A Warp Core?
- Thread starter shapeshifter
- Start date
The whole "warp core"-thing is one of those little details that was poorly thought out from the get-go, and thus it should....go!
I know, I know...it's "canon", but it really was a stupid idea from a writer who wanted to give us details as to how Star Trek ships worked, but didn't really think it through.
Let's think about the warp-core.
It made its first appearance in Star Trek The Motion Picture, but at no point was it ever defined as any kind of reactor or power-plant. It was just a big glowing tower-thingie, obviously intended to be a power conduit and nothing more.
It wasn't until the Next Generation that we found out the glowing tower-whatsit was itself the main reactor.
To really understand why that's such a stupid idea we need to back up a bit. The whole point of MJ's modular primary/secondary hull design was to house the ship's power plant in a separate structure from the main habitation module (the saucer), in case of emergencies or for ease of replacement. Modular design, it's a cool idea!
So the entire reason to have a secondary hull is to house the power plant. That being so, how much sense does it make to orient the "warp-core" vertically at the front of the laterally-oriented hull-structure that only exists to house the power-plant?! It doesn't even fit in all the way! The warp core extends up into the connecting "neck". This would be exactly the same as flipping the engine in your car so it's standing up on end sticking halfway out past the hood. It just makes no sense.
Get rid of the stupid warp-core. The power-plant should actually fit inside the secondary hull like how a cars engine fits under the hood, otherwise there's no point in the multiple-hulls design in the first place.
Better yet would be for Star Trek writers to stop explaining exactly how their imaginary technology works. For one, it's unnecessary. Example: In Empire Strikes back, we knew the hyperdrive was broken, and that was enough. Delving too deep into technical specifics is too often used by lazy writers as a substitute for real writing that actually tells a good story. Second, more often than not when they try to tell us exactly how the ship works they wind up coming with dumb, nonsensical ideas like how the glowing tower-whatsit is the "warp-core".
I know, I know...it's "canon", but it really was a stupid idea from a writer who wanted to give us details as to how Star Trek ships worked, but didn't really think it through.
Let's think about the warp-core.
It made its first appearance in Star Trek The Motion Picture, but at no point was it ever defined as any kind of reactor or power-plant. It was just a big glowing tower-thingie, obviously intended to be a power conduit and nothing more.
It wasn't until the Next Generation that we found out the glowing tower-whatsit was itself the main reactor.
To really understand why that's such a stupid idea we need to back up a bit. The whole point of MJ's modular primary/secondary hull design was to house the ship's power plant in a separate structure from the main habitation module (the saucer), in case of emergencies or for ease of replacement. Modular design, it's a cool idea!
So the entire reason to have a secondary hull is to house the power plant. That being so, how much sense does it make to orient the "warp-core" vertically at the front of the laterally-oriented hull-structure that only exists to house the power-plant?! It doesn't even fit in all the way! The warp core extends up into the connecting "neck". This would be exactly the same as flipping the engine in your car so it's standing up on end sticking halfway out past the hood. It just makes no sense.
Get rid of the stupid warp-core. The power-plant should actually fit inside the secondary hull like how a cars engine fits under the hood, otherwise there's no point in the multiple-hulls design in the first place.
Better yet would be for Star Trek writers to stop explaining exactly how their imaginary technology works. For one, it's unnecessary. Example: In Empire Strikes back, we knew the hyperdrive was broken, and that was enough. Delving too deep into technical specifics is too often used by lazy writers as a substitute for real writing that actually tells a good story. Second, more often than not when they try to tell us exactly how the ship works they wind up coming with dumb, nonsensical ideas like how the glowing tower-whatsit is the "warp-core".
Last edited:
Rii
Rear Admiral
Similar to the USN Ticonderoga class, the first batch came equipped with rotating-arm missile launchers, all the rest with vertical launch cells.
We've heard inferences about massive sets. My guess is that main engineering will be a massive set with all kinds of bells and whistles.
