Galaxy Class Saucer Seperation?
- Thread starter GalaxyClass1701
- Start date
Might be - but why would an arboretum emit blue light? Every time we see the E-D facility from the inside, it's bathed in yellow light instead. Also, the last thing an arboretum would need is windows to the outside: those would wreak havoc with the climate and biorhythms inside, unless they were opaque to basically every type of radiation, including visible blue light.
A fancy subspace thingamabob is the more satisfactory explanation...
Suggestively (although completely accidentally!), Rick Sternbach's E-D blueprints leave this area of the saucer undescribed, featuring only a very large, unexplained empty volume. And that's exactly what a top secret warp drive would look like on those blueprints, of course.
Timo Saloniemi
A fancy subspace thingamabob is the more satisfactory explanation...
Suggestively (although completely accidentally!), Rick Sternbach's E-D blueprints leave this area of the saucer undescribed, featuring only a very large, unexplained empty volume. And that's exactly what a top secret warp drive would look like on those blueprints, of course.
Timo Saloniemi
Maybe those glowing windows on the Enterprise-D are a nod to the glowing domes on the saucers of the (refitted) original Enterprise and the Enterprise-A. They're roughly in the same location--above the impulse engines. I recall one source somewhere referring to them as "impulse deflection crystals." Maybe they're designed to channel impulse power into a rudimentary warp field around the saucer after separation from the secondary hull for limited warp flight, I dunno...
I'm pretty sure the TOS Enterprise could seperate, but not reattach. This is because part of the separation equipment included explosives that blew the saucer off. This actually happens in the fan film "Of Gods and Men" and is actually quite well done.
To be sure, when Andrew Probert put the finishing touches to the ST:TMP ship, he included a "docking latch" of sorts at the upper end of the neck connecting the two hulls: a triangular bit below the impulse engine was supposed to slide aft to facilitate the separation.
For all we really know, such latches might have allowed for redocking, there being no explosives or other nonreversible means involved...
Timo Saloniemi
For all we really know, such latches might have allowed for redocking, there being no explosives or other nonreversible means involved...
Timo Saloniemi
Not necessarily. In "Where Silence Has Lease", Worf felt that he was tactically qualified to advise on an away mission to USS Yamato, an explicit sister ship to his own Enterprise, because he was "acquainted" with the ship's layout - an odd turn of phrase indeed if all Galaxies were identical. Apparently, even the early production examples were somewhat dissimilar, let alone later models.
In the real world, ships are such expensive investments that it's more an exception than a rule that different ships have different capabilities, and that the capabilities of newer specimens are not backfitted to all the older ones. Typically this concerns weapons systems: say, a late model Spruance destroyer would have been capable of attacking a city, while an early model would have had no capacity whatsoever for such operations, even though all it took was the bolting of a new, largely self-contained weapons box on the foredeck. Sometimes even major structural features fall victim to this - say, early ships in some WWII cruiser class may have had massive aircraft facilities while later ones operated no aircraft (because carriers did it better by then, or radar made scouting planes unnecessary), yet the structures associated with aircraft operations (such as a large amidships hangar) were still built into the later ships and never removed from the older ones.
Saucer separation would probably be part of every starship design save for certain small single-hullers that can land on a planet intact. Saucer reattachment might be a rare feature indeed - but even its omission would not necessarily mean altering any major structures, because the separation function would remain.
Timo Saloniemi
In the real world, ships are such expensive investments that it's more an exception than a rule that different ships have different capabilities, and that the capabilities of newer specimens are not backfitted to all the older ones. Typically this concerns weapons systems: say, a late model Spruance destroyer would have been capable of attacking a city, while an early model would have had no capacity whatsoever for such operations, even though all it took was the bolting of a new, largely self-contained weapons box on the foredeck. Sometimes even major structural features fall victim to this - say, early ships in some WWII cruiser class may have had massive aircraft facilities while later ones operated no aircraft (because carriers did it better by then, or radar made scouting planes unnecessary), yet the structures associated with aircraft operations (such as a large amidships hangar) were still built into the later ships and never removed from the older ones.
