Strategic Designs' TOS Conny plans

[TIN_MAN]

I don't spend a lot of time thinking, or reading about, deuterium storage on starships so this has probably been suggested and diregarded, but couldn't deuterium be stored as heavy water? Maybe even mixed with, and then filtered to/from, the ordinary water reserves? Just a thought, for whatever it's worth?

 

[xraydeltaone]

Although the saucer is the primary lifeboat, there needs to be provision for the event that the secondary hull needs to act as one instead. However, I agree with you that there doesn't need to be permanent crew quarters there - the cargo bays or other large areas can easily double as accommodation in an emergency.

That's an excellent point. You're right in saying that cargo bays and other areas could be converted easily. I could see them storing emergency shelters, folding beds and partitions etc for just such an emergency. If it came to it you could easily rig a hammock between the antimatter beer vats.

The biggest issue with using the secondary hull as a lifeboat is that it doesn't have any impulse engines. You're either going at warp, or using thrusters. Not a deal breaker though.

However, one thing the secondary hull does have in abundance is WINDOWS – loads of them! Far more per square meter of hull that the saucer in fact. So unless there a lot of windowed corridors down there, it makes sense that there are some recreational facilities behind all those portholes in the secondary hull.

That's another good point. In my mind it's mostly engineering spaces, but all those windows would suggests something different. I suppose you'd have high energy science labs, engineering offices (Scotty needs a room with a view!), perhaps crew quarters for the engineering crew who would be bunked next to their engines for efficiency and so on. I guess a few recreational facilities too, perhaps viewing galleries that aren't very wide and thus don't take up much space.

 

[Captain Robert April]

The space shuttle is for low Earth orbit, is relatively unpowered during reentry, and only needs enough fuel on board to do what it does while in orbit. It's not a deep space vessel.

Isn't the saucer, when separated and acting as a lifeboat, in a somewhat similar position?

That's why I'm not talking about huge slush tanks, just enough to get the saucer out of whatever predicament it's in on impulse.

There's no real evidence either way; by the time of TNG the saucer section is a very capable starship in it's own right. Who knows if this is the case in the TOS time period?

Kirk's ship wasn't designed to detach and reattach over and over again, and even Data pointed out that saucer separation is not recommended at any warp speed, so either the Galaxy class saucer has sustainer coils to maintain a preexisting warp field ('cause they just know captains like to do things that are specifically not recommended), or the impulse engines can effectively function as sustainer coils. Gene only knows what'd happen if a Constitution class ship did a saucer separation at high warp speed.

My take on it is that it's not a deep space vessel when separated. It lacks a warp drive and deflector. I'd say that it is designed to work effectively in interplanetary space, not interstellar space. It's purely there to act as a lifeboat, abet a very heavily armed one (phasers and torpedos are both in the saucer section).

I'm still wondering where this particular tangent came from...

 

[largo]

I don't spend a lot of time thinking, or reading about, deuterium storage on starships so this has probably been suggested and diregarded, but couldn't deuterium be stored as heavy water? Maybe even mixed with, and then filtered to/from, the ordinary water reserves? Just a thought, for whatever it's worth?

it could be, but then you're carrying around a lot of extra oxygen. which outmasses the hydrogen you're interested in considerably. and you have to spend energy separating it. a lot of bother just so you can dump the captain's waterbed into mr. fusion in a pinch.

 

[Vance]

Impulse power is shown to allow so relatively slow warp speeds (shuttlecraft, the Bird of Prey, etc) so it's possible that the saucer alone COULD do a couple of pegs up on the warpometer if need be. Nothing canon or concrete, though... it depends on if the impulse ENGINES can generate a warp field, or just creates a non-newtonian thrust some otherway.

 

[Mytran]

The biggest issue with using the secondary hull as a lifeboat is that it doesn't have any impulse engines. You're either going at warp, or using thrusters. Not a deal breaker though...

