Spoilers 31st/32nd Century Ships Revealed

[Deks]

I doubt Warping in Reverse is nearly as efficient as Warping forewards, especially if you don't have dedicated Navigational Deflector Dishes mounted for your vessel to go in that direction. There are probably "Speed Limits" for Warping Backwards due to non-existent Navigational Dish emitting a Deflector field for Warp Travel, so relying on Shields is probably "Sub-Optimal".

I'd see it akin to going reverse in an automobile, you would be incredibly speed & acceleration limited going in reverse.

Possibly, but we really wouldn't know if speed and efficiency are affected going to impulse or warp backwards (or even sideways if possible).

Though, one could posit that because the Main Deflector dish (which moves interstellar objects and dust out of the way) is placed on the front of the ship facing 'forward', traveling in that direction at Warp or Impulse would be most efficient - but again, these people have complete control over shield geometry (And for the most part their own subspace field) and how its shaped (they can even turn a section of the shield/field on or off without lowering it across the entire ship... so, they can technically place a 'generator' anywhere on the ship and 'focus' the field on a given angle or vector to allow a ship to move in that direction without facing the front of the ship that way.

Technically a field like that would be like a bubble (and the word has been used before)... so, largely spherical in how its shaped but not a perfect sphere (more like a squashed bubble).

But because of the way these ships are 'designed' (aka visually represented), 99% of the time you'd see them going to warp facing 'forward'. It would only be in rare situations where they wouldn't have enough time to turn the ship around and warp away to simply go to warp backwards or sideways (and then rotate the ship while at Warp so the forward section is facing the direction in which its heading to).

Anyway, my point wasn't about efficiency or speed... but about the fact that UFP ships use field manipulation to achieve Impulse speeds (half a light speed or even slightly above that in some cases) and Warp... and that as such, 'direction' at which the ship is facing shouldn't really matter.

So, the fan animation having nacelles turning into a direction the ship wants to warp to doesn't make sense (and is completely unnecessary because they are effectively nothing more than FTL field generators and the field in turn [its shape/geometry and properties would be controlled from the bridge and would usually follow ship's overall design).

The only thing that produces a classical 'exhaust' as we understand it (and if I'm not mistaken) would effectively be the manuevering thrusters (which aren't field manipulators).

 

[Ronald Held]

Maybe not too worried about damage if you have to go to warp in reverse, due to danger?

 

[Ar-Pharazon]

I remember when Voyager was first on air and I was in high school at the time. I had afternoon/evening classes and missed VOY episode 'Scorpion' (though my sister recorded it for me on the VCR).
Anyway, my cousin mentioned to me that when he saw it, VOY was hit by the 8472 beam and the ship went to warp sideways.
That fan animation actually reminded me of how I envisioned VOY escaping into Warp... and I was a bit disappointed when I saw VOY was basically forced to spin out of control but still went to Warp as it usually did and not sideways like that fan animation suggests (which to be fair, doesn't make sense - the nacelles pointing in a different direction don't have anything to do with the ship entering Warp at that angle... they simply generate the Warp field which is necessary for the ship to enter warp - and because the ship's deflector dish is situated at the front of the ship, then that's the most logical angle for a ship to enter warp - though TOS suggested the Enterprise could Warp in reverse... and since UFP ships are using FIELD MANIPULATION for achieving both Impulse and Warp, movement in any direction should be doable (but the nacelles themselves wouldn't have to rotate).

The Enterprise D was flicked/flung into warp speed a couple times, whilst spinning around. Different means of propulsion of course.

I doubt Warping in Reverse is nearly as efficient as Warping forewards, especially if you don't have dedicated Navigational Deflector Dishes mounted for your vessel to go in that direction. There are probably "Speed Limits" for Warping Backwards due to non-existent Navigational Dish emitting a Deflector field for Warp Travel, so relying on Shields is probably "Sub-Optimal".

I'd see it akin to going reverse in an automobile, you would be incredibly speed & acceleration limited going in reverse.

Star Fleet Battles allowed warp in reverse. I remember running in reverse from the planet eater so I could use all forward arc phasers on it, while not letting it get too close.

 

[Kamen Rider Blade]

Anyway, my point wasn't about efficiency or speed... but about the fact that UFP ships use field manipulation to achieve Impulse speeds (half a light speed or even slightly above that in some cases) and Warp... and that as such, 'direction' at which the ship is facing shouldn't really matter.

Except that Impulse Exhausts are almost always mounted to face the aft of a vessel.
Ergo, they could manipulate it to go any direction, but they don't, probably for efficiency reasons.
The Fields are probably facing Aft to get maximum efficient STL thrust.

