Saucer separation. How does it work exactly?

Discussion in 'Trek Tech' started by urrutiap, Apr 24, 2021.

  1. urrutiap

    urrutiap Lieutenant Junior Grade Red Shirt

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2018
    in Next Generation they sure do it alot with saucer separation.

    Who goes where and how does battle stations work when they do the whole saucer separation?
     
  2. NCC-73515

    NCC-73515 Rear Admiral Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Apr 18, 2019
    Location:
    California
    Civilians apparently go to the saucer, which doesn't have warp drive and therefore can't escape quickly, while the engineering part, which has warp drive and could just get outta there instantly, goes to battle instead. :guffaw:
     
    Skipper and jackoverfull like this.
  3. C.E. Evans

    C.E. Evans Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2001
    Location:
    Saint Louis, Missouri, USA
    There are apparently duplicate control stations in both the saucer and stardrive sections, allowing them to both operate independent of one another. Presumably, all personnel not required for battle or some other major crisis are sent to the saucer. There are likely established protocols in place, but saucer separation could be ultimately at the discretion of a commanding officer. The Enterprise-D may have performed saucer separation more than other Galaxy-class ships, IMO.
     
  4. USS Firefly

    USS Firefly Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2013
    A lot? It was only three times in seven years I believe
     
    Skipper and jackoverfull like this.
  5. Christopher

    Christopher Writer Admiral

    Joined:
    Mar 15, 2001
    The intent was the opposite -- in situations where battle was required, to leave the saucer behind somewhere safe before proceeding to the battle site. That's how it was done in "The Arsenal of Freedom" -- they retreated to a safe distance, dropped off the saucer, then came back to rescue their away team. Also, in "Farpoint," they were in the middle of a high-warp chase, so the saucer was left well behind them by the time the enemy caught up with the battle section.

    It's what the Odyssey should have done in DS9: "The Jem'Hadar" -- instead of evacuating the civilians to the station, just leave the saucer behind at the station. But by that point, they'd stopped using the 6-foot miniature because it was too unwieldy, and the 4-footer wasn't built to separate.
     
    penguin44, jackoverfull and DonIago like this.
  6. ChallengerHK

    ChallengerHK Captain Captain

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2018
    ...which is infinitely time more than it was done in TOS.
     
  7. Christopher

    Christopher Writer Admiral

    Joined:
    Mar 15, 2001
    So? What's that got to do with anything? In TOS, saucer separation was considered a last-ditch, irreversible emergency measure (and only vaguely alluded to once in "The Apple"), whereas the Enterprise-D was designed to be able to separate and recombine repeatedly (which is why the ability was showcased in the first half-hour of the pilot). The circumstances are quite different. You might as well say that Kirk's Enterprise raised shields or used tractor beams infinitely more often than Archer's did. It's technically true but meaningless as a comparison, since only one of the two was meant to have the capability.
     
    hbquikcomjamesl and dupersuper like this.
  8. ChallengerHK

    ChallengerHK Captain Captain

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2018
    I've said it before and I'll say it again; you're an argumentative little cuss.

    The original post was about saucer sep in TOS. One of the responses was mentioning that saucer sep had occurred "a lot" in TNG. One response to that was questioning whether "three" was a lot. My response to that last post was, essentially, that the number in TNG was "a lot" compared to TOS.

    I have no doubt whatsoever that you'll find something to argue about in there as well. I hope I've made you happy today. :guffaw:
     
  9. Christopher

    Christopher Writer Admiral

    Joined:
    Mar 15, 2001
    Uhh, no:

    (emphasis added)
     
  10. ChallengerHK

    ChallengerHK Captain Captain

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2018
    You're right. And I did find a way to make you happy. You're welcome :beer:
     
  11. Ithekro

    Ithekro Vice Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Apr 5, 2012
    Location:
    Republic of California
    I would hope someone on the saucer would figure a way to set the impulse fusion reactors to generate a low power warp field to move the ship if the stardrive can't make it back.
     
  12. publiusr

    publiusr Vice Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2010
    Location:
    publiusr
    Now, I’ve seen where the dorsal comes away with the saucer as a way to reach ground level and a third leg (the triangular bits along the forward saucer being the other two. If an intruder tried to climb a turbo shaft, there would be several layers of resistance in that neck. Which lends itself to storytelling. Right before the saucer is reached, I can see the neck jettisoned as well, maybe hitting a pursuing ship—slicing it.
     
  13. Timo

    Timo Fleet Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2003
    From the scant few examples in TNG, I'd think Starfleet never seriously considered using the saucer for protecting the civilians aboard. Separating the saucer was a technological possibility, but not a recommended maneuver, and the very idea of evacuating people in it seems to be an innovation Picard comes up with on the spot in "Encounter at Farpoint".

