Though this thread is a year old, I thought I'd add my two-cents. I believe that the Star Fleet would continually upgrade the escape pod designs and mechanisms on all ships of the fleet, regardless of age and design. There's no resign the Excelsior class wouldn't end up with lifeboats similar to Voyager's in due time.
PROBERT in need of a little help-
- Thread starter Probert
- Start date
I don't have anything constructive to add, but just wanted to say: what a fun thread to read, especially the fab contributions by those who worked on the show (and the knowledgeable commentary by those fans who've immersed themselves in its detail).
It makes me feel like the TNG-era continues on, albeit offscreen.
+1
It would seem to me, given missions of long range exploration out in the Federation's "boonies," that all the Enterprise's (really all Starfleet ship's) lifeboats/pods would have a warp drive.
I imagine something like the size nacelles you see on the smallest two seat shuttle pod, stored folded flush into the basic cube shape, post launch they would deploy out on short arms/struts and provide a low warp capability (warp three or four) so the life boat could reach a nearby system with a hopefully suitable planet to await rescue on. Depending on where the abandon ship occurred, rescue might be years in the future. As the ship traveled through the galaxy, the fight computers on the lifeboats would be periodically updated with the location to the nearest class M planets.
In terms of a rescue ship removing people from lifeboats, simply beaming them out would be option number one.
Option number two would be landing the lifeboats on the flight deck, remove the occupants, and if necessary throw the empty lifeboat back into space to make room for the next one. If the original ship was in battle prior to launching the lifeboats, the occupants could be heavily injured and we would see medical teams right alongside the lifeboats on the flight deck.
Option number three, we've seen forcefields hold in atmosphere when the hull has been breached. Docking ports, both male and female, take up a fair amount of room, which would be at a premium in a lifeboat. Have a tractor beam simply butt the lifeboat's pressure hatch up against the rescuing ship's docking port, erect a forcefield tightly around the lifeboat, fill the forcefield with air, open the hatches and transfer the personnel.
I imagine something like the size nacelles you see on the smallest two seat shuttle pod, stored folded flush into the basic cube shape, post launch they would deploy out on short arms/struts and provide a low warp capability (warp three or four) so the life boat could reach a nearby system with a hopefully suitable planet to await rescue on. Depending on where the abandon ship occurred, rescue might be years in the future. As the ship traveled through the galaxy, the fight computers on the lifeboats would be periodically updated with the location to the nearest class M planets.
In terms of a rescue ship removing people from lifeboats, simply beaming them out would be option number one.
Option number two would be landing the lifeboats on the flight deck, remove the occupants, and if necessary throw the empty lifeboat back into space to make room for the next one. If the original ship was in battle prior to launching the lifeboats, the occupants could be heavily injured and we would see medical teams right alongside the lifeboats on the flight deck.
Option number three, we've seen forcefields hold in atmosphere when the hull has been breached. Docking ports, both male and female, take up a fair amount of room, which would be at a premium in a lifeboat. Have a tractor beam simply butt the lifeboat's pressure hatch up against the rescuing ship's docking port, erect a forcefield tightly around the lifeboat, fill the forcefield with air, open the hatches and transfer the personnel.
No matter how I look at the various possibilities, I think Rick Sternbach's cube proposal makes the most sense.
After a catastrophic event the lifeboat cubes could easily connect to one another to form a cluster of lifeboats that would eventually resemble a Rubik's Cube. If there's enough space the survivors could move to the interior cubes with the outer cubes providing a protective shell or buffer zone.
I definitely wouldn't like to see lifeboat designs from the later series or movies being retconned into the TNG era. I'd like to see a unique and different design for the TNG era.
Bob
Hi Mr Probert.
I don't comment often. but on this subject I will.
The earliest rendition or inclusion (on screen) of discernible 'Escape Hatches' were on the Ambassador Class Enterprise captained by Rachael Garret in 'Yesterday's Enterprise'.
Given that that ship existed in the historical period of Khitomer 2293, the war with the Klingons, then it seems likely that the hatches on the saucer were not for escape, but deployment of ground forces. There are onscreen references and inferences that I think support that contention.
After the Khitomer Accord, tensions relaxed and the need for troop ships was no longer required.
Long story short:
Federation and StarFleet used the bigger troopships (E-C) to utilise the combat experience of the E-C to man-manage increased personnel of the 'Town-Ship' that is the E-D
My point is, no specific escape or deployment systems were onboard a starship prior to the Ambassador Class
Tha Saratoga and other Miranda Class ships used 'Lifeboats'. Individual vessels capable of direction independent flight and planetary touchdown. Life/escape pods are not.
Albertus
I don't comment often. but on this subject I will.
The earliest rendition or inclusion (on screen) of discernible 'Escape Hatches' were on the Ambassador Class Enterprise captained by Rachael Garret in 'Yesterday's Enterprise'.
