Starship Size Argument™ thread

[Locutus of Bored]

Is there anything in canon (live-action episodes/movies) that says transwarp drive was a failure?

VOY - Threshold says that the Warp 10 "infinite velocity" transwarp barrier had never been broken by the Federation until Tom Paris did it in 2372 and turned into a salamander.

However, that doesn't necessarily mean that transwarp drive like on the Excelsior was a failure, since the Borg and the Voth use transwarp and it simply operates like a much faster warp drive, and not like the Warp 10 transwarp barrier where you supposedly occupy all points in the universe simultaneously (and can also travel backwards in time according to TNG Time Squared) and can drop out anywhere in the universe instantly.

I've just always figured that the adjusted warp scale between TOS and TNG was because transwarp was successful. All those times that the Enterprise in TOS went to ludicrous speed like warp 10, 11, 14, 22, and 36 are equivalent to the multiples of warp 9 used in TNG, like warp 9.6, 9.9, and 9.99999999, etc.

 

[BillJ]

I've just always figured that the adjusted warp scale between TOS and TNG was because transwarp was successful. All those times that the Enterprise in TOS went to ludicrous speed like warp 10, 11, 14, 22, and 36 are equivalent to the multiples of warp 9 used in TNG, like warp 9.6, 9.9, and 9.99999999, etc.

 

[CorporalCaptain]

^ That would make sense, too, I suppose; I was motivated mainly by the the complete absence of any mention of the term (until Descent, IIRC), coupled by Scotty's implicit assessment that the technology—as implemented on the Excelsior—was bunk.

 

[BillJ]

^ That would make sense, too, I suppose; I was motivated mainly by the the complete absence of any mention of the term (until Descent, IIRC), coupled by Scotty's implicit assessment that the technology—as implemented on the Excelsior—was bunk.

I never really got that vibe from Scott. I think it was more a "resistant to change" mentality coupled with Styles being a complete asshole as far as the Enterprise speed records were concerned.

Scott would've had to have had a hand in the development/implementation of transwarp at some point or else he would have been totally unqualified to be chief engineer. In my opinion.

 

[CorporalCaptain]

When it came to engineering, Scotty was always a straight shooter. He never would have implied that the Excelsior had transwarp drive only to the degree that his grandmother with wheels would have been a wagon, if it weren't his professional opinion that the Excelsior's transwarp drive couldn't work.

Scotty could have been wrong, of course, but it would have been one of the rare occasions. Plus, maybe his contributions, including those he made while captain of Engineering aboard Excelsior, ultimately ironed things out or led to the solution.

There's just nothing on screen to say one way or the other.

 

[BillJ]

When it came to engineering, Scotty was always a straight shooter. He never would have implied that the Excelsior had transwarp drive only to the degree that his grandmother with wheels would have been a wagon, if it weren't his professional opinion that the Excelsior's transwarp drive couldn't work.

There is personal pride involved where the Enterprise is concerned and something like the Excelsior would eventually push older starships out of service.

And why would Scott need to pull anything out of the Excelsior transwarp computer if he was convinced the technology wouldn't work?

SCOTT: Aye sir. The more they over-think the plumbing, the easier it is to stop up the drain. ...Here, Doctor, souvenirs from one surgeon to another. I took it out of her main transwarp computer drive.

 

[F. King Daniel]

Back to ship sizes! This link has a few set plans from Into Darkness, including the turbolift plaza (which is actually an oval and not circular as I'd believed). If anyone can make out the scale on the top blueprint, we've got a definitive deck height and the exact between-deck spacing.

http://www.behance.net/gallery/STAR-TREK-INTO-DARKNESS/6414465


Pics of the CG turbolift plaza and physical set here: http://forums.luxology.com/topic.aspx?f=8&t=77509&page=1

 

[Belz...]

When it came to engineering, Scotty was always a straight shooter. He never would have implied that the Excelsior had transwarp drive only to the degree that his grandmother with wheels would have been a wagon, if it weren't his professional opinion that the Excelsior's transwarp drive couldn't work.