I agree, plus there is the possibility that a ship could use it's warp engines to manoeuvre at sublight speeds (albeit less efficiently than using impulse). I get the impression from several episodes that the warp engines can be used like this (sorry, no specifics at the mo!). After all, this was years before the rigid system of TNG came into play, not to mention the appalling Voyager quote of "speed of light, no left or right" (ships in TOS used to turn at warp all the time).

Sorry, got a bit off topic there

 

[Cary L. Brown]

Well, regarding the Constitution's primary and secondary hulls... the secondary hull (with nacelles permanently attached, mind you) is what makes the ship a "starship."

• Extended-duration cargo facilities.
• Self-repair systems.
• High-output power generation (regardless of where the m/am reaction occurs - nacelles or in the s-hull itself - the conversion to usable power occurs in the s-hull, at "main engineering.")
• Support craft systems.
• Non-critical crew facilities (swimming pool, bowling alley, etc).

All the stuff that you can dump and still be a serviceable "space ship," albeit one with limited capabilities.

So, the "impulse engines" aboard Enterprise need to be capable of getting the ship to a safe location... the nearest star system, for instance, if you're in interstellar space, or at least away from any hazards in the vincinity. We're talking a pretty significant "duration of operation" requirement... especially since (with the bussard system) you've got no easy way of refueling (and even if you have bussards... at sublight speeds, they wouldn't do too much good anyway!)

 

[MarianLH]

So, the "impulse engines" aboard Enterprise need to be capable of getting the ship to a safe location... the nearest star system, for instance, if you're in interstellar space, or at least away from any hazards in the vincinity. We're talking a pretty significant "duration of operation" requirement... especially since (with the bussard system) you've got no easy way of refueling (and even if you have bussards... at sublight speeds, they wouldn't do too much good anyway!)

If I remember correctly, in TOS "Where No Man Has Gone Before" the Enterprise was expected to take six months to reach a starbase on impulse power, after the warp drive failed. I don't remember if a specific distance was mentioned, but it was implied to be interstellar.

And that was with the entire ship. Losing the mass of the secondary hull would presumably reduce the travel time.


Marian

 

[Captain Robert April]

Captain's Log: Stardate 1312.9 Ship's condition: heading back on Impulse Power only. Main Engines burned out. The ships Space Warp ability; gone. Earth bases that were only days away are now years in the distance.

 

[Cary L. Brown]

So, the "impulse engines" aboard Enterprise need to be capable of getting the ship to a safe location... the nearest star system, for instance, if you're in interstellar space, or at least away from any hazards in the vincinity. We're talking a pretty significant "duration of operation" requirement... especially since (with the bussard system) you've got no easy way of refueling (and even if you have bussards... at sublight speeds, they wouldn't do too much good anyway!)

If I remember correctly, in TOS "Where No Man Has Gone Before" the Enterprise was expected to take six months to reach a starbase on impulse power, after the warp drive failed. I don't remember if a specific distance was mentioned, but it was implied to be interstellar.

And that was with the entire ship. Losing the mass of the secondary hull would presumably reduce the travel time.


Marian

Captain's Log: Stardate 1312.9 Ship's condition: heading back on Impulse Power only. Main Engines burned out. The ships Space Warp ability; gone. Earth bases that were only days away are now years in the distance.

Those, along with bits from "Balance of Terror" and a number of shuttlecraft issues throughout the series demonstrates, incontrovertably (unless you choose to delete massive amounts of TOS, I s'pose) that "impulse" can be FTL.

This does NOT mean that "impulse" is not Newtonian, however. It only means that a newtonian "impulse-based" (which is totally synonymous with "thrust-based") system is part of some other form of FTL propulsion besides "warp drive."

When it's said that the "main engines are burned out," this does not mean that the warp nacelles have been destroyed. The fact that they are able to salvage equipment from a MINING STATION to restore the ship to "mostly functional" status demonstrates that abundantly well. And most of what we see being replaced on Enterprise consists of electronics... control systems, in other words.

