Dilithium Crystals -- What's the Point?

[Myasishchev]

^Which would explain why they went back to fusion based impulse engines in later models.

The way I see it, the refit Enterprise was something of a prototype, whereas the E-A is more of a regular production model.

I think of the Connie refit as a stopgap measure, intended only to keep the fleet barely modern until Reliants and especially Excelsiors achieved critical mass in the fleet, and ultimately not that good a ship (re)design, even for their time.

Otherwise, it's baffling why Reliants and Excelsiors are still in service in the 24thC when Constitutions aren't.

"She can still outrun us and outgun us." [emphasis mine]

 

[Ronald Held]

I believe the refit Enterprise was a testbed for new technologies, some of which made it into the Enterprise-A.

 

[Timo]

...And for all we know, the Constitution was such a superb example of the TOS generation of shipbuilding that there were only very few of these "silver bullet" vessels available for experimental refits. So even if the experiments went well, the results wouldn't have been particularly useful or operationally interesting. "Bulk" TOS era vessels, like the putative Miranda forebears, could have been refitted in greater quantity, and perhaps with greater success thanks to the experiments done on the useless former silver bullets, thus ending up serving longer.

Mind you, that's a bit like what happened after WWII: big cruisers were used as testbeds for modern SAM and ASW systems, but proved operationally worthless - yet those systems soon found their way to existing destroyers and increased their value and lifespans considerably.

Timo Saloniemi

 

[Captain Robert April]

I'm thinking my next project, after nailing down the TOS Enterprise, I'll take on the E-A, and differentiate it from the TMP refit.

 

[Doran]

Dilithium is an actual element, although it only exists in gas form. Here's an interesting link for those interested in this subject:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dilithium_(Star_Trek)#Fictional_elements_and_materials

I don't see them using the crystals as a containment apparatus, but more of a focusing mechanism, like the ruby is used in a laser.

 

[JuanBolio]

Dilithium is an actual element, although it only exists in gas form. Here's an interesting link for those interested in this subject:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dilithium_(Star_Trek)#Fictional_elements_and_materials

I don't see them using the crystals as a containment apparatus, but more of a focusing mechanism, like the ruby is used in a laser.

Focusing what - and to what end?

 

[Captain Robert April]

Where exactly does that wiki entry mention that dilithium is real?

 

[Myasishchev]

Where exactly does that wiki entry mention that dilithium is real?

I think the two thoughts were meant to be separate.

Li2 may or may not exist. If it does, it would be one weird as hell and I'd assume extremely unstable compound.

 

[aridas sofia]

Where exactly does that wiki entry mention that dilithium is real?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dilithium

 

[Timo]

I think any real-world commentary on dilithium should rather take into account that most chemical compound names we hear are actually abbreviations. We may speak of dihydrates, for example, but that doesn't mean "molecules that consist of two hydrate groups / water molecules" - it means "any and all molecules that enclose two water molecules as part of their structure". Dilithiums would probably be substances that contain two lithium atoms, but not merely two lithium atoms...

I'm thinking my next project, after nailing down the TOS Enterprise, I'll take on the E-A, and differentiate it from the TMP refit.

Cool. Any ideas on what the differences will be?

That is, the two seem to have different shuttlebays; but will the E-A one be explained as being a "lesser modification" of the TOS one than the refit, or will it be considered a "further modification"? Will the reactor be a "further development" of the refit one, or an "alternate approach"? Or perhaps even another "lesser modification", so that the largely unseen TOS reactor is interpreted as having contained E-A -style components, such as some of those we saw in TAS?

Timo Saloniemi

 

[Captain Robert April]

The main aspects will be, yes, the shuttlebay, and the incorporation of the E-D's engineering set, as well as dealing with the addition of the markings on the bottom of the secondary hull (the effects team's homage to the original ship; the TMP refit didn't have any markings down there).

 

[Timo]

One might argue that the markings are mere aesthetics, something the builders of the TMP ship left out because they thought the markings weren't sufficiently pretty. After all, when the markings were added, they didn't exactly scrape any new seams into the surface, to complement the scraping done for ST2, now did they?

In any case, looking forward to it all...

Timo Saloniemi

 

[Doran]

The again, saying dilithium with a scottish accent might have just sounded too cool.

 

[Captain Robert April]

A circle, three rectangles, and an odd t-shaped form make for pretty odd decorations, especially for an Earth ship.

No, they're clearly technical markings of some kind.

 

[Mytran]

Maybe they were painted on by a bored spacedock engineer who happened to be a fan of the original Constitution design?

 

[Captain Robert April]

And the Nasca Plains drawings were done by bored teenagers.

 

[Mytran]

Erm, possibly...

But anyway, I don't dispute that they may be hatches. however, their visual appearance would seem to be an in universe tip of the hat to the E-TOS. Considering the advances made between the E-TOS and E-A, what are the chances that the same warp drive equipment is going to be housed there?
Either that or it's an incredible coincidence that the exact same shapes turned up again!

Anyway, that's by the by. I look forward to seeing your interpretation of the E-A immensely; as you said, it's a neglected area of study

 

[Captain Robert April]

Not the same equipment, but the same type of gear, sure.

As for in-universe homages to the original ship, that's already handled rather explicitly with the registry number of NCC-1701-A. Going to something as obscure as access hatches on the underside of the secondary hull to serve as a tribute is kind of beyond the realm of plausibility.

 

[Mytran]

Not the same equipment, but the same type of gear, sure.

According to one of your cutaways (which may have been updated since, I'm not sure) the equipment you placed under the E_TOS hatches are the M/AM reactor, antimatter pods, antimatter generator, maintainence hatch. I agree, there's nothing TOS-specific about those things that would seem out of place in the E-A.

A further thought: If the "warp core" style tube (featured in the redressed TNG set) is on top of the M/AM reactor, this will locate it through where the cargo bay used to be - so I'm assuming that won't be in the same place either? Which isn't really an issue, as the shuttlebay in ST5 is new as well!

...beyond the realm of plausibility.

Dunno, plausibility is relative!

 

[Timo]

A further thought: If the "warp core" style tube (featured in the redressed TNG set) is on top of the M/AM reactor, this will locate it through where the cargo bay used to be - so I'm assuming that won't be in the same place either? Which isn't really an issue, as the shuttlebay in ST5 is new as well!

Regarding the vertical tube and the cargo bay, here's something of a "best case scenario" study of how far back the vertical tube could lie without protruding into camera view in TMP. Mainly done to allow for the long corridor ahead of Main Engineering that we saw in TMP...



This would more or less place the core where the yellow "ejection port" lies. The exact same configuration would work for the E-A, just with a thicker, ribbed vertical core and a somewhat differently configured Main Engineering. Or then the new thick core could be an additional component, since the TNG/ST5:TFF set apparently features both the thick core and the TMP vertical tube, the latter being some sort of a vertical plasma conduit. Like this:



The same cargo bay could be present in both ships - and in the TOS ship, much like speculated here:

http://www.ex-astris-scientia.org/scans/gus/1701-gus2.jpg

Indeed, all three shuttlebay layouts are also very similar - only, in TMP, the forward wall has been removed, and the side alcoves replaced by workbee stalls, something the refitters of the E-A apparently didn't bother to do.

Timo Saloniemi