Saucer separation would probably be part of every starship design save for certain small single-hullers that can land on a planet intact. Saucer reattachment might be a rare feature indeed - but even its omission would not necessarily mean altering any major structures, because the separation function would remain.
Timo Saloniemi
Suggestively (although completely accidentally!), Rick Sternbach's E-D blueprints leave this area of the saucer undescribed, featuring only a very large, unexplained empty volume. And that's exactly what a top secret warp drive would look like on those blueprints, of course.
Timo Saloniemi
The Whitefire blueprints put those directly above the Emergency Batteries and Generators.
The Prometheus' forward section had warp drive - a pop up nacelle on top - and perhaps bellow too.
http://www.bolarus.de/sibs/fleet/pic/prome-03.jpg
http://www.bolarus.de/sibs/fleet/pic/prome-03.jpg
no those window's are one of the main arboretum's. As for the blueish glow, i believe that was an attempt by the FX ppl to make the window's look more realistic. And the window's wouldn't mess up an arboretum's internal temps etc...the window's could be timed so that they darken or lighten or react to external light at the right times. With the technology that Starfleet has I find it hard to believe that random light and small temperature variances couldn't be handled with ease.
It wouldn't make sense for those small window's to be a warp grille at all. One, it's too small to emit a decent warp field for a saucer that big. The Nebula class, which ratio wise has a "bigger" saucer section, still has full size Nacelles. Two, Where on earth would you fit the warp coils, warp core, warp coolant tanks, magnetic containtment and EPS taps, plasma conduits, seperate antimatter and matter storage, all sitting directly above the Deck 8 bridge? Three, to create a stable warp field for a saucer that big, a port and starboard warp field assembly would be needed. It's very rare that you see a ship with two or one warp nacelle, and they are usually only on smaller ships.
As for the saucer seperation: The Galaxy class is the first to be able to re-attach. I'm always dubious about previous class' since there is little in the way of canon info, but we have on screen evidence of the Enterprise 1701 being able to seperate (kirk's dialogues), and in TMP, an alternate perposed by the writers and producers in which the ship seperated when K't'inga class ships attacked it. Therefore, I think it's reasonable to *assume* that in later ship classes (Excelsior, Ambassador, and even the Sovereign class) it could be done too. Though ships prior to the Galaxy class could only seperate via explosive bolts. I guess that up until that point magnetic docking clamps couldn't be created to be stable enough during high warp flight to be put into use for that reason.
The Saucer can actually maintain a stable warp field by "borrowing" it from the Stardrive and "bleeding it off slowly" via the secondary deflector on deck 13. Or some combo of both as I recall. This is provided the ship is seperated at warp. The same thing is done to torpedo's at warp, hence their outer range of about 1 mill KM, though this is done with some kind of warp sustainer "engine". Not a true engine, but it does essentially what the deflector of the Saucer section does.
Also, ships can jettison their nacelles, it's been said on TOS, and there is mention of it in the TNG Tech manual. Following the same logic as the previous paragraph, I believe it's reasonable to assume other ships in the interrum and after can do it as well. It also just makes sense as a safety precaution, should the plasma streams inside the nacelles become unstable or the nacelle ruptures. This is done by explosive bolt.
It wouldn't make sense for those small window's to be a warp grille at all. One, it's too small to emit a decent warp field for a saucer that big. The Nebula class, which ratio wise has a "bigger" saucer section, still has full size Nacelles. Two, Where on earth would you fit the warp coils, warp core, warp coolant tanks, magnetic containtment and EPS taps, plasma conduits, seperate antimatter and matter storage, all sitting directly above the Deck 8 bridge? Three, to create a stable warp field for a saucer that big, a port and starboard warp field assembly would be needed. It's very rare that you see a ship with two or one warp nacelle, and they are usually only on smaller ships.
