How well does that work with the original Connie?
Discovery starship discussion [SPOILERS]
- Thread starter Cpt. Kyle Amasov
- Start date
Those calculation (the larger numbers) were based on scaling that had Discovery one-deck saucer rim to be the same height than Constitution's two-deck saucer rim. Except that was a scaled up Connie for some bizarre reason...
And I certainly didn't get impression that Shenzhou was that big. I though they mentioned the crew complement in one of the episodes, and it was less than Connie's, but now that I try to google it I can't find it... I'm not gonna watch those episodes third time just for that. Maybe I imagined it.
Not quite - those “rabbit teeth” windows are open to space only where they are black, but the same shapes lower down are filled in, and overhead are actual light sources. The same shapes are visible on the rim of Discovery’s inner saucer only, suggesting where at least the mess hall and some of the crew quarters are. The shapes are NOT on the Shenzhou model though, so YMMV...
Mark
Mark
Regarding the shuttlebay thing, it's particularly unambiguous - when the doorway opens, we can
1) compare it to the Security Chief,
2) see that it is exactly the same height as the deck within, opening all the way up to the ceiling, and
3) see that it's exactly the same height as the further, upper decks marked by horizontal lines, window rows etc.
It would appear that on the (aft) secondary hull of the Discovery, the thickness of deck structures between the inhabited volumes is on the order of a couple of inches only. Although the floor of the landing bay is a bit lower than the floor of the "corresponding" deck, suggesting either that there are under-deck structures to that deck, or then simply that the bay floor, well, is a bit lower...
Timo Saloniemi
1) compare it to the Security Chief,
2) see that it is exactly the same height as the deck within, opening all the way up to the ceiling, and
3) see that it's exactly the same height as the further, upper decks marked by horizontal lines, window rows etc.
It would appear that on the (aft) secondary hull of the Discovery, the thickness of deck structures between the inhabited volumes is on the order of a couple of inches only. Although the floor of the landing bay is a bit lower than the floor of the "corresponding" deck, suggesting either that there are under-deck structures to that deck, or then simply that the bay floor, well, is a bit lower...
Timo Saloniemi
The Engineering bay similarly has an upper and lower section to it, not a full deck up or down, but with full corridor segments beyond both levels' access doors. The Jefferies tubes are doubtless stashed between these partial deck structures and wherever decks step up or down a smidge, meaning that they're not ALL between decks themselves.
The Jefferies tube graphic above is also somewhat misleading, suggesting there's a single network snaking through the ship with no relative decks crossing each other. Maybe this IS correct, but there's no single deck where the tubes laterally cross the entire volume of the ship like that, as the saucer and secondary hulls are at completely different heights...
Mark
The Jefferies tube graphic above is also somewhat misleading, suggesting there's a single network snaking through the ship with no relative decks crossing each other. Maybe this IS correct, but there's no single deck where the tubes laterally cross the entire volume of the ship like that, as the saucer and secondary hulls are at completely different heights...
Mark
Is anyone else happy that we haven't heard the name 'warp core' mentioned yet? They have mentioned engine core or reactor or something. I always hated the term 'warp core'. It implies that the warping was done in the reactor when it's really nothing other than a powerplant (Insurrection interphasic rift scene aside).
Turboshafts cruelly and ruthlessly cut decks into sections inaccessible from each other (except via turbolift). Surely Jeffries tubes would be allowed to do the same, snaking through the ship at deck level instead of above or below? I mean, when they used the Jeffries Tube Junction setlet in TNG, it always showed the horizontal tube at the level of the deck (that is, at waist height) instead of above or below.
This would allow each deck to be only as high as the distance from floor to ceiling, plus a few inches of plating. And total deck height would then be a bit under three meters, rather than 3.5, judging by the easy comparisons with the characters.
Indeed, the turbolift network, too, can only be as extensive as seen in various top views on various ships if this is the sum total of shaft networks on different decks. We never really saw a truly long straight stretch of Jeffries tubes in any Trek, and won't see one here, either, for various reasons - so the seemingly straight stretches in that diagram must look terraced from the side.
...Yes, loving it that there has been no mention of "warp core" yet (even though it supposedly is technically correct, having been used back in the 2150s already). What was the shuttle facility called, if anything? It really shouldn't be "hangar" because that word has a different real-world meaning, but "shuttlebay" might make certain people angry.
Timo Saloniemi
[Spoilers through Episode 1x04, "The Butcher's Knife Cares Not for the Lamb's Cry"]
Thread for Episode 3 found here:
https://www.trekbbs.com/threads/dsc-1x03-starships-and-technology-spoilers.290297/
Back on the r.a.s.tech newsgroup and then the Flare forums I had a whale of a time posting thoughts and observations of the (mostly Starfleet) ships and tech for every episode, in the context of how Starfleet at the Federation works. Planning on continuing doing so here for Discovery. All are welcome to post their own as well!
On the lookout for:
- USS Discovery, take two! Last week we were introduced to our new hero shop, but we were kept from seeing her in action much aside from tractoring a shuttle from a nebula and orbiting a star. The preview shows her actually going somewhere, possibly with the controversial spore drive, to do some rescue work.
