF actually being levels of power generation then velocity?

Calling out a warp factor actually fits with calling out a sea ship's power. With a sea ship the captain just knows how much power equals how many revolutions of the propeller per minute, and how that equals a particular speed in calm water. But, those speeds are affected by wind and currents, and the captain will take those factors into account too, so he doesn't call out a speed, just engine power output because engine output and speed are not fixed as if on a road. Where the ship goes and how is up to the captain, so he is the one who works that stuff out, with help or without, before giving orders.

Considering how warp speed is all over the place for similar, or even the same, factors, there are likely external phenomena causing uncontrolled variations. Interstellar gas density, gravitational anomalies, subspace whatsit effects, and so on could all be interacting with the warp field creating differing speeds for differing speed outputs. If the captain is aware of this, then the captain will call out the appropriate warp factor to achieve the desired speed, rather than call for the speed. Realistically, we don't see the captain consulting charts or astrometrics like they should, or otherwise getting an information feed on local speed altering factors, so they should be calling out speeds, letting the astrogator work out the factor, and the pilot should input the factor plus heading.

We're not seeing what we should see in either case, so I think that leaves us with a needed assumption that the captain must know what is going on with the power output and speed, just without showing us the mental legwork of gathering that information. We are left seeing only the solution.
http://www.trekbbs.com//www.pinterest.com/pin/create/extension/

 

[Mytran]

Possibly, but there has to be some correlation between speed and WF, otherwise Kirk would just order "warp speed" all the time without specifying a factor. Or are you suggesting we revisit the old theory about WF actually being levels of power generation then velocity?

Calling out a warp factor actually fits with calling out a sea ship's power. With a sea ship the captain just knows how much power equals how many revolutions of the propeller per minute, and how that equals a particular speed in calm water. But, those speeds are affected by wind and currents, and the captain will take those factors into account too, so he doesn't call out a speed, just engine power output because engine output and speed are not fixed as if on a road. Where the ship goes and how is up to the captain, so he is the one who works that stuff out, with help or without, before giving orders.

Since so much of Star Trek fits as an analogy of "The Navy...in SPAAAACE!" I think this works very well. Of course, we already have more direct language used on Impulse Power (ahead full, half power etc). However, we have seen on numerous occasions that the Warp Engines at "full" power are capable of ludicrous speeds and acts of ship-threatening power output, so "ahead, Warp full" would not be a wise order! Therefore, we could easily surmise that this is why they use the more quantifiable Warp Factors instead.

Of course, we have numerous instances of crew members announcing an approaching ship and giving its speed in Warp Factors. While that would be like giving a car's top speed in terms of its engine horsepower, I wonder - is there a real life naval equivalent that would work?

The speed curve might be kind of flat, though. For example, in chase scenarios like "Arena", going from Warp 6 to 7 or 7 to 8 should have resulted in the Enterprise blowing by the Gorn ship if the warp factor was exponential or even logarithmic. Instead there seems to be a lot more gradual change in distances and all very controllable as well.

That's an excellent point and is something echoed in later chase sequences such as TNG's EOF and BOBW - the pursuers are noted as having significantly higher Warp 9.x speeds but only very slowly gaining ground on our heroes. The most simple explanation might be that it just takes time to fully accelerate up the maximum velocity afforded by the higher warp factor (just enough time for our heroes to act, ). Furthermore, this issue could become exponentially more problematic the higher the Warp Factor used.

Maybe the asteroid was unrealistically speedy? Say, 0.1% of lightspeed?

• This fantasy asteroid travels 300KMS
• It was 60 days away from the planet
• Which is 15½ billion kilometres
• Enterprise was en route for "several hours" (assume 3) which means its Warp 9 intra-system speed is 0.48c

My rough calculations would be for an interplanetary trip across or near the star resulting in an average of 5c at Warp 9 for about 3 hours. That's about 0.0017 LY traveled. Return trip at 1421.3 hours results in a speed of approx 0.01c which isn't super fast but very conservative if Spock also needed to reserve energy to blast out of orbit from the planet after rescuing Kirk and then proceeding to the nearest starbase or friendly system. This does make the asteroid very fast moving but it might also help explain how it is having such an effect on the planet while many hours away.

(You'll note that I have corrected my earlier typo to make my asteroid 0.1% of lightspeed as intended)
The thing is, although your 0.01c (1% of lightspeed) is peanuts for a starship, it's ridiculously fast for an asteroid or other natural phenomenon. Well, I suppose this is science fiction about an alien solar system - it's certainly not the first time we've seen something naturally occurring that's unnaturally weird in Star Trek

A side effect is that it means the velocity dampening effect of the local sun extends out to at least 15 billion kilometres - over double the distance to Pluto at its furthest extent (I bring up Pluto because of course it got a mention in Tomorrow is Yesterday). And slowing Warp 9 speeds to 5c is only the average across this distance; closer to the sun (if the effect is progressive) I can easily imagine it slowing everything down to 1c or less. No wonder starships usually cross zone this at Impulse!

