As always.
Stargazer-Class
- Thread starter CuttingEdge100
- Start date
As always.
We really have no idea how the number of nacelles relates to warp drive, except that any number between zero and four is fine.
From the surface, it certainly looks largely analogous to the situation with propellers in water propulsion technology. If you have lots of power available, it might be a good idea to spread it out between more than just one propeller. Two is always good for redundancy anyway, but three or four is a good way to overcome the hydrodynamic limitations inherent in a propeller - better than attempting to build a bigger single propeller. Hence, lots of cheap warships out there with just a single prop, but mostly two-prop ships, whereas a really big ship would be built with three or four until the middle of the 20th century at least.
Never mind analogies, tho. The Stargazer design makes intuitive sense: it represents the last gasps of an outdated technology at a time when the Excelsior class propulsion tech is already being introduced, and quite plausibly the only way to compete with "better" and "bigger" is by attempting "more".
That sort of thinking shines through elsewhere as well. The ship has two impulse assemblies of Constitution design, again more instead of better. The saucer is thicker than the Constitution one, with weird things leaking out from the seams and ruining the lines. There are even two bridge superstructures, one upside down at the bottom. It's Constitution tech taken to the very limits, and then some - the end of one well-traveled road.
Timo Saloniemi
From the surface, it certainly looks largely analogous to the situation with propellers in water propulsion technology. If you have lots of power available, it might be a good idea to spread it out between more than just one propeller. Two is always good for redundancy anyway, but three or four is a good way to overcome the hydrodynamic limitations inherent in a propeller - better than attempting to build a bigger single propeller. Hence, lots of cheap warships out there with just a single prop, but mostly two-prop ships, whereas a really big ship would be built with three or four until the middle of the 20th century at least.
Never mind analogies, tho. The Stargazer design makes intuitive sense: it represents the last gasps of an outdated technology at a time when the Excelsior class propulsion tech is already being introduced, and quite plausibly the only way to compete with "better" and "bigger" is by attempting "more".
That sort of thinking shines through elsewhere as well. The ship has two impulse assemblies of Constitution design, again more instead of better. The saucer is thicker than the Constitution one, with weird things leaking out from the seams and ruining the lines. There are even two bridge superstructures, one upside down at the bottom. It's Constitution tech taken to the very limits, and then some - the end of one well-traveled road.
Timo Saloniemi
Yea, it's kinda like having one, last big bang with the old stuff, before the new stuff comes out.
I like this class of ship IMO the four warp nacelles would be a great power reserve as they could use warp speed with two nacelles and use the over two for weapons shields long range sensors impulse speeds and red alert conditions. As i recall this ship was a deep space explorer vessel I also have some tech sheets on this ship she had a wide range of sensor equipment and also some heavy duty phaser banks, so she was well suited for DSE.
It doesn't work that way. The nacelles are not the power source of a starship, merely propulsive elements, analogous to the wheels of a car. Ship's power is generated by the ship's matter/antimatter reactor assembly(warp core) and/or the fusion reactors of the impulse engines.
Hm...
Now that I think about it... perhaps what the Stargazer designers attempt with the 4 nacelles might have been akin to greater control over the warp bubbles which would in turn produce more efficient means of navigating Warp space.
I highly doubt that new starships such as the Ambassador class would be 'expensive'.
The resource requirements for building an Ambassador class might have been larger, but that can also be attributed easily to it's size and nothing else.
The materials themselves remained largely the same, if not went through some enhancements as time went on, and one of the biggest changes was the hardware and power outputs.
I mean seriously, resources are the least of these people's issues.
They have thousands of LY's worth of raw matter they can convert from one thing into something else.
Furthermore, they already have infrastructure in place allowing them to make new technologies with relative ease.
Once they come up with something new, they simply replace the old by breaking it into base elements and reconstitute it into new technologies, or just use it as energy.
Now that I think about it... perhaps what the Stargazer designers attempt with the 4 nacelles might have been akin to greater control over the warp bubbles which would in turn produce more efficient means of navigating Warp space.
I highly doubt that new starships such as the Ambassador class would be 'expensive'.
The resource requirements for building an Ambassador class might have been larger, but that can also be attributed easily to it's size and nothing else.
The materials themselves remained largely the same, if not went through some enhancements as time went on, and one of the biggest changes was the hardware and power outputs.
I mean seriously, resources are the least of these people's issues.
They have thousands of LY's worth of raw matter they can convert from one thing into something else.