- THE BRIDGE. I have been dissecting bridge designs for as long as I've been a Trek fan, and last week we were frustratingly barred from seeing much of Discovery's nerve center. I know this was largely on purpose, but this week it looks like we make up for it by seeing the bridge in all her glory, with multiple alert statuses bound to be seen. What will black alert look like on the ridge? Will they simply turn off the lights for transit?
- Bridge stations and crew. Even with her limited screen time, we were ae to determine practically all of the USS Shenzhou bridge stations via dialogue. The crew manning those stations were also impressively clear in the kind of information they relayed to Georgiou, and I'm hoping that'll carry forward to the bridge banter we will see this week as Discovery flies into action and perhaps combat this week.
- Any new sets aboard the hero ship. We know there's at least a transporter room set around somewhere, magically refitted somehow from the completely different looking Shenzhou set. Sickbay will be kept in reserve for when we will need it, but hey, we're on a rescue mission, and rescued people generally beeline it from the transporter room to sickbay, so...
- Justification for Burnham's evolving position and perhaps rank. She was a deep blue data cruncher last week, but we see her here in shiny science silver. I'm guessing she obtains a commission or at least position here, probably unofficial as she has no badge, yet...
- Non-Starfleet life. Looks like Discovery is off on a rescue mission to a facility under attack by Klingon warships. What will they look like? What sort of technology level are they at? Will we be Easter egged by something we see, or will it be a very generic industrial location made up to look futuristic?
- Where Discovery fits in the fleet structure. Last week suggested they were tasked with spore research to the exclusion of regular combat duties. Here she seems to be ordered into action by the holo-brass, and Lorca eagerly agrees...
Mark
Thread for Episode 3 found here:
https://www.trekbbs.com/threads/dsc-1x03-starships-and-technology-spoilers.290297/
Back on the r.a.s.tech newsgroup and then the Flare forums I had a whale of a time posting thoughts and observations of the (mostly Starfleet) ships and tech for every episode, in the context of how Starfleet at the Federation works. Planning on continuing doing so here for Discovery. All are welcome to post their own as well!
On the lookout for:
- USS Discovery, take two! Last week we were introduced to our new hero shop, but we were kept from seeing her in action much aside from tractoring a shuttle from a nebula and orbiting a star. The preview shows her actually going somewhere, possibly with the controversial spore drive, to do some rescue work.
- THE BRIDGE. I have been dissecting bridge designs for as long as I've been a Trek fan, and last week we were frustratingly barred from seeing much of Discovery's nerve center. I know this was largely on purpose, but this week it looks like we make up for it by seeing the bridge in all her glory, with multiple alert statuses bound to be seen. What will black alert look like on the ridge? Will they simply turn off the lights for transit?
- Bridge stations and crew. Even with her limited screen time, we were ae to determine practically all of the USS Shenzhou bridge stations via dialogue. The crew manning those stations were also impressively clear in the kind of information they relayed to Georgiou, and I'm hoping that'll carry forward to the bridge banter we will see this week as Discovery flies into action and perhaps combat this week.
- Any new sets aboard the hero ship. We know there's at least a transporter room set around somewhere, magically refitted somehow from the completely different looking Shenzhou set. Sickbay will be kept in reserve for when we will need it, but hey, we're on a rescue mission, and rescued people generally beeline it from the transporter room to sickbay, so...
- Justification for Burnham's evolving position and perhaps rank. She was a deep blue data cruncher last week, but we see her here in shiny science silver. I'm guessing she obtains a commission or at least position here, probably unofficial as she has no badge, yet...
- Non-Starfleet life. Looks like Discovery is off on a rescue mission to a facility under attack by Klingon warships. What will they look like? What sort of technology level are they at? Will we be Easter egged by something we see, or will it be a very generic industrial location made up to look futuristic?
- Where Discovery fits in the fleet structure. Last week suggested they were tasked with spore research to the exclusion of regular combat duties. Here she seems to be ordered into action by the holo-brass, and Lorca eagerly agrees...
Mark
*cough* Defiant's insanely long tubes in "The Adversary" *cough*
And there's nothing at all to say that any ship's Jefferies tubes don't extend between decks AND between rooms AND just under or over them. On basically all Berman-era Trek the tubes are accessed by hatches that have them extend a foot or so above the corresponding deck, where others have them directly above a room for spying or zapping purposes. Having explored a couple Navy ships over the years, access crawlways are pretty much wherever you can squeeze them.
Mark
And there's nothing at all to say that any ship's Jefferies tubes don't extend between decks AND between rooms AND just under or over them. On basically all Berman-era Trek the tubes are accessed by hatches that have them extend a foot or so above the corresponding deck, where others have them directly above a room for spying or zapping purposes. Having explored a couple Navy ships over the years, access crawlways are pretty much wherever you can squeeze them.
Mark
G
Gonzo
Guest
Its about the same length as the 1701 more or less but I don't think it has as many decks as the whole ship seems to have a lower profile than the 1701.
