Plecostomus
Commodore
Geeze! How is a mad babbler supposed to technobabble without accurate shots to derive babble from?!
...I'll make an attempt later in Sketchup and Paint.
Launching the Phoenix
- Thread starter William Leisner
- Start date
- Status
Geeze! How is a mad babbler supposed to technobabble without accurate shots to derive babble from?!
...I'll make an attempt later in Sketchup and Paint.
Well, not really, AFAIK. The full-scale "prop" was a real Titan II ICBM, and only its upper works were seen sitting in the museum silo they used for filming. The flying model was a totally fictional missile that some sources have dubbed Titan V (no relation to the real space launcher of that name whatsoever), and in terms of appearance this differed from the real ICBM only by having a single futuristic nozzle at the bottom, rather than the two engine bells of the real thing. So essentially the "prop" and the model were identical for all of their visible parts.
Of course, the real Titan II of 1950s design philosophy and 1960s-1970s execution was struggling to reach an orbital trajectory for its minuscule Gemini payload by using its two stages (it had been designed to loft a similar mass of nuclear warheads for a ballistic hop), while the lower stage of this fictional Titan V alone easily achieved escape velocity for a gigantic spacecraft the size of the entire upper stage, propelling it farther away from Earth than any real-world single rocket stage has ever done.
Here's a random shot of a Titan II (with nuclear rather than Gemini spacecraft payload), with her engines and the shape of the nose cone essentially the only things not in common with "Titan V":
http://www.siloworld.com/ICBM/Titan%20II.jpg
Timo Saloniemi
I thought his warp drive was powered by a fusion plant. He must have some form of IDF to get up to near lightspeed much less warp 1. I do not recall any gravity control in the cabin.
You don't need an IDF for warp travel - no inertia is imparted. His ship was in warp from the moment Cochrane flipped the engage switch while in orbit. You don't have to get up to near light speed with conventional engines and THEN flip on the warp drive, you know.
I will assume that in warp, one will not need an IDF. Do we know how fast the Phoenix was going when it went to Warp one?
It was in warp from the moment it broke orbit - the whole time it was building up speed toward warp one its warp drive was what was propelling it.
When was the first drawing of the Phoenix ever shown? Was it in a TOS episode, or in a book or something?
I mean before the John Eaves design
Regarding inertial dampener fields. I don't know why you'd need them honestly.
If you used an Alcubierre drive system, which at least one scientist working on TMP suggested more or less the same mechanism (though years before Miguel Alcubierre actually drew it up) there would be no feeling of acceleration as a result of warp-drive.
CuttingEdge100
I mean before the John Eaves design
Regarding inertial dampener fields. I don't know why you'd need them honestly.
If you used an Alcubierre drive system, which at least one scientist working on TMP suggested more or less the same mechanism (though years before Miguel Alcubierre actually drew it up) there would be no feeling of acceleration as a result of warp-drive.
CuttingEdge100
Juan you are saying it might be going 10s of km/secs before it went into warp?
No, I'm saying it was using its warp drive before it broke the light barrier. The whole time it was building up speed toward warp one, it was under warp drive. As such, there was no need for an IDF.
The only times the Phoenix wasn't moving under warp drive were when it was boosting into orbit (before Cochrane says "Engage!") and after they throttle down and look back at Earth.
Last edited:
It's more like this...
The Phoenix used it WARP DRIVE to go subluminal speeds, AS WELL AS go to Warp 1 (1C). Because of the use of the warp drive for most of the trip, the effects of relativity, as well as inertia, are dramatically reduced.
Would this be of any help?
http://www.shipschematics.net/startrek/images/federation/warpship_phoenix.jpg
If you go for a technically conservative approach to the Phoenix considering the limited resources of Cochrane's team, then a Titan booster shell with the original internals swapped for some "high energy density" fuel rocket might have been the most cost-effective way to keep the operational envelope of the Phoenix itself close to the minimum required for a "proof of concept" flight.
A powerplant that would be compact and yet "exotic" enough for a quick warp 1 hop in something the size of the Phoenix in 2063 would likely be a gas core fission reactor. Leave the first use of anti-matter fuel to the unmanned "Friendship 1" of four years later for safety reasons (unlucky Delta quadrant races aside).
As for earth return, perhaps a detachable cockpit/re-entry capsule? I like letting what will later be bussard collectors at the front of nacelles function as ionizing plasma-sheath generators to help get the entire vehicle down, followed by chutes or more likely a para-sail, before a final landing thruster burst. A 20th century style landing would be in keeping with a 20th century style launch after all.
Once again, this scenario represents my idea of the most technically conservative explaination of what we see presented in ST:First Contact.
A powerplant that would be compact and yet "exotic" enough for a quick warp 1 hop in something the size of the Phoenix in 2063 would likely be a gas core fission reactor. Leave the first use of anti-matter fuel to the unmanned "Friendship 1" of four years later for safety reasons (unlucky Delta quadrant races aside).
As for earth return, perhaps a detachable cockpit/re-entry capsule? I like letting what will later be bussard collectors at the front of nacelles function as ionizing plasma-sheath generators to help get the entire vehicle down, followed by chutes or more likely a para-sail, before a final landing thruster burst. A 20th century style landing would be in keeping with a 20th century style launch after all.
Once again, this scenario represents my idea of the most technically conservative explaination of what we see presented in ST:First Contact.
Last edited:
It would have been better if Cochrane's design was a ring-ship... It sounds easier to work than using twin nacelles.
="William Leisner, post: 2524393, member: 2255"]I wonder if some of the more technical minded fans around here can answer a question I've been pondering, regarding the Phoenix as depicted in Star Trek: First Contact.
As we know from the movie, Cochrane converted an old disarmed ICBM to his launch vehicle for his warp ship. However, it strikes me that a missile designed only to travel partway around the globe might not actually be able achieve orbit. Also, if I'm not mistaken, a nuclear missile is mostly missile, with a relatively small warhead. However, only about half the missile we saw in FC was rocket engine, and the other half the Phoenix itself. That means that this missile had to lift a larger payload further with less, no?
So, is this really bad engineering science, or could a genius like Cochrane have pulled off such a feat of rocket retrofitting?
Thanks.[/QUOTE]
As we know from the movie, Cochrane converted an old disarmed ICBM to his launch vehicle for his warp ship. However, it strikes me that a missile designed only to travel partway around the globe might not actually be able achieve orbit. Also, if I'm not mistaken, a nuclear missile is mostly missile, with a relatively small warhead. However, only about half the missile we saw in FC was rocket engine, and the other half the Phoenix itself. That means that this missile had to lift a larger payload further with less, no?
So, is this really bad engineering science, or could a genius like Cochrane have pulled off such a feat of rocket retrofitting?
Thanks.[/QUOTE]
There were two different Titans (II). While the Military version LGM-25C was featured in the film, the NASA version was definitely meant to put astronauts into orbit. Check out the Gemini program... I am sure that the military version was optimized for it's suborbital, parabolic flight path the true space booster was different in its wiring at the very least. Do correct me if I am wrong, but wasn't the initial flight with a retired ICBM? It may not have been the nuke weapon delivery version because the launch site was in Wyoming, right? There were never any liquid fueled missiles in that state. Solid ones, yes, but never liquid fueled. And the Copper Penny, south of Tucson, is the only full site capable of visiting for the filming. So, yes, the one in the movie was never designed for full orbit.
- Status