Furthermore, they already have infrastructure in place allowing them to make new technologies with relative ease.
Once they come up with something new, they simply replace the old by breaking it into base elements and reconstitute it into new technologies, or just use it as energy.
^When we say "resources" we are not restricting that meaning to raw materials. More advanced design require more advanced techniques/knowledge/training. All of which would be in smaller quantities than using well known designs with manufacturing already in place.
It takes time to ramp up. Probably not as much as it does to go from design to production of a new state of the art jet fighter today, but there is still a transition period.
It takes time to ramp up. Probably not as much as it does to go from design to production of a new state of the art jet fighter today, but there is still a transition period.
Doesn't matter in the long run.
The initial construction of a new ship might be 'slow', but subsequent construction would likely be faster.
And even then, I very much have my doubts about long construction times regardless of how new the ship is.
They have the training /techniques/knowledge that is freely shared throughout the Federation.
The initial construction of a new ship might be 'slow', but subsequent construction would likely be faster.
And even then, I very much have my doubts about long construction times regardless of how new the ship is.
They have the training /techniques/knowledge that is freely shared throughout the Federation.
That's all sort of academic, now isn't it, when we know for a fact that Starfleet has fewer ships than it would like to have?
Something is preventing Starfleet from existing in decisive strength. Something is keeping them "spread thin" in peacetime and wartime alike. Something is forcing them to utilize ancient ships rather than modern ones. And every now and then, a prototype crops up, an unlikely step in production if ships really can be built regardless of the usual earthly concerns.
It would appear that with the fantastic new technologies of the 24th century, the UFP is barely treading water. A ship from that century takes longer to manufacture than a ship from today, and is more likely to prove a complete dud at a late stage of production. Which should hardly come as a surprise, considering the supposedly increasing complexities of manufacture and design. For all we know, it's impossible to analytically or even numerically solve the equations of warp field generation, and the only way to proceed is to build testbed after testbed - much like aerodynamics was done until very recently.
Timo Saloniemi
Something is preventing Starfleet from existing in decisive strength. Something is keeping them "spread thin" in peacetime and wartime alike. Something is forcing them to utilize ancient ships rather than modern ones. And every now and then, a prototype crops up, an unlikely step in production if ships really can be built regardless of the usual earthly concerns.
It would appear that with the fantastic new technologies of the 24th century, the UFP is barely treading water. A ship from that century takes longer to manufacture than a ship from today, and is more likely to prove a complete dud at a late stage of production. Which should hardly come as a surprise, considering the supposedly increasing complexities of manufacture and design. For all we know, it's impossible to analytically or even numerically solve the equations of warp field generation, and the only way to proceed is to build testbed after testbed - much like aerodynamics was done until very recently.
Timo Saloniemi
But we're not talking about the long run. We're talking about that period of transition between old and new tech. You keep making some of the old stuff until the new stuff is widespread.
I didn't say it wasn't free. I said it was only available in small quantities. It takes time for these things to propagate.
Just this, while never specified on screen, something somewhere is creating a production bottleneck.
But having four wheel drive does offer advantages over two wheel drive in some situations. Tractor-trailers have eight drive wheels, the Stargazer's four nacelles offer abilities over only two double sized nacelles.
The Stargazer could have been considered high powered when launched, and Picard was simply commenting on the aging vessel's approaching obsolesce. Comparing it to then "modern" starships.
Perhaps just that, it was "dingy."
If you wanted more power with exist design nacelles (analogy to tires) , merely installing a larger warpcore and feeding the resulting power to two nacelles would only allow you to go so fast, accelerate so fast, and then the nacelles simply would have nothing else to give. The nacelles on the Stargazer would visually appear to be "standard sized" to the ones on the Enterprise refit. The four nacelle design would give twice the destination, twice the warp coils for any additionally produced warp plasma. What would be a dangerous red-line for two nacelles, would be standard operating parameters with four. Higher cruising speed, more acceleration, increased towing, maybe even tighter turns in combat.
On heavy duty pickup trucks, with large tows, you have to put addition drive tires outside of the original two, otherwise when you try to move, two tires will just spin on the pavement, while four will move the load. Doesn't make any difference how big your engine is. (Found this out the hard way)
Race cars have unusually wide drive tires, again to handle the power of the engine.
From the scene at the end of Nemesis, where the new bow is being built on the Enterprise, they do indeed build their starships. A Galaxy will take longer than a runabout. It isn't manufactured/replicated already in one piece.
Last edited:
