Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!
Typing CST Driver Coil is faster than typing Compact Space-Time Driver Coil over & over.
It's like how the military loves their abbreviations & acronyms. It's just faster once you get used to it.
Yes, but if nobody knows what you're talking about before you start abbreviating all over the place using acronyms of your own invention then it's a little bit counter-productive isn't it
This might be what you mean but it's not what you say, and the context isn't clear enough to deduce it. I can't tell if you're disagreeing with me, or agreeing with me, or providing some form of parallel commentary.
Having a similar "Performance Enveleope" or "Acceleration Time" to get to 0.25c since the common limit for impulse drive operation during the 24th century is 0.25c. That limit is dictated by the computer time synchronization issues going past 0.25c, not because the Impulse drives can't go faster, they can, but they won't due to the regulations to limit the impulse drive to 0.25c to prevent relavistic effects on the computers internal clocks and the desync issues it causes.
Elsewhere on the very page you cite for "CST driver coil" it talks about "high impulse operations" above 0.75c. Also – you're going to get relativistic effects with any movement. That's how GPS works. At a limit of 0.25c you're still going to see about 3% time dilation.
It's also clear that they mean that prolonged high relativistic speeds will cause ship time becomes desynchronised with what we might call "Federation standard time", rather than the computers becoming desynchronised with each other. When we see the Enterprise having to recalibrate its onboard clocks – in "Cause and Effect" or "Clues", for example – it seems to be no more complex than doing a manual refresh of a computer clock against an internet time server today. The issue comes in that if you are continually recalibrating then timekeeping aboard the ship is going to become very strange indeed over time, and that's going to cause crew issues with things like sleep cycles etc.
That matching of "Acceleration Time" to a IRL vehicle or vessel is what allows for similar performance characteristics seen on screen. It's because the time needed to accelerate is "Similar" to things we see in real life.
Otherwise you get slow & lumbering ships like from the age of sail where things aren't moving as dynamically as it is currently portrayed.
I... literally did this calculation already? And demonstrated using on-screen evidence what accelerations starships are capable of?
How fast a modern jet fighter can accelerate to mach 1 isn't really relevant since it's hugely slower. A starship accelerating to mach 1 at the same acceleration we see the refit Enterprise use in TMP (which it can't technically do if they're not in an atmosphere, but let's run with it for now using the standard speed of sound) would take no more than 0.012 seconds. A starship accelerating to full impulse at the same acceleration as fighter jets are capable of with catapult assist from an aircraft carrier is going to take overthree weeks. It's a complete mismatch of scales. Compared to what we know of starships, fighter jets are slow and lumbering.
Yes, but if nobody knows what you're talking about before you start abbreviating all over the place using acronyms of your own invention then it's a little bit counter-productive isn't it
I did state what "CST (Compact Space-Time) Driver Coil" was at the beginning of the post before I continued with the abbreviations. Sorry if you have a hard time keeping up. It's usually standard acronym protocol to list the full abbreviation at the beginning of the statement before you continue on using the abbreviated acronym for the rest of the post.
This might be what you mean but it's not what you say, and the context isn't clear enough to deduce it. I can't tell if you're disagreeing with me, or agreeing with me, or providing some form of parallel commentary.
It's a analogy of how long it takes to accelerate to a standard measuring point.
You know how automobiles acceleration is usually measured from 0-60 mph
Or how Fighter Jets acceleration is usually measured from 0 to Mach 1.0
I'm using 0 to 0.25c as a common measuring point for StarShip STL acceleration.
Elsewhere on the very page you cite for "CST driver coil" it talks about "high impulse operations" above 0.75c. Also – you're going to get relativistic effects with any movement. That's how GPS works. At a limit of 0.25c you're still going to see about 3% time dilation.
But there are good reason why you don't go past 0.25c, the smaller relativistic effects are a factor that the ship can easily handle (computer clock adjustment wise), the faster you go past 0.25c, you cause more clock syncing issues which plays havoc with other systems.
It's also clear that they mean that prolonged high relativistic speeds will cause ship time becomes desynchronised with what we might call "Federation standard time", rather than the computers becoming desynchronised with each other. When we see the Enterprise having to recalibrate its onboard clocks – in "Cause and Effect" or "Clues", for example – it seems to be no more complex than doing a manual refresh of a computer clock against an internet time server today.
If it was that easy, StarFleet wouldn't have imposed a speed limit of 0.25c on engines that can easily go much higher and faster past that point.
6.2 RELATIVISTIC CONSIDERATIONS While the Galaxy class starship is the most advanced space vehicle in Starfleet's inventory, it is perhaps ironic that
one of its most sophisticated systems can actually cause a number of annoying problems with extended use.
