ST XI Enterprise conjecture

[B.J.]

Not just the speeds they depict, but some of the maneuvers as well. Considering how fast some Trek ships turn, people at the extremities would be thrown against an outer bulkhead without something to counteract that. Although, the image of Guinan plastered against the windows of Ten Forward is mildly appealing.

 

[deg3D]

Not just the speeds they depict, but some of the maneuvers as well. Considering how fast some Trek ships turn, people at the extremities would be thrown against an outer bulkhead without something to counteract that. Although, the image of Guinan plastered against the windows of Ten Forward is mildly appealing.

Inertial dampeners, isn't that Trek-tech for getting around that...

All rigged with the infamous EPS conduits of course.

deg

 

[Manticore]

You're thinking of the momentum, which is related to an object moving. Inertia is an object's resistance to changing its rest state; if an object is at rest, it has the same inertia (essentially, until you reach absurdly high relativistic speeds. ). It'll still take a great deal of work to rotate the ship if it isn't moving.

Def 2 is what I was thinking in terms of inertia:

inertia |iˈnər sh ə|
noun
1 a tendency to do nothing or to remain unchanged : the bureaucratic inertia of government.
2 Physics a property of matter by which it continues in its existing state of rest or uniform motion in a straight line, unless that state is changed by an external force.

deg

I'm changing the emphasis to emphasize my points.

If you ever want to change the state of motion that your object is in, you'll come up against its inertia. If you want to slow it down, speed it up, spin it, change the direction that it's flying, etc., you're going to have fight the inertia. On a ship the mass of the Enterprise (and of them), that's going to be fairly significant.

I hope this helps. Sorry that I suck at explaining things.

 

[deg3D]

You're thinking of the momentum, which is related to an object moving. Inertia is an object's resistance to changing its rest state; if an object is at rest, it has the same inertia (essentially, until you reach absurdly high relativistic speeds. ). It'll still take a great deal of work to rotate the ship if it isn't moving.

Def 2 is what I was thinking in terms of inertia:

inertia |iˈnər sh ə|
noun
1 a tendency to do nothing or to remain unchanged : the bureaucratic inertia of government.
2 Physics a property of matter by which it continues in its existing state of rest or uniform motion in a straight line, unless that state is changed by an external force.

deg

I'm changing the emphasis to emphasize my points.

If you ever want to change the state of motion that your object is in, you'll come up against its inertia. If you want to slow it down, speed it up, spin it, change the direction that it's flying, etc., you're going to have fight the inertia. On a ship the mass of the Enterprise (and of them), that's going to be fairly significant.

I hope this helps. Sorry that I suck at explaining things.

No that totally brought me back up to speed dude, the light-bulb came back on, thanks much.

deg

 

[MarianLH]

Not just the speeds they depict, but some of the maneuvers as well. Considering how fast some Trek ships turn, people at the extremities would be thrown against an outer bulkhead without something to counteract that. Although, the image of Guinan plastered against the windows of Ten Forward is mildly appealing.

Marian

 

[Relayer]

We've seen a BoP and other craft in Trek operate, land, hover, and take off from a planet. All of this without relying on aerodynamic flight. AFAIK there isn't anything special or different in their means of propulsion to allow this from any other design.

 

[shipfisher]

Wow! Four pages of posts bangin' on about technical aspects of surface-launching and manouvering the Big E in a trek art thread with nary a pic for how long now? I'm not complaining, but now you're going to have to endure my 2 cents worth.

I think that getting the ship off the ground in one shot would certainly not be outside the capabilities of 23rd century feddies with established grav manipulation tech. I've always thought of trek propulsion systems as coming in three flavours, the most prominent two being warp and impulse drive and the third involving those "gravimetric thrusters". When you're sitting in a nice big gravity field to push against, the same "stator graviton" generation grids and such that plant crews on decks in deep space and take the inertial sting out of all those hairy manouvers should easily be able to get the big lady out of any construction/launch cradle. You still need impulse drive for anything other than a lifting force directly opposed to the gravitational force, but at least you're clear of any gantries, buildings and platforms full of dignitaries swinging champagne bottles, etc. before your exhaust vents incinerate much (perhaps what might be relatively "cold" RCS thrusters are in use initially in concert with the gravs for anything other than "straight-up" and any attitude changes) . Any take-offs and landings in trek always seem to involve an initial or final vertical component when I would think the gravs are running the show for the most part. This would cover any low altitude "hovering" as well.

