Galaxy Class Saucer Seperation?

[GalaxyClass1701]

Can all the Galaxy Class starships seperate their saucers or just Enterprise since it is the flagship?

 

[C.E. Evans]

They were all designed to do that.

 

[GalaxyClass1701]

Thanks.

 

[C.E. Evans]

No prob. Presumably the Constitution-, Excelsior-, and Ambassador-classes (just to name a few) were likely capable of saucer separation too, IMO.

 

[Leathco]

If I remember right, the constitution class could detach the saucer, but required the resources of a starbase to reconnect.

 

[YARN]

If I remember right, the constitution class could detach the saucer with the appropriate application of phaser fire, but required the resources of a spacedock to reconnect.

fixed

 

[Scout101]

well, in that case, it could also seperate the nacelles, pylons, neck, and random bits of the saucer from each other

 

[Robert D. Robot]

If I remember right, the constitution class could detach the saucer, but required the resources of a starbase to reconnect.

That is my understanding, too. The ship was designed to allow the separation of the primary hull form the rest of the ship in an emergency, but this was almost certainly a last ditch effort where a future reattachment was probably not in the cards. With the resources and facilities in the secondary hull, it seems logical that the individual nacelles could also be jettisoned in an emergency, but I never heard that feature mentioned in Trek (although in "The Apple" I think Kirk tells Scotty to jettison the nacelles and blast out of orbit with the primary section(?), if that will save the ship).

 

[Guartho]

If I remember right, the constitution class could detach the saucer, but required the resources of a starbase to reconnect.

As I recall it's sort of an emergency life-boat option. Kirk tells Scotty in the Apple to be ready to "Jettsion the nacelles and get out in the saucer section if you have to."

 

[Timo]

It's an interesting question, really. Starfleet seems to have decided that regular saucer separation and reattachment wasn't such a good idea after all, because even the E-D stopped doing that rather early on. Perhaps the later Galaxies were indeed built without the expensive and complex docking machinery, and cannot detach and then reattach their saucers? At least not without dockyard help?

It might have been a one-off gimmick from the get-go, really. Starfleet would have seen the theoretical and technological possibility, but also the high cost and low usefulness - so the tech would only have been installed on a single vessel, intended to be the technological showpiece of the UFP whenever primitive cultures needed to be shocked and awed.

Certainly we never saw or heard another Galaxy class ship perform a non-emergency saucer separation and redocking. (The Odyssey and the Yamato apparently did separate their saucers, with the help of sufficiently large quantities of antimatter...)

Timo Saloniemi

 

[Albertese]

^^^
And yet in "Encounter At Farpoint" Commander Riker claims to have performed the maneuver before on his old ship....

Which was an Excelsior?!?!? Evidently this goes back farther than we'd thought.

--Alex

 

[Lazarus]

Did Riker say he'd done it on his old ship?

 

[Timo]

No, he only acknowledged that he was "qualified". For all we know, he had not even done a simulator run, but had merely read the manual.

Timo Saloniemi

 

[JB2005]

It's been suggested that the E-E was capable of Saucer Seperation, so presumably Starfleet didn't rule it out all together?

Also did i dream this or was Voyager said to have this capability too?

 

[C.E. Evans]

Also did i dream this or was Voyager said to have this capability too?

I think the Voyager--or rather, the Intrepid-class--represented a trend away from dual-hulled vessels and towards single-hulled ones, IMO.

 

[STR]

It's been suggested that the E-E was capable of Saucer Seperation, so presumably Starfleet didn't rule it out all together?

Also did i dream this or was Voyager said to have this capability too?

They built a fairly obvious separation joint into the filming model of the Enterprise-E, though the model itself couldn't separate, at least I don't think it was designed to on screen (for maintenance, sure). Voyager...not so much. NCC-74656 looks like a single piece ship.

Kirk tells Scotty to jettison the nacelles and blast out of orbit with the primary section(?), if that will save the ship).

I'd take that non-literally. Meaning, "nacelles" was colloquial for "warp drive" hence the warp-powered secondary hull.

 

[Timo]

Kirk could also have been suggesting an escalating sequence of options. First jettison nacelles (which may have so much mass that they hinder impulse propulsion) and try leaving orbit. If that doesn't help, jettison secondary hull as well, and fly to safety in the saucer.

Timo Saloniemi

 

[STR]

I don't like that view (seems like a needless step), but am willing to grant its validity as a possibility.

 

[SeerSGB]

It's an interesting question, really. Starfleet seems to have decided that regular saucer separation and reattachment wasn't such a good idea after all, because even the E-D stopped doing that rather early on. Perhaps the later Galaxies were indeed built without the expensive and complex docking machinery, and cannot detach and then reattach their saucers? At least not without dockyard help?

It might have been a one-off gimmick from the get-go, really. Starfleet would have seen the theoretical and technological possibility, but also the high cost and low usefulness - so the tech would only have been installed on a single vessel, intended to be the technological showpiece of the UFP whenever primitive cultures needed to be shocked and awed.

Certainly we never saw or heard another Galaxy class ship perform a non-emergency saucer separation and redocking. (The Odyssey and the Yamato apparently did separate their saucers, with the help of sufficiently large quantities of antimatter...)

Timo Saloniemi

Could be that someone realized: "Hold on, we're going to jettison the saucer and let it limp along to a Starbase on impulse drive (months, years away) and hope that the stardrives doesn't get blown to hell in the battle? Or that the enemy doesn't decide to come back and finish off the saucer?"

I can see saucer-sep (as it was intended: To get the families out of the fight till the stardrive can swing around and pick them up; if not then make it to a friendly base or ship) being a viable option within friendly space. But if a ship's out on the ass-end of unexplored space with no support ships or bases within a reasonable distance (say ~6 months at full impulse), then there's no real point to it.

That's way I always wanted to see the saucers used as mission-modules. Separate and orbit or land to establish a new colony. Use it as diplomatic courier in systems where a big ass ship carrying lots of guns would be a touchy idea at best.

 

[Timo]

...Of course, it's never canonically established that the saucer would lack warp drive.

To the contrary, in "Encounter at Farpoint" it spans considerable interstellar distances in a short time after separation at warp. In "Arsenal of Freedom", it is sent on an interstellar errand without the benefit of warp separation, possibly suggesting it can accelerate to warp independently. And in "Brothers", a forced separation is said to plunge the saucer down to impulse speeds after two minutes of separated flight - but this could be thanks to the desperate efforts of our heroes in the stardrive section to achieve this specific outcome, and not what normally happens after a warp separation.

Also, the saucer does have some blue-glowing bits that look suspiciously like the blue glow of warp nacelles or cowlings on most other types of Starfleet starship.

Timo Saloniemi