Warp 9 at 5c is about the same speed I get calculating out from "Tomorrow is Yesterday" and "Operation Annihilate" for flying right at the sun/star.

I would certainly be happy if the solar effect allowed this - just a general "slow down" zone perhaps? I'm uncertain how that would play out in relation to dwindling gravitational effect of the star, however.

 

[blssdwlf]

Of course, we have numerous instances of crew members announcing an approaching ship and giving its speed in Warp Factors. While that would be like giving a car's top speed in terms of its engine horsepower, I wonder - is there a real life naval equivalent that would work?

Perhaps when announcing approaching ships the speed is given in Warp Factors relative to the Enterprise? That way the Captain only needs to call out a Warp Factor instead of say throttle percentage...

I would certainly be happy if the solar effect allowed this - just a general "slow down" zone perhaps? I'm uncertain how that would play out in relation to dwindling gravitational effect of the star, however.

My guess is that the more mass the gravitational object, the larger the slow down zone would be. "Tomorrow is Yesterday" and "The Voyage Home" gives us a baseline for a Sun-mass and Earth-mass effect. We can use that to make some guesses that "The Paradise Syndrome" might have had a larger star or conditions that kept Warp 9 in the slow zone.

 

[Mytran]

I would certainly be happy if the solar effect allowed this - just a general "slow down" zone perhaps? I'm uncertain how that would play out in relation to dwindling gravitational effect of the star, however.

My guess is that the more mass the gravitational object, the larger the slow down zone would be. "Tomorrow is Yesterday" and "The Voyage Home" gives us a baseline for a Sun-mass and Earth-mass effect. We can use that to make some guesses that "The Paradise Syndrome" might have had a larger star or conditions that kept Warp 9 in the slow zone.

One thing that marks this particular solar system apart from ours is the preponderance of really big and (as our deductions have shown) really fast asteroids!
There are probably also other spacial conditions present; really unique and important ones that led the Preservers to place this groups of Native Americans in such a seemingly lethal location!
A giant Kuiper Belt perhaps? Maybe it camouflages the system from passing observers...

Perhaps when announcing approaching ships the speed is given in Warp Factors relative to the Enterprise? That way the Captain only needs to call out a Warp Factor instead of say throttle percentage...

It makes sense that the Enterprise crew would use their own scale of power ratings I suppose. We can also presume then that (Starfleet) Warp factors correspond directly to specific energy output ratings. Interestingly enough, this means that ENT's oft-quoted "Warp Five Engine" makes a lot more sense - we don't speak of a 135 mph sports car engine after all, it's all about the horsepower.

This kind of leads into another train of thought I had - namely, USS Voyager and it's supposed top cruising speed of Warp 9.975. Voyager and it's stated return trip of 70,000 ly in 75 years is a perpetual thorn in the side of keeping TOS speeds in the TNG universe. However, what if the problem is the Voyager herself?

Hailed from the start as a new and high-tech starship, Voyager probably sported more types of experimental technology than just the bio-neural gel packs (and which almost crippled the ship when they caught space-flu). Specifically, I'm thinking of those teeny-tiny nacelles, almost half the proportional size of the ones on the Enterprise-D. Never designed as a long range explorer, the Intrepid class may have been the testbed for a new type of nacelle - smaller but more technologically advanced, able to fully utilise the power output of a super sized "tower" warp core thanks to special <tech> components. Unfortunately, when these were burned out by the Caretaker's displacement wave (both had incompatible energy emissions) the diminutive nacelles were reduced to a fraction of their former propulsive power. Like the gel packs the <tech> components could not be repaired when damaged, and spares were only available from properly equipped Starfleet bases - not normally an issue in Voyager's assigned patrol area, but a massive problem when on the other side of the galaxy! The 9.975 Warp Core remained intact, but the warp coils themselves could only handle such power outputs for limited periods of time and even then at much reduced efficiency compared to their more traditional equivalents (see quoted sprinting speeds in Manoeuvres and The 37s).
Incidentally, we can see that the "small but advanced" type of nacelle never really caught on - the more robust and traditional type (big = fast) is still in effect on board the Enterprise-E

A final point - Voyager herself only averaged about 400ly a year for most of the series - the rest of her progress was made using helping hands and shortcuts. This really wasn't a speedy ship!

 

[blssdwlf]

I agree that damage is the most likely cause for Voyager's "slower-ness" but IMHO, TOS is best kept in a separate universe from TNG-DS9-VOY-ENT just as they are different from 09 Trek Alternate and 09 Trek Prime.

 

[Mytran]

Yeah I know that's possible, but I live in hope that there's a common factor out there somewhere

How about I mess around with the TOS speeds instead?