The only species that we've really seen be omni-directional with at FTL or STL speeds are the Borg.

Star Fleet Battles allowed warp in reverse. I remember running in reverse from the planet eater so I could use all forward arc phasers on it, while not letting it get too close.

That's a neat in game feature to allow a reverse gear.

The Enterprise D was flicked/flung into warp speed a couple times, whilst spinning around. Different means of propulsion of course.

Those are largely external factors inducing Warp Speed onto the Enterprise D.

 

[Vale]

Since the warp propulsive effect is caused by the sequential energising of warp coils with highly energetic plasma, it should be possible for ships to warp backwards just by reversing the energisation sequence. One assumes that they will be less efficient doing this, and as the navigational deflector points forwards it would probably require full shields and slower speeds anyway to avoid the ship colliding with any space debris. And the Bussards would be all but useless facing the wrong direction.

 

[Deks]

Except that Impulse Exhausts are almost always mounted to face the aft of a vessel.
Ergo, they could manipulate it to go any direction, but they don't, probably for efficiency reasons.
The Fields are probably facing Aft to get maximum efficient STL thrust.

The only species that we've really seen be omni-directional with at FTL or STL speeds are the Borg.

The dialogue in TNG suggests a SF ship can use Impulse in reverse, and TOS suggested that Warping backwards is doable... but as you say, given how the ships are designed, SF only rarely uses 'omnidirectional' field manipulation for Impulse and Warp and probably only if there is no other option.

 

[Kamen Rider Blade]

The dialogue in TNG suggests a SF ship can use Impulse in reverse, and TOS suggested that Warping backwards is doable... but as you say, given how the ships are designed, SF only rarely uses 'omnidirectional' field manipulation for Impulse and Warp and probably only if there is no other option.

It's like the reverse gear in your automobile, it's not the primary mode of travel.

It's there for local manuevering / parking, it's never designed for maximum efficiency or primary travel.

All systems are designed for moving Foreward at maximum efficiency, ergo the ships are designed a certain way.

The Borg don't give a damn and build based on decentralization and 3D geometric shape aesthetics.

Ergo they can go in any direction with equal ease, the only difference is probably technical complexity of design and many layers of redundancy to allow for that to happen.

Ergo the huge volume / mass on Borg Vessels.

 

[Deks]

The Enterprise D was flicked/flung into warp speed a couple times, whilst spinning around. Different means of propulsion of course.

From a stationary position no less.
Once was by the Alteans repulsor beam and then the second time by Q.
Both instances were pretty controlled 'flungs' though and have protected the ship from being torn apart - though admittedly, I saw VOY before I saw TNG.

 

[Deks]

It's like the reverse gear in your automobile, it's not the primary mode of travel.

It's there for local manuevering / parking, it's never designed for maximum efficiency or primary travel.

All systems are designed for moving Foreward at maximum efficiency, ergo the ships are designed a certain way.

The Borg don't give a damn and build based on decentralization and 3D geometric shape aesthetics.

Ergo they can go in any direction with equal ease, the only difference is probably technical complexity of design and many layers of redundancy to allow for that to happen.

Ergo the huge volume / mass on Borg Vessels.

I don't think the Borg not caring is a factor. They probably have less issues partly because of how decentralized their systems are... but also because they use basic geometrical shapes for design of their ships... which makes it easier to distribute and copy technology in an equal manner across the ship - especially with ships as big as theirs.
For SF (or other alien organisations) which use a more 'elaborate' ship design, things are pretty focused for 'forward' function (as far as speed and efficiency goes) as you mentioned.

With basic geometric shapes being scaled up... you can technically have 6 deflector dishes (one for each side of the cube), multiple power generation systems, again something like 6 main reactors (whatever it is the Borg use), and a plethora of other things.
In SF ships, they usually only have forward facing Main Deflector dish and just recently started using a secondary/auxiliary (and smaller) deflector dish (like on VOY) - though for this we never actually SAW a practical function, did we?
Plus, there's supposed to be a backup/redundancy system in place, but the main Deflector dish doesn't seem to have this... probably because it takes up a huge portion of the forward section of a ship.

 

[Ar-Pharazon]

From a stationary position no less.
Once was by the Alteans repulsor beam and then the second time by Q.
Both instances were pretty controlled 'flungs' though and have protected the ship from being torn apart - though admittedly, I saw VOY before I saw TNG.

I would imagine the deflectors and SI field would have kept the ship from sustaining any serious damage, unless their warp field automatically went up (which I don't see).