Given that that ship existed in the historical period of Khitomer 2293, the war with the Klingons, then it seems likely that the hatches on the saucer were not for escape, but deployment of ground forces. There are onscreen references and inferences that I think support that contention.
After the Khitomer Accord, tensions relaxed and the need for troop ships was no longer required.
Long story short:
Federation and StarFleet used the bigger troopships (E-C) to utilise the combat experience of the E-C to man-manage increased personnel of the 'Town-Ship' that is the E-D
My point is, no specific escape or deployment systems were onboard a starship prior to the Ambassador Class
Tha Saratoga and other Miranda Class ships used 'Lifeboats'. Individual vessels capable of direction independent flight and planetary touchdown. Life/escape pods are not.
Albertus
As the designer of the original and beautiful Ambassador Class Enterprise (Enterprise-C depicted on conference room wall sculpture display) I would not expect Mr. Probert to pay any attention to a design that pushed his original design over the cliff.
To illustrate the issue check out Tobias Richter's amazing and fully operational CGI recreation of Mr. Probert's original design:
http://drexfiles.wordpress.com/2011/07/03/sotl-2012-1-of-5-tobias-richter/
As an afterthought I just had a discussion with one of my friends regarding the lifeboat issue. He wondered if it really would make sense to have the necessity of a hatch opening (mechanical failure?) and felt it to be more sensical that what appears to be a hatch panel is actually one side of the lifeboat.
Bob
The square panels found on typical TNG shooting models were sort of established as indeed being either lifeboat hull sections (or then at least blowaway rather than hinged obstacles to lifeboat launch). That is, in "Best of Both Worlds", some of the wrecks were supposedly completed with "missing" squares rather than "opened" ones.
Of course, there's a major dramatic advantage to having hinged panels, because the plot can then involve a pod or dozen being fired without necessitating the shooting model to be modified to show the aftermath of the launch. VOY appeared to capitalize on this.
Timo Saloniemi
Of course, there's a major dramatic advantage to having hinged panels, because the plot can then involve a pod or dozen being fired without necessitating the shooting model to be modified to show the aftermath of the launch. VOY appeared to capitalize on this.
Timo Saloniemi
It's a practical VFX production advantage but wouldn't it actually look more dramatic if the hull of the ships was covered with square holes that tell the viewer immediately that the lifeboats had been ejected and that the ship had been abandoned?
Bob
Hi Mr Comsol, The E-C is a great ship,(I paid £78 for a resin kit model of it.
I think it is a troop ship. Big, powerful and robust. Heavy-duty nacelles, short, powerful Engineering section and lots of space for Federation troops.
Apropos of the 'hatches', in the escape pod scene in ST:FC (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IhoH21tVJnQ) it can clearly be seen that the Escape Pod's heat shield is the hatch. No open lids.
I suspect that all escape pods were magnetically sealed to the ships hull, thus obviating a mechanical deployment system.
The real difference seems to be in the E-D, where the escape modules were designed, not for planet-fall but rather to connect together and await rescue by a third party whilst still in free space. Although, I also suspect that they were capable of touchdown in a manner similar to how the Soviets' do it. and the singular way that the E-E releases them as 'spores'. Even Picard references the 'chance' involved in the pods landing.
Just some thoughts
Al
PP
Just thought:
The E-D had up to 1000+ inhabitants, a 'community emergency habitat' makes sense as there were families aboard. seems reasonable to provide a "refugee complex" where they have the option to wait it out.
I think it is a troop ship. Big, powerful and robust. Heavy-duty nacelles, short, powerful Engineering section and lots of space for Federation troops.
Apropos of the 'hatches', in the escape pod scene in ST:FC (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IhoH21tVJnQ) it can clearly be seen that the Escape Pod's heat shield is the hatch. No open lids.
I suspect that all escape pods were magnetically sealed to the ships hull, thus obviating a mechanical deployment system.
The real difference seems to be in the E-D, where the escape modules were designed, not for planet-fall but rather to connect together and await rescue by a third party whilst still in free space. Although, I also suspect that they were capable of touchdown in a manner similar to how the Soviets' do it. and the singular way that the E-E releases them as 'spores'. Even Picard references the 'chance' involved in the pods landing.
Just some thoughts
Al
PP
Just thought:
The E-D had up to 1000+ inhabitants, a 'community emergency habitat' makes sense as there were families aboard. seems reasonable to provide a "refugee complex" where they have the option to wait it out.
Last edited:
When I did the Voyager escape pods, which were appropriated for use on the Defiant, I also built in some docking capabilities, though the number of pods in a gaggle would be a bit lower due to the lack of docking ports on all sides. You'd still be able to connect a number of pods along the lateral ports, and hook a similar string of pods "roof to roof" to be able to wait out a deep space disaster or power on over to a habitable planet. The docking business was really devised to make personnel like medical folks available in a crisis.
Rick
Similar threads