As for the saucer seperation: The Galaxy class is the first to be able to re-attach. I'm always dubious about previous class' since there is little in the way of canon info, but we have on screen evidence of the Enterprise 1701 being able to seperate (kirk's dialogues), and in TMP, an alternate perposed by the writers and producers in which the ship seperated when K't'inga class ships attacked it. Therefore, I think it's reasonable to *assume* that in later ship classes (Excelsior, Ambassador, and even the Sovereign class) it could be done too. Though ships prior to the Galaxy class could only seperate via explosive bolts. I guess that up until that point magnetic docking clamps couldn't be created to be stable enough during high warp flight to be put into use for that reason.
The Saucer can actually maintain a stable warp field by "borrowing" it from the Stardrive and "bleeding it off slowly" via the secondary deflector on deck 13. Or some combo of both as I recall. This is provided the ship is seperated at warp. The same thing is done to torpedo's at warp, hence their outer range of about 1 mill KM, though this is done with some kind of warp sustainer "engine". Not a true engine, but it does essentially what the deflector of the Saucer section does.
Also, ships can jettison their nacelles, it's been said on TOS, and there is mention of it in the TNG Tech manual. Following the same logic as the previous paragraph, I believe it's reasonable to assume other ships in the interrum and after can do it as well. It also just makes sense as a safety precaution, should the plasma streams inside the nacelles become unstable or the nacelle ruptures. This is done by explosive bolt.
All valid reasons as such, but not showstoppers.
We have no real idea of any "threshold size" for warp engines. Far smaller glowing apertures have quite nicely propelled various alien starships; many Federation vessels also make do either with even smaller glowing areas, or then without glowing areas at all.
The Nebula of course has the same nacelles as the Galaxy for main propulsion, but she's not supposed to operate her saucer independently. I see no pressing reason to consider the nacelles of the Nebula the minimum size required for moving a saucer of that size at warp. Rather, those engines are of the size that will push the entire complex to warp 9+; the saucer engines would probably be capable of only warp 3 or 4.
As for fitting in the hardware, well, you could easily house an entire Constitution class nacelle in the space allotted. And warp engines quite seldom span the entire width or length or height of a starship; placing them atop the stern of one should not be a problem. Indeed, we see just such a mounting on the Prometheus of VOY fame.
Or then the sixteenth. We're never told on screen. Even when the ability is introduced in the TNG pilot, it's not marketed as a novelty. Only the idea of separating the saucer at extremely high warp becomes a point of technological doubt and drama, and even there it's not implied that only a Galaxy would be structurally capable of it; it's just implied that extreme warp is rarely done, and saucer separation at such speeds thus has never become topical before, on any ship class.
We've never seen explosive bolts used, to be sure. And we have seen all sorts of docking arrangements that require nothing of the sort. There's even that (admittedly computer-screen-glimpsed-only) Ptolemy class that supposedly regularly attachs, detachs and reattachs those big cylindrar containers. A saucer hull should be no different.
Why settle for an "untrue" engine? A "true" one could be installed equally well. And "Encounter at Farpoint" suggests there indeed is a warp engine aboard, while "Arsenal of Freedom" suggests it is capable of warp travel even when the saucer is separated at impulse.
Timo Saloniemi
I know this has been asked before but I have forgotten the group consensus...if, say, the E-D's saucer section had either been salvaged and raised from Veridian 4's surface or had made safe orbit after the secondary hull blew apart, would the addition of a new stardrive section have made it "the Enterprise" again?
I'd of said so. Depends what's considered the heart of the vessel. What's left plus new would not be a different ship - she could only be the Enterprise D.
Of course by the book (the Prime Directive that is) they really should remove the ship from Veridian III - the locals in that Star System would reach that planet in due course without needing to develop Warp capability.
Of course by the book (the Prime Directive that is) they really should remove the ship from Veridian III - the locals in that Star System would reach that planet in due course without needing to develop Warp capability.
IMO, it would be a totally arbitrary decision by Starfleet (which is almost how they do most things, it seems).
You could pretty much flip a coin.
Starfleet might decide to tie the saucer section up in drydock and build a new stardrive section around it for an eventual relaunch as the Enterprise-D, or they might decide to simply decommission the saucer--to ultimately dismantle it for scrap--and commission another ship as the Enterprise-E. Which I guess, is what they really did...