So... perhaps Kirk's comment isn't entirely accurate, but only insofar as it's "truncated" and slightly incomplete.

His line, if spoken by someone who wanted to be 100% technically accurate, might have been "the control systems for our warp propulsion system have been burned out."

Why does this matter? Well, because the HARDWARE would still be functional, and there is still clearly enough functional computer hardware aboard to permit most ships' systems to function perfectly well.

SO... they may be able to generate power, and divert it into the subspace-field-generation hardware, but not to manipulate that subspace field to be a "warp field" (a subclass of subspace fields, let's be clear).

This is EXACTLY why I've been pushing the whole "static-subspace-field-assisted impulse as an FTL propulsion system" for the past couple of years.

It fits... with everything. It allows FTL without warp drive. It makes the "Bonaventure" from TAS make sense. It lets Jose Tyler's line from "The Cage" make sense, as well as the more "experimental-drive" treatment of warp drive in The Cage to fit as well. It lets the Romulan stuff make sense. It lets the "FTL impulse-only shuttlecraft" thing make sense (and also the presence of nacelles... which generate a subspace field, but not a WARP FIELD... on the shuttlecraft make sense).

Everything works... if you assume that a "static subspace field" can permit limited FTL capability under newtonian-based impulse drive without the presence of actual "warp drive."

Okay, then... here's the thing. In WNMHGB, we have a COMPLETE STARSHIP, not a separated saucer. Granted, it's not able to do the complex and subtle control necessary for manipulation of a subspace field into a safe "warp drive" field. But it still has the ability to generate a subspace field... and it seems to me that a "static field" is quite safe, compared to a "warp field."

So... where is the "static subspace field" being generated? THAT is the real question.

In TNG-era terms, it's safe to say that each subsection of a ship has the ability to generate such a "static subspace field." But in TOS-era terms, there's no reason to assume the same thing.

I assume that the WNMHGB sequence involves Enterprise creating a subspace field (not a "warp field") in the nacelles.

I still haven't decided if I think that the saucer needs to have the ability to generate its own "static subspace field" when operating in independent mode. Yes, it's NICE... but is it practical in TOS-era terms?

In my TOS 1701 work, I've got a couple of places where I've been CONSIDERING putting "field coils" in the impulse housing. Basically, to either side of the impulse housing (outboard of the thrust units and behind the row of three fusion reactors), there is some empty space, as seen here:

What I'm CONSIDERING doing is putting "field coils" in those spaces, to permit the saucer to generate its own subspace field (in emergencies only, after separation!) to make it a practical "deep space lifeboat" without having to be a generational vessel.

Remember, though... in my take on "FTL impulse," the practical "speed limit" is about 75c, and that's at the top end (after that, you get "relativistic effects within subspace"). 75c is, in "Trekkian" terms, the rough equivalent of about WF4.2. So, it's reasonable to say that the saucer, when separated, would be able to sustain something equivalent to about warp 3 for long enough to make planetfall in a nearby system.

 

[Vance]

I say 'non-newtonian' for a few reasons.. but the most obvious is "Reverse Impulse!" .. as well as time dilation...

 

[Santaman]

^^ Add that in the TMP refit there actually is no exhaust but the impulse engines are like the warp drive fitted with a similar ribbed "glass" sheet which just glows, the Ent D has the same thing just the colour is different.

And then there's the incredible acceleration, the relatively tiny amount of fuel carried by the ship, and so on and so on...

 

[xraydeltaone]

(snipped a bunch of good stuff)

So... where is the "static subspace field" being generated? THAT is the real question.

In TNG-era terms, it's safe to say that each subsection of a ship has the ability to generate such a "static subspace field." But in TOS-era terms, there's no reason to assume the same thing.

I assume that the WNMHGB sequence involves Enterprise creating a subspace field (not a "warp field") in the nacelles.

I still haven't decided if I think that the saucer needs to have the ability to generate its own "static subspace field" when operating in independent mode. Yes, it's NICE... but is it practical in TOS-era terms?

