starfield motion / warp SFX

[Timo]

I'm happy with arguing that different transporter machines produce different visual effect. Alien machines definitely produce alien ones, after all. But warp is more or less universal regardless of species or level of tech; there may be slight coloration nuances (the violet tones of the Jem'Hadar warp as seen from "inside"), but the starstreaks are the same for everybody.

What probably makes a big difference is where the "camera" is placed. Is it inside the warp field? Riding along just outside it? Inside its own, separate warp field? Also, how fast is the ship going exactly?

Nuances are again okay: some engines may burp off excess plasma to create the ST:NEM smoke effect, some may leave colorful contrails, etc.

Timo Saloniemi

 

[David cgc]

The transporters I can buy, though you have to squint a little when every Starfleet transporter has the expanding balls of light on "Voyager" or the shower of sparkles on "Deep Space Nine." I don't think we actually saw the Bellerophon's transporter on that episode of DS9, maybe as much because they didn't want to square that circle and decide which effect to use as because the story didn't call for it.

I wouldn't mind if the warp-flashes also varied by ship or manufacturer (heck, I'd prefer it as a means of adding variety and verisimilitude), but there's no good in-univese explanation for "it depends which show you're watching." The Stargate franchise had a similar problem. They had three or four different "entering hyperspace" effects, which at first seemed to vary by the type of ship, but after a few episodes, it became clear that they were just the "house styles" of the different effects studios the various shows used.

 

[Timo]

Transporters might receive software updates for the new visuals. After all, the visuals can't be a purely hardware thing - a Cardassian transporter may flaunt a Klingon effect when receiving a Klingon signal, as in "Dramatis Personae", say. And if we assume Starfleet upgrades because the upgrade is better than what they had before, then we could expect the upgrade to be fleetwide and near-immediate. But perhaps only after a specific edition of the software has been field-tested aboard certain vessels first.

Timo Saloniemi

 

[Jedi Marso]

Digging through some old Trek stuff last night I looked at the booklet which comes along with 'Star Trek MAPS' and read the section on warp speeds.

Interestingly enough, they proposed a slightly different formula for the original TOS warp speed scale than the one to which we are accustomed, which is v = Wf^3 x c. (Velocity = Warp factor cubed multiplied by the speed of light). Under this scale, Warp 1 = 1c, W2 = 8c, W3 = 27c and so on, resulting in speeds that are still fairly slow by galacitc standards.

The formula proposed in MAPS added one more component to the equation, a variable called 'Cochrane's Factor.' This has to do with the curvature of space-time caused by the presence of matter, and the more (and more dense) matter you find in the vicinity of a warp-field, the higher the variable becomes. The value of this variable normally ranges between 1 and 1500, and can increase so much in the vicinity of black holes and neutron stars that warp drive cannot safely be used without creating the 'slingshot efftects' that can propel a ship out of normal space-time. The 'corrected warp speed equation' using Cochrane's Variable is:

v = X(Wf^3) x c where X = Cochrane Factor.

According to the booklet, the variable local density of matter throughout the galaxy creates the equivalent of winds or ocean currents, explaining how some vast interstellar distances can be crossed in much less time than if using the 'ideal' warp speed equation.

The booklet states that within Federation space, the average Cochrane Factor is 1292.7238. That makes Warp 1 not just the speed of light, but 1292c! At Warp 5 you could cross the entire galaxy in less than a year.

Obviously, this idea works for stuff like TVH or the NX-01 heading to Kronos in 4 days, but not so much with Voyager taking 80 years to get home from the far side of the galaxy. I did think it was an interesting swerve on 'the speed of plot' as seen in Trek, and thought I'd throw it out here for people to chew on. The interesting thing is that the sorts of speeds you could attain with Cochrane Factor adjustments would allow for the sorts of starfield movements you see on the main viewer in most episodes.

 

[Mytran]

The "Cochrane Factor" is certainly a step in the right direction, but I think it needs to be more tightly controlled. For example, the areas where you can "piggy back" on the variable subspace densities ought to be relatively rare - those bands where the ideal conditions happen to meet, and you can "ride the wave" for as along as it happens to be going in your direction (Cestus III from Arena, for example - the Enterprise traveled 22 parsecs in a few hours at Warp 6).