Based on the bridge photos we've seen so far, the warp core will be a giant, pulsating iPod.
Based on the bridge photos we've seen so far, the warp core will be a giant, pulsating iPod.
GodThingFormerly
A Different Kind of Asshole
The vertical intermix shaft connects to the NCC-1701 Refit's impulse engines, which are located on the trailing edge of the saucer (they have to get their power from somewhere).
TGT
The pic you linked is Probert's interpretation of Jeffries' original design, and while I like the exterior, Probert's interpretation as to the specifics of the interior aren't that good. I guess you could say the impulse engine has to be hooked up to the power-plant in the secondary hull via a large conduit, but why? Isn't it just as reasonable to say the impulse engines have their own dedicated power-supply? That would be more in keeping with the modular approach to Jeffries' design, and it would make sense that the impulse engines wouldn't require nearly as much energy as the warp engines. Just say the impulse drive has it's own dedicated fusion reactor or something. Makes just as much, if not more sense.
But really, that picture predates the introduction of the "warp-core" - Probert did those drawings before the glowing-tower-thing was explicitly defined as the the main power-reactor (circa TNG). Now it is defined as such, so we're not talking about a power conduit, we're talking about the "warp-core", the main reactor chamber.
Defining the glowing tower as the reactor chamber & labeling it the "warp-core" is a dumb, poorly thought out idea that should be completely disregarded in the set design - that's all.
Last edited:
GodThingFormerly
A Different Kind of Asshole
The original NCC-1701's impulse engines were thermonuclear fusion energized according to dialogue in The Doomsday Machine, but Gene Roddenberry - in his infinite wisdom - approved Andrew Probert's proposal to make them anti-matter energized for ST:TMP. Aside from M/AM reactions being vastly more energetic and efficient than any conceivable form of fusion (i.e., tokamak or spheromak reactors employing Cat-DD or DHe^3 fuels), the Refit design would also save on mass and complexity penalties by discarding a separate primary impulse propulsion reactor system. It also gave production designer Harold Michelson an excuse to put a big glowy tube in the engine room set.
If Abrams is making a TOS-era pastiche then obviously a 24th century "warp core" would be badly out of place aboard a 23rd century starship.
TGT
We have known ever since the earliest episodes of TOS that the thing they call Main Engineering is an expansive maze, supposedly much larger than the various sets that were used to portray its most important corners. If STXI shows us facilities much larger than what we saw in TOS, that in itself is not a big problem: we can just say that the TOS folks installed a few more divisive bulkheads for safety reasons.
And if STXI shows us elements familiar from, say, ENT (the boiler-like warp reactor) or TNG (the glowing tower), it's not too difficult to pretend that those were hidden behind some of the bulkheads in TOS. I'd certainly want to hide that glowing tower behind as much metal as I could - it looks like it would spew lots of dangerous radiation and other varieties of gruesome death if the forcefields around it hiccuped.
Agreed, though, that TNG made a mistake in portraying the warp reactor as something residing mainly in the connecting neck. The TMP arrangement could well have been excused as showing the power leads of a vast reactor assembly that resided underfloor, that is, in the engineering hull proper - but the placement of Main Engineering at the juncture of those power leads was a bit silly, when it could have sat in a more central location amidst that reactor machinery. And the giant cargo hold area dictated on Probert really made a mess of the concept of an "engineering hull".
...Although it wouldn't be that difficult to believe that the engineers responsible for the refit had been able to miniaturize the power machinery a lot, freeing significant space in the secondary hull, after which other engineers found no better use for it than extra cargo space. Miniaturization of power systems has plenty of real-world precedent from a century ago, when bulky coal-burning machinery was replaced by oil burners and eventually by diesels; many a big ship was left with surprising amounts of empty space in her belly.
