Starship Size Argument™ thread
- Thread starter WarpFactorZ
- Start date
- Status
Of course it is.
I wonder if the transwarp beaming formula could have something to do with the Vengeance leap in propulsion technology?
For whatever it's worth, Mr. Scott's Guide to the Enterprise and FASA's old gaming manuals technobabbled that the STIII transwarp drive somehow combined the transporter and warp drive systems.
It also explains how Enterprise and Excelsior were both able to cover the distances that they did in such a short amount of time. Both are shown warping to Khitomer from totally different locations -- arguably, totally different sectors of space -- in less than a day. Still earlier, Enterprise manages to warp across space from a position within Federation space to a location "deep within the Klingon frontier" in a matter of hours. It suffices to say that the Enterprise-A was considerably faster than the original Enterprise.
Seems perfectly plausible to me, especially since it's not entirely clear what "transwarp" even means other than "really really fast warp."
Looking at this screengrab from the 2009 teaser where you can see a worker kneeling over to weld, it's EASILY five decks...
I don't think so. Mr Scott's Guide... is unofficial. All 'more-or-less official' books after TNG said that transwarp was a failure.
^You mean like the TNG Technical Manual that claimed phasers couldn't be fired at warp
If you want to play that game, Kira said that warping within a system was very risky. It's not like actual Trek canon doesn't contradict itself.
I don't think whether or not there's a contradiction should be used to determine canon. But the TNG guide was written by the guys doing the show, so it's more reliable, in my view, than Scott's guide.
I don't think whether or not there's a contradiction should be used to determine canon. But the TNG guide was written by the guys doing the show, so it's more reliable, in my view, than Scott's guide.
Something had to have changed because TNG warp was much faster than TOS warp. Warp 10 is infinite velocity in TNG, we saw the TOS ship move beyond warp 10 multiple times.
Perhaps transwarp was a success and the books simply got it wrong?
Or just regular advancements in warp drive and the guys at Paramount didn't want to have ships going at warp 31.
At the time of early TNG, my personal fanwank was that transwarp drive failed because Federation theories were wrong, and that the subsequent attempts to correct the theories brought about the revision in the regular warp scale.
And there they turned it into a spectacular failure - on so many levels.
- Status
Similar threads