True we may not have "threshold" sizes for warp feild grills, but speaking of Starfleet only and NOT alien ships with different technology, one only has to look at onscreen evidence. Shuttle nacelles always seem to be of a certain comparable size. Warp nacelles also seem to be of comparable size to the starship depending on the design of ship. Voyager had little nacelles, but then again they were supposed to be one of the most advanced designs of nacelles made. If Starfleet could move a saucer that big (E-d) with just that tiny little warp field emitter, wouldn't they have done it already and not used HUGE bulky nacelles in the first place?? That makes no sense. And as for "glowing" being evidence of activity is shaky. Old engine styles didn't glow until active or in use while at warp, except the Excelsior warp field grille didn't glow at all, then later it did, then TNG ships glowed all the time.
And you wouldn't be able to fit a constitution nacelle inside there at all, they are at least half the length of a constitution herself!! There is no way they'd be able to fit the warp coils, off axis field controllers, subspace geometry sensors, plasma conduits, plasma injectors, and so forth into such a tiny space. If it was fitted inside the saucer much of the internal arrangement would consist of a warp nacelle, not something that we see on the MSD or anywhere, and the warp grille would have to be larger than a tiny window space to accommodate. Are we to believe that when the nacelles of a Galaxy class were said to be top of the line and most advanced at the time? No that window arrangment has been labled an arboretum before, and if that is not canon then it's probably some recreation area for the crew to enjoy like the one on the ventral hull of the Enterprise refit.
You're not getting that the field grille is only an emitter, the hardware has to be underneath this said emitter, and there just isn't enough space. NOR is there any evidence to suggest that there is a warp core or secondary fuel tanks anywhere on the MSD, sripts, shows, or episodes. The only concrete engine evidence we have are the impulse engines. And if the saucer had warp I think the E-D would've warped as far away from the secondary hull's explosion in Generations as they could. Why walk when you can run.
Also Gene Roddenberry had a rule: warp engines in pairs. though this has been violated by a couple kit bashes, it hasn't been shown on screen in any kind of serious way to my knowlege. and warp engines are put on pylons to keep the insane amount of radiation away from the ship. The only other ship class that violates that is the Defiant class, and even this class' warp nacelles are proportionate to it's size and in pairs (though one could say the ablative hull armor protects against possible nacelle radiation).
And it's generally assumed that the Enterprise was the first to be able to reattach because the writers wanted to do something "new" with this new Enterprise to give it a little extra. I've seen the proposed plot and story board sketches from The Motion Picture that has the saucer seperating after three Ktinga class ships attack it. the saucer also has landing pads further indicating seperation ability. So this is a capability that until the E-D, was a last ditch effort. The E-D being new they gave it the ability to reattach. And as for the Ptolemy, that ship has never even been seen on screen so that's really not a credible source of opposing argument, and something "towing" or "tugging" another ship is far different than designing a ship to have a seperation ability but under normal circumstances acting as one whole ship.
In arsenal and Encounter at farpoint: I'd like to see that dialogue or better yet hear it in a link. That said, it was early in the show's career and the Enterprise-D hadn't been totally fleshed out yet. I'm sure that in context it isn't so clear as you make it seem, and i'm not even sure what the dialogue is. There is absolutely no mention of the saucer being able to go to warp anywhere else in the show as far as i know, and no evidence that it can.
I suppose the torps use sustainer engines because ultimately their purpose isn't to travel but to hit a target and explode. I don't know why the saucer was given only this ability, i think that it makes it a sitting duck personally, and a small warp core with dueterium and antimatter in the saucer would've been beneficial if they hadn't wanted it to be for habitation only. I'm sure a warp field could be emitted via the deflector, albeit a low energy one. Slipstream drive generates subspace fields via the deflector, so it does make sense.
Lazarus
Fleet Captain
I think it's pretty much a given that Starfleet would've removed the saucer section from Veridian III in the weeks after the crash - you can only imagine the hardware and information that anyone who happens upon the crashsite could gain from the saucer.
I suppose blowing it to smithereens with photon torpedoes would destroy anything sensitive, or you could try to remove the computer cores and weapons and so on and leave what's left, but that doesn't seem like the 'Starfleet way' to me.