I do like the flattened and widened engineering section, far more effective a use of available space.
G
Gonzo
Guest
I would be fine with a big Discovery but it doesn't look that big on the screen (unlike the E in the new films), it looks to my eye about the same overall size as the 1701 with a flatter overall profile and thus fewer decks maybe 15 or so.
I am amazed no one has done the size comparison checks yet, its a shame King Daniel cant do any but alas he has finally been outed as a paid CBS plant so he cant, it wasn't me Daniel I swear I didn't tell.
The Shenzou looked around half the size of the 1701, based on the picture we were shown of Burnham standing on the edge of the saucer, both the engineering section and the saucer itself look considerably smaller than the 1701.
So circa 300m for the Discovery and 150-200m at most for the Shenzou.
I would be fine with a big 500-600m Discovery but it really doesn't look anything like that big to the naked eye in the footage we have seen so far, also we get to see the inside of the shuttle bay and we know that stretches across the whole of the rear of the engineering hull to where the sublight engines are, it is nothing like the cavernous space we see in the new films.
So for me its a bit longer overall, slightly wider in places but not as tall as the 1701.
It's been a long time, but it feels like the early 2000's all over again. I'm excited. And I miss my portable CD player and flip-open mobile phone.
Sensors don't give you enough information to navigate by at low altitudes. Even video/camera feeds probably wouldn't suffice for that. There are entire series of aircraft whose low altitude performance was hindered by poor pilot visibility due to overly large noses (the Concord and the F-111 being the most famous examples).
It's longer than the TOS Constitution, that's for sure. Hard to to be sure as far as volume, but I'm guessing it's actually LARGER in absolute terms as well. My guess is that in terms of height it's probably pretty similar, going by the shuttlebay and the overall silhouette.
I imagine a 23rd century FTL starship will have a few sensors more than '60s and '70s aircraft like the F-111 and the Concorde.
And all those aircraft with poor downward visibility kept their cockpits were they where because it’s actually more important to look where you’re flying/going.
Why would you imagine that?
Or, more to the point: what, specifically, would a starship have in its sensor package that an F-111 wouldn't?
Which is why the bridge has a viewscreen and/or windows, yes? So you can see where you're flying/going. And if you need to see where you are going relative to geological features on the planet very near below you, you probably need your field of view to be as much forward as downward.
First of all, everything that later (4th, 5th and 6th) generations of aircraft include, things like terrain-following radar for low-level high-speed flight; radar search and fire control; infrared sensors; heads up displays (HUD); laser ranging and targeting; advanced radar (multiple target track-while-scan, look-down/shoot-down); active electronically scanned arrays; advanced integrated avionics; full sensor fusion; etc. And that’s just current 2017 aircraft technology. Not future/futuristic 2256 FTL starship technology.
Like we already established, if atmospheric aircraft that fly (dangerously close) over geological features don’t have a need to have their cockpit on the bottom side of their airframe then starships and spacecraft (that most of the time don’t even land!) certainly don’t/won’t have that need as well.
Which one of those technologies would enable a pilot to safely fly an aircraft at low altitude without windows?
What futuristic FTL starship technology would enable a pilot to safely operate a one hundred thousand ton starship without windows?
We've established that they need to be able to see the ground at least to a certain extent, and that aircraft whose visibility is limited have historically had problems doing this. Significantly, every combat aircraft currently in service -- even craft designed to engage targets well beyond visual range, even craft that are capable of taking off and landing without a pilot's intervention, even aircraft that can be flown entirely by infrared sensors without any external visuals at all, still have a large transparent canopy to enclose the pilot, usually at considerable cost to design utility (bubble canopy ruins stealth characteristics on tactical fighters and is terrible for the craft's aerodynamics.
I mean, I totally get that It's The Future and our technology should be too advanced to deal with something so primitive as windows... but in that case, why do WE still use windows, given the technology we already have?
Lest you think that's a rhetorical question, the answer is this: because people who operate flying machines need to be able to see where they're going. The easiest way to see where you're going is, more than than not, by looking out of a window.
In this case, increased ground visibility, the utility of which was demonstrated literally fifteen seconds into Discovery's first appearance, is one very likely advantage of having the bridge positioned on the bottom of the saucer.
I am not aware of a single manned spacecraft in all of human history that DIDN'T have any windows. From Vostok-1 to the Space Shuttle, they ALL have them.
So saying that spaceships and aircraft don't/won't have a need for windows is more than a little pretentious on your part: for whatever reason, people way smarter than either of us, people who get paid millions of dollars to design things that cost billions of dollars, on which lives often depend, on which the destinies of entire nations often depend, still continue to install windows on their designs.
Clearly you should go work for Northrop Grumman or something, set all those silly people straight about how pointless it is to put windows on their fucking airplanes since they're so incredibly useless in the 21st century. Here's their careers page if you want to apply; your engineering knowledge is surely too impressive for them to pass up, since you know better than every aerospace engineer on the planet how combat aircraft, space ships and commercial airliners out to be designed.