As fledgling journeys were made by fusion starships late in the twenty-first century, theoretical calculations concerning the tau factor, or time dilation effect encountered at appreciable fractions of lightspeed, rapidly crossed over into reality. Time aboard a spacecraft at relativistic velocities slowed according to the "twin paradox." During the last of the long voyages, many more years had passed back on Earth, and the time differences proved little more than curiosities as mission news was relayed back to Earth and global developments were broadcast to the distant travelers. Numerous other spacefaring cultures have echoed these experiences, leading to the present navigation and communication standards within the Federation.
Today, such time differences can interfere with the requirement for close synchronization with Starfleet Command as well as overall Federation timekeeping schemes. Any extended flight at high relativistic speeds can place mission objectives in jeopardy. At times when warp propulsion is not available, impulse flight may be unavoidable, but will require lengthy recalibration of onboard computer clock systems even if contact is maintained with Starfleet navigation beacons. It is for this reason that normal impulse operations are limited to a velocity of 0.25c.
Efficiency ratings for impulse and warp engines determine which flight modes will best accomplish mission objectives. Current impulse engine configurations achieve efficiencies approaching 85% when velocities are limited to 0.5c. Current warp engine efficiency, on the other hand, falls off dramatically when the engine is asked to maintain an asymmetrical peristaltic subspace field below lightspeed or an integral warp factor (See: 5.1). It is generally accepted that careful mission planning of warp and impulse flight segments, in conjunction with computer recommendations, will minimize normal clock adjustments. In emergency and combat operations, major readjustments are dealt with according to the specifics of the situation, usually after action levels are reduced.
That's great and all, but I'm just stating what StarShips should be able to do easily.
How fast a modern jet fighter can accelerate to mach 1 isn't really relevant since it's hugely slower. A starship accelerating to mach 1 at the same acceleration we see the refit Enterprise use in TMP (which it can't technically do if they're not in an atmosphere, but let's run with it for now using the standard speed of sound) would take no more than 0.012 seconds. A starship accelerating to full impulse at the same acceleration as fighter jets are capable of with catapult assist from an aircraft carrier is going to take overthree weeks. It's a complete mismatch of scales.
Again, I'm not talking about StarShips hitting Mach 1 or using Fighter Jet Acceleration.
The entire acceleration to Mach 1 was just a comparative analogy for ease of understanding for normal people to get a reference point about (how long/how much time it takes) for each vessel/vehicle would take to accelerate to their common measuring speeds as a "reference point" as to how fast they accelerate.
Similar to how I'm stating 0-60 mph is a common acceleration reference point for cars.
That 0 - 0.25c should also be a common acceleration reference point for a StarShip at STL speeds.
That's all I'm saying, nothing more, nothing less.
You don't have to try to infer anything more complicated than that or trying to mix & match scales.
There was none of that happening.
I'm sorry if you misunderstood, but that's not what I was talking about.
That's honestly not good enough. This season has been awful. Horrendous writing from the start. I honestly think I'm more of a Star Trek fan than the majority of u
I didn't check your math or citation, but assuming all is accurate, that puts the nail in the coffin of the claim that the maneuvers under discussion are inconsistent with the TNG-era Enterprise-D. And you cited licensed tie-in material written by people who worked on the show that was based on technical reference material used during production of the show. Well done.
Yup. Not sure why people are so upset how the D performed. In TNG it made fast turns all the time. Even in the first episode when it was fleeing Q it made really fast turns.
That's honestly not good enough. This season has been awful. Horrendous writing from the start. I honestly think I'm more of a Star Trek fan than the majority of u
Yup. Not sure why people are so upset how the D performed. In TNG it made fast turns all the time. Even I'm the first episode when it was fleeing Q it made really fast turns.
The whole criticism is silly and just people looking for things to support their thesis that the show/season/whatever was bad. Imagine looking to a property like Star Trek for strict adherence to the laws of physics and thermodynamic verisimilitude!
The whole criticism is silly and just people looking for things to support their thesis that the show/season/whatever was bad. Imagine looking to a property like Star Trek for strict adherence to the laws of physics and thermodynamic verisimilitude!
My criticism is twofold: one, it looks like Star Wars and two this VFX is completely at odds with past criticism of newer Trek over reliance on "pew-pew." It smacks of disingenuous arguments now.
But, it's not that it's unbelievable; it's that it looks like Star Wars, specifically Return of the Jedi.
My criticism is twofold: one, it looks like Star Wars and two this VFX is completely at odds with past criticism of newer Trek over reliance on "pew-pew." It smacks of disingenuous arguments now.
But, it's not that it's unbelievable; it's that it looks like Star Wars, specifically Return of the Jedi.
So what if it looks like Star Wars? TV/movies are visual media and things are meant to look engaging and exciting. Star Wars did not invent nor does it hold a monopoly on "we need to fly this ship into the center of the big giant threat to blow it up or whatever," nor is such a plot device uncommon in the genre. Even TMP was this, just in much slower motion.