I'd say they salvaged the entire thing, although there's still the matter of a five mile long scar on the planet where the thing came down...
I suppose blowing it to smithereens with photon torpedoes would destroy anything sensitive, or you could try to remove the computer cores and weapons and so on and leave what's left, but that doesn't seem like the 'Starfleet way' to me.
I'd say they salvaged the entire thing, although there's still the matter of a five mile long scar on the planet where the thing came down...
True we may not have "threshold" sizes for warp feild grills, but speaking of Starfleet only and NOT alien ships with different technology, one only has to look at onscreen evidence. Shuttle nacelles always seem to be of a certain comparable size. Warp nacelles also seem to be of comparable size to the starship depending on the design of ship. Voyager had little nacelles, but then again they were supposed to be one of the most advanced designs of nacelles made. If Starfleet could move a saucer that big (E-d) with just that tiny little warp field emitter, wouldn't they have done it already and not used HUGE bulky nacelles in the first place?? That makes no sense. And as for "glowing" being evidence of activity is shaky. Old engine styles didn't glow until active or in use while at warp, except the Excelsior warp field grille didn't glow at all, then later it did, then TNG ships glowed all the time.
And you wouldn't be able to fit a constitution nacelle inside there at all, they are at least half the length of a constitution herself!! There is no way they'd be able to fit the warp coils, off axis field controllers, subspace geometry sensors, plasma conduits, plasma injectors, and so forth into such a tiny space. Are we to believe that when the nacelles of a Galaxy class were said to be top of the line and most advanced at the time? No that window arrangment has been labled an arboretum before, and if that is not canon then it's probably some recreation area for the crew to enjoy like the one on the ventral hull of the Enterprise refit.
You're not getting that the field grille is only an emitter, the hardware has to be underneath this said emitter, and there just isn't enough space. NOR is there any evidence to suggest that there is a warp core or secondary fuel tanks anywhere on the MSD, sripts, shows, or episodes. The only concrete engine evidence we have are the impulse engines. And if the saucer had warp I think the E-D would've warped as far away from the secondary hull's explosion in Generations as they could. Why walk when you can run.
Also Gene Roddenberry had a rule: warp engines in pairs. though this has been violated by a couple kit bashes, it hasn't been shown on screen in any kind of serious way to my knowlege. and warp engines are put on pylons to keep the insane amount of radiation away from the ship. The only other ship class that violates that is the Defiant class, and even this class' warp nacelles are proportionate to it's size and in pairs (though one could say the ablative hull armor protects against possible nacelle radiation).
And it's generally assumed that the Enterprise was the first to be able to reattach because the writers wanted to do something "new" with this new Enterprise to give it a little extra. I've seen the proposed plot and story board sketches from The Motion Picture that has the saucer seperating after three Ktinga class ships attack it. the saucer also has landing pads further indicating seperation ability. So this is a capability that until the E-D, was a last ditch effort. The E-D being new they gave it the ability to reattach. And as for the Ptolemy, that ship has never even been seen on screen so that's really not a credible source of opposing argument, and something "towing" or "tugging" another ship is far different than designing a ship to have a seperation ability but under normal circumstances acting as one whole ship.
In arsenal and Encounter at farpoint: I'd like to see that dialogue or better yet hear it in a link. That said, it was early in the show's career and the Enterprise-D hadn't been totally fleshed out yet. I'm sure that in context it isn't so clear as you make it seem, and i'm not even sure what the dialogue is. There is absolutely no mention of the saucer being able to go to warp anywhere else in the show as far as i know, and no evidence that it can.
There is another non-standard routine in Farpoint that might suggest Saucer Separation may be more common - Riker's manual docking with the Saucer. If manual is next to unheard of and raises a few eyebrows, there must be an automated procedure that is routine by this time.
It's a bit like Voyager landing for the first time. No one batters an eyelid when Janeway suggests it.
My mistake, I was looking one deck too low. It would have one of the two sqaure arrangements over the casino and the other over a lounge.
Similar threads