Timo Saloniemi
And if STXI shows us elements familiar from, say, ENT (the boiler-like warp reactor) or TNG (the glowing tower), it's not too difficult to pretend that those were hidden behind some of the bulkheads in TOS. I'd certainly want to hide that glowing tower behind as much metal as I could - it looks like it would spew lots of dangerous radiation and other varieties of gruesome death if the forcefields around it hiccuped.
Agreed, though, that TNG made a mistake in portraying the warp reactor as something residing mainly in the connecting neck. The TMP arrangement could well have been excused as showing the power leads of a vast reactor assembly that resided underfloor, that is, in the engineering hull proper - but the placement of Main Engineering at the juncture of those power leads was a bit silly, when it could have sat in a more central location amidst that reactor machinery. And the giant cargo hold area dictated on Probert really made a mess of the concept of an "engineering hull".
...Although it wouldn't be that difficult to believe that the engineers responsible for the refit had been able to miniaturize the power machinery a lot, freeing significant space in the secondary hull, after which other engineers found no better use for it than extra cargo space. Miniaturization of power systems has plenty of real-world precedent from a century ago, when bulky coal-burning machinery was replaced by oil burners and eventually by diesels; many a big ship was left with surprising amounts of empty space in her belly.
Timo Saloniemi
...Indeed, we may be seeing the facility in a somewhat unfinished state at that. There might be permanent structures there eventually, and the cargo containers we see bolted to the floor might not be there once the construction is completed.
That is, yes, the silly upper two-thirds are the ill-utilized part of the cargo hold (even with Probert's clever movable floors) - but accessing the lowest third would be very difficult if the modules you suggest were in place. Possibly the ship is lacking numerous elements there, including a solid partitioning wall á la ST5:TFF, the lower two-thirds of the hold innards, and the final cargo hold area that is to be constructed in the uppermost third.
Timo Saloniemi
That is, yes, the silly upper two-thirds are the ill-utilized part of the cargo hold (even with Probert's clever movable floors) - but accessing the lowest third would be very difficult if the modules you suggest were in place. Possibly the ship is lacking numerous elements there, including a solid partitioning wall á la ST5:TFF, the lower two-thirds of the hold innards, and the final cargo hold area that is to be constructed in the uppermost third.
Timo Saloniemi
Last edited:
GodThingFormerly
A Different Kind of Asshole
^ Timo is responding to this post (which I deleted by accident). My apologies for the confusion. 
It is entirely possible that dedicated, self-contained engineering modules optimized for - amongst other things - 5YM requirements can be maneuvered through the shuttlebay doors via workbee and "plugged" into the upper two-thirds portion of the green area on Probert's diagram, although the turboshaft placement is a problem which can be bypassed with Winnebago-style slideouts. Obviously they would not have been needed for the comparatively quick V'ger intercept mission.
TGT
It is entirely possible that dedicated, self-contained engineering modules optimized for - amongst other things - 5YM requirements can be maneuvered through the shuttlebay doors via workbee and "plugged" into the upper two-thirds portion of the green area on Probert's diagram, although the turboshaft placement is a problem which can be bypassed with Winnebago-style slideouts. Obviously they would not have been needed for the comparatively quick V'ger intercept mission.
TGT
GodThingFormerly
A Different Kind of Asshole
I naturally disagree. Cargo can still be fully accessed via the floor-level corridors visible from Kirk's POV as well as the two turboshafts (which presumably have lift stops on the same floor) even when Probert's "rollaway" floors are closed and with the proposed mission module installed.
TGT
Umm, in what manner would that help? The cargo containers themselves would not fit either in the corridors or in the turbolifts. The whole idea of having the container infrastructure would be lost, then.
Sealing off the lowermost floor, and possibly one of the two uppermost ones, would still leave an access route for rolling in the containers, even if the workbee trains couldn't maneuver in with the displayed ease any more.