Yes, there was "pew pew" in the big action climax. The sequence was exactly 24 seconds long, so I would hardly call that over reliance. Let's say there's an even 60 seconds of pew-pew with the E-D to allow for Bev's strafing run of the exterior. Still not over reliance. I just rewatched the sequence to time it and whilst doing so I noticed that the ship's movements are actually not that crazy or fast paced. The camera moves quite kinetically and much more quickly than the ship to create the feeling of much faster and more sudden motion, often moving in contrary directions to the ship. If you try to ignore that and just focus on the E-D she is actually not doing anything that crazy. The Kelvin movies are FULL of pew pew and that's fine too because they are cool and interesting to watch and 2/3 of them are good movies!
Trek fans sure seem to get distracted by a lot of things...
Thoughtful SF and pew pew are not mutually exclusive. The entire franchise is replete with pew pew. Hell, one of the most beloved series in the franchise dedicates two thirds of its run to an entire intragalactic war, containing copious pew.
Trek fans sure seem to get distracted by a lot of things...
Thoughtful SF and pew pew are not mutually exclusive. The entire franchise is replete with pew pew. Hell, one of the most beloved series in the franchise dedicates two thirds of its run to an entire intragalactic war, containing copious pew.
Yes, I get distracted by uniforms, pronunciation of certain words, and poor counseling techniques (occupational hazard). I don't believe this should come as a surprise.
Two, see my response above about it, and why this bothers me. S3 didn't do anything particularly different from Season 1 except it had the Galaxy class taking on the gigantic fleet, rather than the La Sirena. It smacks of favoritism. It stands out to me, and is ultimately just plain frustrating.
And, yes, I was thinking of Lando flying the Millenium Falco through parts of the sequence. I guess Matalas wanted to celebrate ROTJ's 40th anniversary too.
Yes, there was "pew pew" in the big action climax. The sequence was exactly 24 seconds long, so I would hardly call that over reliance. Let's say there's an even 60 seconds of pew-pew with the E-D to allow for Bev's strafing run of the exterior. Still not over reliance. I just rewatched the sequence to time it and whilst doing so I noticed that the ship's movements are actually not that crazy or fast paced. The camera moves quite kinetically and much more quickly than the ship to create the feeling of much faster and more sudden motion, often moving in contrary directions to the ship. If you try to ignore that and just focus on the E-D she is actually not doing anything that crazy. The Kelvin movies are FULL of pew pew and that's fine too because they are cool and interesting to watch and 2/3 of them are good movies!
I know, the Enterprise-D wasn't doing anything crazy in the grand scheme of things, it's movements were like a light Cessna flying through rings in Pilot-Wings at relatively slow speeds. But that level of manueverability has been shown for larger StarFleet ships in the past. That isn't all that crazy compared to what real fighter jets or high performance sports cars can do.
Even a basic "Fish-Tail turn" isn't all that uncommon with average cars, hell I can do that with my Mazda 6 if I really wanted to. So seeing a Nebula class pull that at Wolf-359 means that pilot for that ship, at that time was more skilled then your average pilot in terms of manuevering finesse. That's all. The StarFleet Impulse Engines & RCS units on StarFleet ships are on different levels than what most other alien species seem to put into their ships.
But that's probably StarFleet thinking based on NASA / USAF heritage of valuing manueverability and flexibility over raw efficiency. Otherwise they would've stuck with the Vulcan Coleopteric Warp Ring and just only cared about Straight-line warp Energy Consumption Efficiency over Twin Warp Nacelles that offered more manueverability at the expense of Energy Consumption Efficiency at Warp speeds.
If you actually watched some Gundam/Macross shows, they have battles that span most of an entire episode that can last over several episodes, all focused on the detail & nitty gritty of combat.
I'm all down for that, but not everybody here seems to care about the details of how a real battle would work or how it would flow. Especially Space Combat.
The problem itself isn't the "pew-pew" action. It's how it's handled.
Details make all the difference.
Yes, I get distracted by uniforms, pronunciation of certain words, and poor counseling techniques (occupational hazard). I don't believe this should come as a surprise.
Has Star Trek ever portrayed a competent counselor in any of it's incarnation IYO as a professional counselor?
Or has every incarnation shown been incompetent? From Troi, to Ezri Dax, to Hugh Culber, to the Doctor Migleemo?
Two, see my response above about it, and why this bothers me. S3 didn't do anything particularly different from Season 1 except it had the Galaxy class taking on the gigantic fleet, rather than the La Sirena. It smacks of favoritism. It stands out to me, and is ultimately just plain frustrating.
The Galaxy-class didn't fight the gigantic fleet, it went after the Borg Cube to stop the source of the problem.
It was the Titan that went up against the gigantic fleet with it's cloaking device advantage.
And, yes, I was thinking of Lando flying the Millenium Falco through parts of the sequence. I guess Matalas wanted to celebrate ROTJ's 40th anniversary too.