 

[Kamen Rider Blade]

I don't think the Borg not caring is a factor. They probably have less issues partly because of how decentralized their systems are... but also because they use basic geometrical shapes for design of their ships... which makes it easier to distribute and copy technology in an equal manner across the ship - especially with ships as big as theirs.

The only reason they would logically decentralize their system is because the experience of the Borg has them meeting resistance everywhere they assimilate, ergo they expect some amount of system losses (in combat/process of assimilation). Ergo they go for simple 3D Geometric shapes & Copy/Paste redundant systems across the multiple facets of the 3D Geometric Shapes.

For SF (or other alien organisations) which use a more 'elaborate' ship design, things are pretty focused for 'forward' function (as far as speed and efficiency goes) as you mentioned.

That's because StarFleet targets efficiency for 'Foreward Movement' based around their Paired Warp Field Principles

Spoiler: Side Orthographic Perspective of Enterprise-D's Warp Field Geometry

Spoiler: Side & Top Orthographic perspective on Enterprise-D's Warp Field Geometry

Spoiler: Top Orthographic Perspective of Voyager's Warp Field Geometry

Spoiler: Side & Top Orthographic View of Miranda Class Warp Field Geometry

Spoiler: 3D View of Enterprise-D's Warp Field Geometry

Spoiler: Alternative 3D view of Enterprise-D's Warp Field Geometry

With basic geometric shapes being scaled up... you can technically have 6 deflector dishes (one for each side of the cube), multiple power generation systems, again something like 6 main reactors (whatever it is the Borg use), and a plethora of other things.

They probably have more than 6, but that's neither here nor there. The Borg's level of redundancy is crazy high and designed for ease of repair, but they didn't focus on physical armor until the later Tactical Cube variants. Probably a gradual evolution of the Borg Design.

In SF ships, they usually only have forward facing Main Deflector dish and just recently started using a secondary/auxiliary (and smaller) deflector dish (like on VOY) - though for this we never actually SAW a practical function, did we?

The Secondary Smaller Dish in the Saucer section is probably only designed for Navigational Deflector duties while the large Main Dish can probably handle Deflector & Primary Defensive Shield duties as well.

If your larger Main Dish gets damaged or Destroyed, you can still run away at Warp Speeds with only the Navigational Deflector Dish doing it's job.

Plus, there's supposed to be a backup/redundancy system in place, but the main Deflector dish doesn't seem to have this... probably because it takes up a huge portion of the forward section of a ship.

It's only a backup for Navigational Deflection Duties, not "Main Shield" duties.

But if both systems gets taken down, then you're out of luck and stuck to STL movement which leaves you trapped.

 

[Deks]

I would imagine the deflectors and SI field would have kept the ship from sustaining any serious damage, unless their warp field automatically went up (which I don't see).

I think it had more to do with the Alteans and Q protecting the ship from getting torn apart while being flung (after all, when SF ships were rescuing other ships, they had to reinforce the rescued ship's structural integrity to be able to go to Warp in the first place - so I imagine a similar/same thing was done to the ENT-D by both the Alteans and Q).

 

[Markonian]

The Merian class is coming to STO.
It has been categorised as the Merian class science dreadnought.

And we now have an official name for the 32nd century shuttlecraft: 32c. Federation shuttlecraft.

 

[Kamen Rider Blade]

And we now have an official name for the 32nd century shuttlecraft: 32c. Federation shuttlecraft.

Wow, that was so Anti-Climatic of a name choice.

 

[Markonian]

Wow, that was so Anti-Climatic of a name choice.

I'd go for Type-32 shuttle or, to be a little more colorful, the Afterburner.

 

[NCC-73515]

The Merian class is coming to STO.
It has been categorised as the Merian class science dreadnought.

And we now have an official name for the 32nd century shuttlecraft: 32c. Federation shuttlecraft.

A science dreadnought makes as much sense as planned chaos theory, grounded aviation, or deep sea astronomy

 

[Kamen Rider Blade]

I'd go for Type-32 shuttle or, to be a little more colorful, the Afterburner.

Hell, if they called it the "iShuttle" because it looks like Apple made it. I'd be okay with it as a gag name.

They choose the most blandest name possible.

 

[Ar-Pharazon]

They had a Type 18 on the Defiant. Shoulda been to type 0320 by this point.

 

[fireproof78]

A science dreadnought makes as much sense as planned chaos theory, grounded aviation, or deep sea astronomy

Secondary definition of dreadnought: one that is among the largest or most powerful of its kind

 

[137th Gebirg]

"Science Dreadnought". I love these class designation word salads. This one tickles me in particular.