In my TOS 1701 work, I've got a couple of places where I've been CONSIDERING putting "field coils" in the impulse housing. Basically, to either side of the impulse housing (outboard of the thrust units and behind the row of three fusion reactors), there is some empty space, as seen here:


What I'm CONSIDERING doing is putting "field coils" in those spaces, to permit the saucer to generate its own subspace field (in emergencies only, after separation!) to make it a practical "deep space lifeboat" without having to be a generational vessel.

Remember, though... in my take on "FTL impulse," the practical "speed limit" is about 75c, and that's at the top end (after that, you get "relativistic effects within subspace"). 75c is, in "Trekkian" terms, the rough equivalent of about WF4.2. So, it's reasonable to say that the saucer, when separated, would be able to sustain something equivalent to about warp 3 for long enough to make planetfall in a nearby system.

I love how you're describing impulse. As you say, it solves a bunch of problems, and does so very elegantly. I'm totally on board, and am very happy with the way it seems to solve a bunch of impulse/ftl inconsistencies.
However, I don't like the idea of the TOS Enterprise having multiple sets of subspace field generating equipment. To me, nacelles = subspace field generators. They can be used to create both warp field and subspace fields. How do I justify that? Well, shuttlecraft have nacelles too, and at least in TOS are impulse only. If they had subspace generators integrated into the impulse engines, you wouldn't expect to see a pair of nacelles attached.

Of course this does reduce the range of the saucer as a lifeboat, but to me this just adds a little dramatic tension.

Of course by the time of TNG you'd expect the technology to have matured enough that they could incorporate driver coils into the impulse engines.

 

[Cary L. Brown]

I say 'non-newtonian' for a few reasons.. but the most obvious is "Reverse Impulse!" .. as well as time dilation...

Time dilation has nothing whatsoever to do with whether or not the system is Newtonian.

In order to establish that it is not subject to "time dilation" effects, you need something more. "Time dilation" is, after all, related to the fabric of normal space-time (as we currently understand it, granted that our current understanding is far from complete!)

Explain how such a system might work... why it would use a fundamental Newtonian term (no less critical to basic physics than, say, the terms "mass" or "force")... and how you envision your approach isolating it from relativistic effects.

And since we already have a term called "warp drive" which is clearly separate from "impulse propulsion," be careful to differentiate how the two are different (other than "they have different names").

And regarding "reverse thrust," well...as has been pointed out many times before, there are "thrust reversers" on many directional-thrust systems (such as airliner engines), which can be implemented through a variety of means. There is no real indication on-screen that the ship doesn't literally flip around and fire impulse engines into the direction of travel, is there? We only know that the view on the main viewscreen doesn't change... but this tells us nothing, since that isn't a window, it's a computer monitor.

^^ Add that in the TMP refit there actually is no exhaust but the impulse engines are like the warp drive fitted with a similar ribbed "glass" sheet which just glows, the Ent D has the same thing just the colour is different.

Well, there is the little fact that we're looking at a MODEL, not a real spacecraft... the "glass sheet" isn't a real engine, it's a modeling trick intended to represent an engine. The fact that we have lines painted on a piece of frosted clear material with a light bulb behind it on the model should not be taken as a clear indication that the "real" refit Enterprise had a piece of frosted clear material with lines painted on it and a light bulb behind it in that location, should it?

Those "lines" represent louvers, as far as I'm concerned... limited up-down vectoring for the output thrust. Something which is done in real-life propulsion systems, by the way, and is VERY common in lower-pressure systems (say, the air vents in your car's interior).

I'm just saying... models are intended to represent something else. You can "interpret" a model too literally, sometimes. I think that the above is an example of where this is the case.

And then there's the incredible acceleration, the relatively tiny amount of fuel carried by the ship, and so on and so on...[/QUOTE]

 

[Vance]

Cary, the ship hits near C under impulse power (several times, explicitly so)... if the ship is Newtonian, then the Enterprise would be arriving thousands of years in 'outside' time after it left. So, if they're NOT getting dialation issues, then they're not Newtonian. Fair enough to accept, really.