    Riker then ponders repeating the fancy experiment in "Heart of Glory", but Picard now speaks against it. It doesn't really sound as if Riker's position would be what the manuals recommend, as he immediately backs down, and never returns to such a proposal in any later adventure.

    It's LaForge's turn in the very next episode, "Arsenal of Freedom" (which also is a later one in stardate terms, even if S1 stardates are screwy), and again everybody is surprised at the suggestion, and some indeed fight it.

    And in "Best of Both Worlds", separation of course again is treated as an unexpected trick, and eventually a double feint. It's not what anybody ought to expect of Starfleet, or of a Galaxy class starship, is the message there, too.

    Saucers no doubt exist primarily in order to be separated. But only for purposes of terminal evacuation, as in ST:GEN. The ability to redock caters for more flexible evacuation scenarios in theory, but not in tactical practice. And no, the ship doesn't perform better in battle without the saucer, regardless of whatever propaganda Worf read for "Heart of Glory" (or perhaps he was giving disinformation to the dangerous visitors?)...

    Timo Saloniemi
     
    jackoverfull likes this.
  14. Mytran

    Mytran Rear Admiral Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2009
    Location:
    North Wales
    Given the scant number of times we saw the Ent-D operate without its saucer, can this statement really be substantiated? It seemed to do pretty well in AoF and BoBW
     
    DonIago likes this.
  15. David cgc

    David cgc Admiral Premium Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2002
    Location:
    California
    I think the obvious response is if the saucer was in any way dead-weight in combat or made the ship less than the sum of its parts, the Galaxy-class ships we saw in the Dominion War and responding to the sudden Borg attack in the VGR finale would’ve been headless.

    Of course, most of the ships we saw in those situations also didn’t have names painted on them, so I think it’s a valid reaction to take the VFX seriously, but not literally.
     
    jackoverfull likes this.
  16. Tenacity

    Tenacity Rear Admiral Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Jul 14, 2016
    In first contact a separation might have been in order, providing the borg weren't already in the saucer
     
  17. yotsuya

    yotsuya Captain Captain

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2008
    Saucer separation was conceived for TOS. It was never more than a concept. It was suggested, but they had no model for it so it was never going to happen. It was in the story boards for TMP, but it never made it past that. And like many things, the TMP production seems to have relied on Franz Joseph's TOS General Plans for what they had in mind.
    [​IMG]

    The assumption is that if you separate you need either a shipyard or a best of Starfleet level engineering team.
     
  18. Mytran

    Mytran Rear Admiral Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2009
    Location:
    North Wales
    Good point, although I still think it was a wasted visual opportunity not to have the "cobra heads" out in the middle of a war.
    But got to maintain that visual continuity for the newbs I suppose... :confused:

    As to justification, I recall at least one episode of TNG where they talked about needing the extra power from the impulse engines (for whatever plot of the week they were involved with).
    Maybe the Dominion War versions of the Galaxy class ships had saucers stuffed full of extra large reactors and shield generators? ;)
     
  19. Deks

    Deks Rear Admiral Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2003
    No, just no.
    Ships in Trek usually come with primary and secondary power sources.
    Primary being: 1 Warp core (matter/antimatter reaction)
    Secondary: Fusion generators (unknown amount of fusion generators).

    There is also no reason to think stuffing more shield generators would improve the shields. In fact, I don't think you can actually do something like that.
    Each ship comes with a primary and secondary shield generator (therefore there'd be a maximum of 2 - so if the primary system is down, the secondary would ideally take over assuming that's not damaged - you cannot run them at the same time to say improve shield power).

    You improve the shields by improving the shield generator (aka type of shield you are generating, power efficiency, etc. - all of which would be done on existing piece of hw - which might be replaced if there comes a time you cannot upgrade or modify the original one - in which case the old one would be taken out, harvested for its resources and a new one built in its place).

    The Galaxy class during the Dominion War would most certainly sport a new warp core (similar to one we saw the Ent-D getting or newer [maybe ones that the Sovereign class has even] - but without the flaws), two extra phaser strips (one on each nacelle) to increase coverage (length of the strip has nothing to do with phaser power output) - although, the USS Venture is to date the only Galaxy class seen with those phaser upgrades (but its very possible all Galaxy class ships had them... the VFX department just forgot to add them).

    Upgrades to primary/secondary shield generators (obviously), upgrades to phaser power output, increase in Warp capability, etc. (that kind of thing).
     
  20. publiusr

    publiusr Vice Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2010
    Location:
    publiusr