I also don't mind that whole "structural integrity field" business either. I'm sure the Big E's spaceframe is pretty strong to begin with thanks to 23rd century materials science and they've had stuff like hull polarizing systems since at least the NX-01 era to make things that much stronger. I see embedded SIF tech being a progression of this, so even before you raise the deflector shields/screens, you've got one damn tough boat.

 

[Captain Robert April]

It's pretty well-established that the Enterprise-D was built in sections on the surface of Mars at Utopia Planitia and that was a MUCH, MUCH larger ship. I don't see any implausibility at all of lifting a Constitution class ship into orbit by similar means.

1) The only shot we've ever seen of the Enterprise-D along those lines was in a certain episode of Voyager, and that showed us, not only the E-D in an orbital spacedock, but that the Utopia Planitia shipyards has a helluva lot of orbital spacedocks.

2) By Mike Okuda's own admission, the grainy shot of those Galaxy class ship components on the ground of the Utopia Planitia site wasn't fully thought out conceptually. They just thought it looked cool, and he conceded that it could very well be a facility for ground testing new components and equipment in a more controlled situation before shlepping the stuff into orbit and fitting the stuff into a fuctioning starship, i.e., what we are seeing is NOT a ship underconstruction, but something more akin to the shuttle simulator at Johnson Space Center in Houston, Texas.

3) Mars' gravity is around half that of Earth's. Big honking difference.

 

[ancient]

I also don't mind that whole "structural integrity field" business either. I'm sure the Big E's spaceframe is pretty strong to begin with thanks to 23rd century materials science and they've had stuff like hull polarizing systems since at least the NX-01 era to make things that much stronger. I see embedded SIF tech being a progression of this, so even before you raise the deflector shields/screens, you've got one damn tough boat.

Exactly. The ship on its own may be able to withstand, say, 10 g's with just its hull strength, being made out of superstrong 23rd/24th century material.

Turn on the SIF and suddenly the ship can withstand 100,000 g's and jump to warp 9.9 in 2 seconds without the ship or crew vaporizing.

 

[Santaman]

Exactly. The ship on its own may be able to withstand, say, 10 g's with just its hull strength, being made out of superstrong 23rd/24th century material.

Turn on the SIF and suddenly the ship can withstand 100,000 g's and jump to warp 9.9 in 2 seconds without the ship or crew vaporizing.

^^ Bingo! thats the perfect way to describe it.

 

[deg3D]

My version of E in sky-flight...

deg

It's only a model. - Patsy, Monty Python and the Holy Grail

 

[ST-One]

 

[Psion]

Beautiful, deg3D! From a distance and on an old B&W TV with rabbit-ear antennae, that'd be indistinguishable from the original, but close up in HD, the hidden details are revealed!

 

[Gryndl]

Hi guys - long timer lurker, first time poster... there's been something bugging me about the nacelles and the conjectural design put forth here... given the design in the trailer, I *really* think the nacelles are much shorter than the tri-view elevation.

I recall hearing the nacelles described as "shorter, more aircraft like" - based on what I'm seeing, I'm inclined to think they look like jet engines; albeit the 23rd century version...

I'll post a photo-manip another time... but honestly... look at it..

 

[judexavier]

You know, Gryndl ,you might be on to somrthing.....
The whole "conjecture" thread was simply a stab at guessing what the hell
they were doing.... The first thing I did was to "set" the proportions as close as possible to the original TOS "E", and modify from there. (Which may have been wrong, too limiting, compared to what we may see on the big screen).
And I'm thinking more and more that they may have really REALLY seriously changed M. J's Enterprise....
weird twisty shapes and odd mixes of TMP/TOS elements....Maybe it will truely blow all of our minds?...guess we'll have to wait and see.
(The things I've done have evolved somewhat since I posted them...especially after noticing my proportions were WAY off...and I've conjectured a few other things as well...will try to upload/post when time permits)
My only hope is that, after seeing some of the cast photos/cool poster shots, the rest of the
production-final release has a sense of "Realness" and elevated level of film-making-art that none of us has seen before.
I haven't been up on all of this for awhile, (all sorts of fun personal hell-crap going on) but looking at the trailer cap you posted, I can see where you are going.
Please post your photo-manips and ideas!

Also just want to mention that deg3D's images are awsome.
I want those on my phone wallpaper. Just have to figure that out.