Timo Saloniemi
Sealing off the lowermost floor, and possibly one of the two uppermost ones, would still leave an access route for rolling in the containers, even if the workbee trains couldn't maneuver in with the displayed ease any more.
Timo Saloniemi
GodThingFormerly
A Different Kind of Asshole
The containers themselves obviously wouldn't fit inside shipboard corridors and turbolifts, but their contents would. I fail to see the problem.
The containers loaded aboard the ship via workbee would by necessity be "trapped" once the mission module is installed, but any one of them can be accessed from long-term storage behind the bulkheads if the floor is kept clear as a temporary staging area when requesting a particular container. Besides, once the starship has been fully provisioned most of its subsequent cargo would presumably be beamed aboard via transporter.
TGT
Last edited:
Somehow, the idea of trapped containers doesn't appeal to me at all. Having those oddly shaped things as a permanent storage arrangement smacks of inefficiency - conventional shelves down there would do much better. But I'm not at all opposed to the idea of mission modules residing in the hold - I just feel that this lemon of a hold doesn't exactly improve if those modules block the use of those odd containers.
And no, I'm not particularly enamored with my own idea of halted construction, either. The lowermost level does have those nice built-in berths for containers (although again it would probably make much more sense to store each individual segment separately and upright, for reasons of practicability AND packing density), and it seems the builders put a bit of effort into creating those.
Perhaps a typical frontline combat/exploration/colony shepherd starship indeed needs a massive cargo area, and a giant deflector/sensor dish, and the secondary hull exists for those; the powerplant is just a compact little afterthought, and other starships manage just fine without a secondary hull, a cargo hold and a dish (see the Reliant). And this could "always" have been the case, from STXI to TOS to TMP.
Timo Saloniemi
And no, I'm not particularly enamored with my own idea of halted construction, either. The lowermost level does have those nice built-in berths for containers (although again it would probably make much more sense to store each individual segment separately and upright, for reasons of practicability AND packing density), and it seems the builders put a bit of effort into creating those.
Perhaps a typical frontline combat/exploration/colony shepherd starship indeed needs a massive cargo area, and a giant deflector/sensor dish, and the secondary hull exists for those; the powerplant is just a compact little afterthought, and other starships manage just fine without a secondary hull, a cargo hold and a dish (see the Reliant). And this could "always" have been the case, from STXI to TOS to TMP.
Timo Saloniemi
GodThingFormerly
A Different Kind of Asshole
Perhaps the cargo containers can - with Probert's approval, of course - also be accessed through ports beneath the two shuttlecraft elevators in emergencies, thus rendering your concerns essentially moot.
TGT
Actually no. TMP gave us the "horizontal and vertical intermix shafts." TNG was the first time we saw a single dedicated "intermix chamber." And also the first time we were told that dilithium was somehow used in the reaction process (prior to that, it was always implied to be what converted the power into usable energy which could run the ship).
It does look cool, but it doesn't make any sense under the "canon" definition.
There's 2 solutions:
A. Get rid of the warp-core concept entirely and lose the glowing tower
B. Leave the glowing tower but don't write dialogue that goes into any specific detail as to exactly what it is or how it works. This approach is probably better. Star Trek tends to get way too far up it's own a$$ when it comes to technobabble, and the techno-stuff the writers come up with is nearly always poorly thought out. The warp-core is but one example. Better to go the route of Star Wars - keep the technobabble to an absolute minimum...that'd also be better in that not only is treknology too often nonsensical, but the technobabble amounts to lazy writing - it's just filler dialogue.
Of course, most Trek fans seem to enjoy being told these sorts of details, so I don't expect writers to go with option B. If they must define how the ship works though, at least think it through so it actually makes sense in context. That's all I'm saying.
GodThingFormerly
A Different Kind of Asshole
Sounds like we'll be getting a Warp Core according to this http://www.denofgeek.com/movies/144817/star_trek_the_new_enterprise_revealed.html at the bottom of the article.
Similar threads