Unfortunately, if you can't find any Cochrane Factor Effect areas of space going where you need them, you are going to be stuck at regular warp speeds (sorry, Voyager)

 

[Jedi Marso]

The "Cochrane Factor" is certainly a step in the right direction, but I think it needs to be more tightly controlled. For example, the areas where you can "piggy back" on the variable subspace densities ought to be relatively rare - those bands where the ideal conditions happen to meet, and you can "ride the wave" for as along as it happens to be going in your direction (Cestus III from Arena, for example - the Enterprise traveled 22 parsecs in a few hours at Warp 6).



Unfortunately, if you can't find any Cochrane Factor Effect areas of space going where you need them, you are going to be stuck at regular warp speeds (sorry, Voyager)

I'm on board with this. Also, the 'average' Cochrane Factor for UFP space they listed in the booklet was way too high: up over 1200, which would make travelling at Warp 1 through the Federation faster than Warp 10 most of the time. Cut the average Cochrane Factors down by two orders of magnitude or so and then we're talking about something that gives you a 'speed of plot' when necessary but doesn't turn the entire galaxy into a duck pond.

 

[drt]

I'm on board with this. Also, the 'average' Cochrane Factor for UFP space they listed in the booklet was way too high: up over 1200, which would make travelling at Warp 1 through the Federation faster than Warp 10 most of the time. Cut the average Cochrane Factors down by two orders of magnitude or so and then we're talking about something that gives you a 'speed of plot' when necessary but doesn't turn the entire galaxy into a duck pond.

I think the Cochrane Factor works better with TOS, which seemed to imply both that Enterprise was exploring a larger territory than later indicated in the TNG-era shows and that Warp 1-3 were reasonable speeds for interstellar travel.

 

[C.E. Evans]

According to the booklet, the variable local density of matter throughout the galaxy creates the equivalent of winds or ocean currents, explaining how some vast interstellar distances can be crossed in much less time than if using the 'ideal' warp speed equation.

The booklet states that within Federation space, the average Cochrane Factor is 1292.7238. That makes Warp 1 not just the speed of light, but 1292c! At Warp 5 you could cross the entire galaxy in less than a year.

Obviously, this idea works for stuff like TVH or the NX-01 heading to Kronos in 4 days, but not so much with Voyager taking 80 years to get home from the far side of the galaxy.

Being unfamiliar with the Delta Quadrant, the Voyager crew may not have known the location of the "warp highways" in the region and had to travel at standard base values in regards to warp factors.

 

[Jedi Marso]

I think the Cochrane Factor works better with TOS, which seemed to imply both that Enterprise was exploring a larger territory than later indicated in the TNG-era shows and that Warp 1-3 were reasonable speeds for interstellar travel.

Yeah, the booklet in MAPS is strictly a TOS deal- doesn't address TNG era at all (and may be before it's time altogether). They re-drew the warp scale for the TNG era anyway- don't know that formula off the top of my head but it gets wonky anyway after warp 9, setting Warp 10 as an unachievable barrier of infinite speed or something like that.

 

[Mytran]

That is of course true (about the TNG scale) and you can calculate & compare here.
I looked into this quite deeply earlier in the year and I think the Enterprise-D had to have either made use of the CF "highways" or else the official speeds are way too slow - or a mixture of both!

For example, the E-D made it from Earth (in BOBW) to Malcor (in First Contact) which is 2,000 light years away in about 6 months - 2.5 times Warp 9, assuming that they were travelling that speed constantly (which they clearly weren't).
In Booby Trap (early 3rd season) LaForge boasts that they have logged "tens of thousands of light years"
These are not the speeds of a ship which flies anywhere close to the official Warp chart!

My own theories lean towards starships being capable (in addition to using the CF highways) of very high warp speeds, but with the side effect of burned out warp coils and other cumulative damage to their engines. Of course, in a Federation replete with starbases and repair yards this only means a few days or weeks downtime. For USS Voyager, it is a risk they could not afford to take.