One of the most oft-quoted top speeds in TOS is of course from TWS; figures of both 990.7ly and 11.337 hours are mentioned explicitly, and suggest a top speed of around 766,029(c). This single incident is far in excess of other calculated speeds in TOS, which come out at 200,000 - 400,000 times lightspeed.

However, what if they'd already been at Warp 8 for a while by the time Lt Rhada gave the 8.337 hours ETA - Scotty would need some time to "nurse" the engines up to Warp 8.4, after all. Perhaps the ship held steady at Warp 8 for the first 12 hours or so? OK, 12.663 hours it is then

This means Kirk & the landing party were alone for a fair while, but they could (and should) have spent a fair amount of time exploring the planet to determine it's age and composition - and there's nothing to say what time of day (planetside) they first beamed down.

So, we now have 990.7ly crossed in 24 hours, split up into Warp 8 and Warp 8.4 as above - this gives 361,853(c), very similar to the maximum possible speed seen in other episodes (Obsession) which is around 1,000 ly/day (under emergency conditions). Typical cruising speed remains around 214,000(c) (Bread & Circuses) although we must assume that this for interstellar travel only, free from the slowdown effect of stars and other gravitational bodies

Of course, as it turned out (due to the antimatter pod malfunction) the Enterprise arrived far sooner than the projected 24 hours - and ready for some considerable engine downtime, no doubt!

With the 766,029(c) knocked off the list, we can now postulate the following Warp/power chart:

Interestingly, this matches up with the first Star Trek Enterprise episode!
I'm sure we all remember when Archer took a mere 4 days to cross the 90 light years to Qo'noS (plus a side quest to Rigel along the way), in complete disregard of the then current TNG Warp scale? Well, this Warp scale would allow a Warp 5 ship to travel 110ly in 96 hours - problem solved!

 

[drt]

With regard to TOS speeds, I've always been partial to the Star Trek Maps' Cochrane factor, which is the Wf^3 factor multiplied by 1290, which seems to work well for stated times/distances at the upper end of the Wf scale. I also am OK with how that increases the speeds on the lower end, since in TOS we see a number of freighters and what-not that only travel at very slow warp factors, plus in quite a few episodes Kirk often orders a pretty slow speed to their next destination, so I'm OK with tens of thousands of light speed for warps 2-4, otherwise it would take years to get anywhere.

And no that note, similarly to Mytran's proposals regarding Voyager above, I think what also works is that the faster they go, the longer downtime is perhaps spent off-screen regenerating power or repairing damage to the engines, which is why they generally seem to travel at the low end of the scale most of the time, as it provides the optimal travel times with regard to speed v maintenance downtime.

 

[blssdwlf]

@Mytran - I've been looking at "Broken Bow" but having a hard time finding distance to Kronos/Qo'nos. Where does the 90 light years come from? I found dialogue for 80 hours to Kronos. And around Warp 4.3-Warp 4.4 it's about 30,000,000 km/s or 100c.

ARCHER: Ensign Mayweather tells me we'll be to Kronos in about eighty hours.
...
TRAVIS: Warp four point three, sir.
...
ARCHER: Bring us to four four, Ensign.
...
ARCHER: It's easy to get a little jumpy when you're traveling at thirty million kilometers a second.

 

[Mytran]

Well something isn't right with that bit of Enterprise dialogue, because 30,000,000 KMS for 80 hours is 0.9 light years - they'd still be in the Terran Oort Cloud! Maybe Archer was underestimating their speed to avoid panicking Hoshi?

I can't remember exactly where I first got the idea that the Klingon homeworld was 90ly away from Earth, but a quick search shows it was probably one of the official Star Trek maps. Or maybe here?
http://memory-alpha.wikia.com/wiki/Qo'noS
Way further than 0.9ly, in any case.

@drt - Cochrane's factor is all very well as a multiplying factor for TOS, but it doesn't explain why it got so little use in the 24th Century. Incidentally, those speeds I quoted are maximums for each power level - often made slower by local subspace and gravimetric conditions - "space weather" if you will, or sort of an "anti-Cochrane" factor?

FWIW, I think that the reason Kirk often left orbit at Warp One is due to the proximity of the local sun each time.
He could have warped out at a higher level than lightspeed, but at very little change in velocity (IOW, a waste of fuel)

Regarding the "required downtime" scenario you raised, maybe Starfleet warp engines just aren't designed with continuous high speed operation in mind? Certainly, by the time of the 24th century they are accustomed to operating within a network of starbases and supply lines that can carry out the necessary refuelling and Warp Coil overhauls every 5,000 light years. There are mentions in TNG, DS9 as well as VOY about a ship taking 70(ish) years to cross 70,000ly(ish). However, it may be that Starfleet's "fastest starship" is simply their fastest long-distance starship, not their fastest (sprinter) ship overall.