Inner Turbolift doors?

[PCz911]

But one could also argue that single-propeller aircraft are "asymmetric" in that the engine rotates in a specific direction and thus creates torque that needs to be countered by the shape of the aircraft. For example the giant-engined Republic Thunderbolt fighter had asymmetric wings to compensate for the torque

- did not know that.

And, yes, the thread sort of meandered away from turbo lift doors to warp nacelles.

For me, personally, the plane analogy doesn't work since I perceive star trek more like ships in an era akin to WWI. They had planes (shuttle crafts ) but they weren't truly capable of attacking/doing serious damage to capital ships. The ships themselves were large beasts. So it's one engine vs two depending upon ship size. For a smaller vessels, it's costly to add two engines if one will do.

 

[Timo]

WWI and II era ships had varying numbers of propellers (very) roughly in the following manner:

1 prop: cheapo escorts, sub-hunters and various support ships, because more would have been more expensive (even if some sub-hunters had dual power options, with separate "cruise" and "chase" powerplants)
2 props: many destroyers, for better channeling the greater power; many cruisers; sometimes one powerplant per prop, sometimes a crossfeed
3 props: multi-engined small craft like torpedo boats, because gearboxing all that power into fewer props would have been complicated and wasteful; large battleships
4 props: large battleships only

Submarines also had two props, and dual powerplants, but the former was only due to the rudder arrangement and not the powerplant arrangement. Modern subs have just one prop, nowadays often shrouded, because one large and slowly turning prop is quieter than two smaller and faster ones.

So that's rather similar to how the number of nacelles varies in Trek. And it has basically nothing to do with how many powerplants there are aboard; one can feed multiple props, or many can feed one prop. But so far we haven't heard of a Trek ship with multiple main powerplants. Oh, many "boilers" (such as the things ejected in STXI), but just one "turbine" (such as the dilithium focus chamber repaired by Kirk in ST:ID).

Timo Saloniemi

 

[PCz911]

WWI and II era ships had varying numbers of propellers (very) roughly in the following manner:

1 prop: cheapo escorts, sub-hunters and various support ships, because more would have been more expensive (even if some sub-hunters had dual power options, with separate "cruise" and "chase" powerplants)
2 props: many destroyers, for better channeling the greater power; many cruisers; sometimes one powerplant per prop, sometimes a crossfeed
3 props: multi-engined small craft like torpedo boats, because gearboxing all that power into fewer props would have been complicated and wasteful; large battleships
4 props: large battleships only

Submarines also had two props, and dual powerplants, but the former was only due to the rudder arrangement and not the powerplant arrangement. Modern subs have just one prop, nowadays often shrouded, because one large and slowly turning prop is quieter than two smaller and faster ones.

So that's rather similar to how the number of nacelles varies in Trek. And it has basically nothing to do with how many powerplants there are aboard; one can feed multiple props, or many can feed one prop. But so far we haven't heard of a Trek ship with multiple main powerplants. Oh, many "boilers" (such as the things ejected in STXI), but just one "turbine" (such as the dilithium focus chamber repaired by Kirk in ST:ID).

Timo Saloniemi

Ok, so much for my simplistic theory. I had no idea it was so complicated.

 

[Richard Baker]

I remember reading somewhere, might have been the TNG Technical Manual, that the Galaxy class warp nacelle was designed to functionally act as two in one housing. This would give the standard Galaxy class four and the AGT version six..
I am not that concerned about the rule of them required to be in pairs since another design rule was that they had to be in clear sight of each other. That rule has been violated in canon many times. I think it stems from TMP Refir design where they eere originally planning on havng a cool optical effect to energy waves appearing between the nacelles when at warp

https://forgottentrek.com/the-motio...es/Enterprise-officers-lounge-concept-art.jpg

 

[1001001]

I remember reading somewhere, might have been the TNG Technical Manual, that the Galaxy class warp nacelle was designed to functionally act as two in one housing. This would give the standard Galaxy class four and the AGT version six..
I am not that concerned about the rule of them required to be in pairs since another design rule was that they had to be in clear sight of each other. That rule has been violated in canon many times. I think it stems from TMP Refir design where they eere originally planning on havng a cool optical effect to energy waves appearing between the nacelles when at warp
content://com.android.chrome.FileProvider/images/screenshot/16610431401111621628548.jpg

Please take a moment to review the posting rules, pinned at the top of this forum. Specifically the one about resurrecting dead threads.

This one has been dead for well over 7 years. Let’s let it Rest In Peace, shall we?

Thanks.