Also, once again, subspace is the warped space that a warp field generates. VOY technobabble was written by idiots.

 

[Cary L. Brown]

Cary, the ship hits near C under impulse power (several times, explicitly so)... if the ship is Newtonian, then the Enterprise would be arriving thousands of years in 'outside' time after it left. So, if they're NOT getting dialation issues, then they're not Newtonian. Fair enough to accept, really.

I get it. You don't want to read anything I've written, so instead of arguing against the point I'm making, you ignore it and restate your own point.

For anyone who's NOT so set on ignoring the argument they're arguing against, though...

The crux of my concept is that (as established throughout latter-era Trek) a "static subspace field" has two major effects:

• Increase in the "local speed of light"
• Decrease in "observed mass" (relative to real space/time)

So... put your ship into a bubble of subspace, and you have a tremendously decreased mass... meaning you can accelerate a lot faster. And since your own "local speed limit" inside the bubble isn't the same as within real space/time, you can go much faster.

Of course, there are still limits to this... you still have that "local speed of light" (which I'll call "c-prime" for the same of the discussion) within your subspace bubble to deal with, and as you approach .75c-prime, you begin to see the beginning of relativistic concerns cropping up (though they stay reasonably inconsequential 'til well up into the 90 percent range, just like with "real space/time")

Also, once again, subspace is the warped space that a warp field generates.

No, it's not.

Subspace is defined in one of two ways:

• A make-believe term created to explain a ship doing something we cannot currently envision being able to do.
• As defined in-fiction, subspace is a different "level" of reality... a continuum which exists at a level "lower" than what we call "real space/time," but is so close to our level of existence that you can see between the two realms, and the laws of reality are quite similar (though not identical) in each.

At no point in the history of Star Trek has "subspace" ever been explicitly equated to "warp drive." In fact, from TOS's "subspace radio" to the use of "static subspace fields" to increase the 1701-D's computer processing capabilities... and on and on... this particular bit of "scriptwriting magic" has been used, repeatedly, in ways that have NOTHING to do with "warp drive."

VOY technobabble was written by idiots.

Quite probably true, but since I made no reference at any level to Voyager, I'm quite curious where that comment is coming from. Had I referenced "Voyager in ANY fashion whatsoever, that would be a reasonable response. But since I didn't... and since I've never even WATCHED the series, really (a few episodes here and there, none of which appealed to me), I fail to see why you'd make that comment.

 

[Vance]

Simple, because it was VOY that explicitly defined subspace in the way you're mentioning. (Though TNG has some odd statements, not quite as definitive, on its own). As I've stated elsewhere, subspace radio was really just supposed to be a microburst of 'warp' that sent a single through - no more complicated than that.

I explain this in more detail in the tech area... but the overall point is really that the impulse engines alone are non Newtonian, and are capable of low-yield warp. So, a 'saucer' part of a starship could probably make it one or two systems over in a pinch. (As it actually does the few times it comes up.)

 

[GilmourD]

Has anybody ever read the TNG tech manual? I think the part where the computer cores have a subspace field around them for FTL operation fits entirely with what Cary said above.

 

[Vance]

Has anybody ever read the TNG tech manual? I think the part where the computer cores have a subspace field around them for FTL operation fits entirely with what Cary said above.

Read it, dismissed it. The TNG tech manual was ignored through the entire run of the series, and has many things in it which simply make no sense. (One reason that the TNG and DS9 tech manuals did so poorly was that there clearly weren't being referred to in the shows.)

 

[Santaman]

[

• Increase in the "local speed of light"
• Decrease in "observed mass" (relative to real space/time)

So... put your ship into a bubble of subspace, and you have a tremendously decreased mass... meaning you can accelerate a lot faster.

I don't think so, since your exhaust matter (if impulse engines exhaust anything) will be tremendously reduced in mass/energy as well negating the effect entirely. at least that seems logical to me.