I think what was implied by that line was that transwarp drive didn't make the Excelcior better than the Enterprise. I think this is supported by the other line about that ship at the end of IV.

 

[Belz...]

Back to ship sizes! This link has a few set plans from Into Darkness, including the turbolift plaza (which is actually an oval and not circular as I'd believed). If anyone can make out the scale on the top blueprint, we've got a definitive deck height and the exact between-deck spacing.

Deck plans are too small.

 

[CorporalCaptain]

And why would Scott need to pull anything out of the Excelsior transwarp computer if he was convinced the technology wouldn't work?

SCOTT: Aye sir. The more they over-think the plumbing, the easier it is to stop up the drain. ...Here, Doctor, souvenirs from one surgeon to another. I took it out of her main transwarp computer drive.

So not even the regular warp drive would work...

With respect to the transwarp drive questions, I'm to chalk any issues here up to TSFS not being a perfect movie!

 

[BillJ]

So not even the regular warp drive would work...

But we don't even know if transwarp includes a regular warp drive or if that is a separate entity.

It really all comes down to personal interpretation, unless Paramount makes Star Trek III.5: Why Didn't Transwarp Drive Work?

 

[Crazy Eddie]

Seems perfectly plausible to me

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.

Actually, the TNG tech manual is the only one that claims this, as does the Star Trek Chronology which uses the TNG manual as source material.

And as already mentioned, there's ALOT in the TNG manual that is either apocryphal or self-contradictory. It's an interesting read, but not much more than that.

 

[WarpFactorZ]

As far as I know, the "failure" of transwarp drive was due to the popular belief that the Excelsior broke down because of this deficiency. Mr. Scott's skepticism (based on not wanting to feel obsolete, as with the lingering subplot of STII) caused people to literally assume transwarp drive was bunk.

In short: most people missed the point of why the Excelsior sputtered out.

 

[gerbil]

The way warp was portrayed in Into Darkness (such as when the Vengeance knocked the Enterprise out of warp) seemed almost like one of the "corridors" Voyager portrayed the Borg using.

 

[Belz...]

Yeah warp effects have never been consistent.

 

[JarodRussell]

Seems perfectly plausible to me

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.

Actually, the TNG tech manual is the only one that claims this, as does the Star Trek Chronology which uses the TNG manual as source material.

And as already mentioned, there's ALOT in the TNG manual that is either apocryphal or self-contradictory. It's an interesting read, but not much more than that.

And I thought transwarp drive was what every TNG ship was using. Hence the introduction of the new warp scale in TNG.

 

[Belz...]

It's a possibility, also, assuming the TNG books are wrong. It's never mentioned as such, however, and with Voyager saying Transwarp is something the Federation don't have, I think it's unlikely.

 

[YellowSubmarine]

It's a possibility, also, assuming the TNG books are wrong. It's never mentioned as such, however, and with Voyager saying Transwarp is something the Federation don't have, I think it's unlikely.

Or transwarp is just a buzzword along the lines of next generation, 3G we use today. It could mean any propulsion technology that is comparable to a warp drive, but different in one or another, including drives that are actually faster (as seen in Voyager, TNG, etc.), drives using a different mechanism to achieve FTL without being faster, and drives that are warp drives that do something differently. It is also possible that "transwarp" drives were being renamed back to "warp" drives after each generation.

 

[Gonzo]

Transwarp uses corridors and was used extensively by the Borg from TNG onwards and retrofitted into the USS Voyager (STV) and USS Monitor (Shatner books).

Whatever the Vengeance is using it is obviously very fast indeed, though calling it true Transwarp is not possible as it uses a completely different principle and would mean that the NuEnterprise was using it as well which we know is not the case.

The warp speeds used in the new films are very fast but not Transwarp speed which is so fast it is used for crossing quadrants and ships using it travel in a completely different way (transwarp corridors), if the NuEntperprise was using even an advanced type of warp speed and the Vengeance was using true Transwarp they would not have met unless the Vengeance dropped out of Transwarp on top of the Enterprise which did not seem to be the case from the footage in the film.

Whatever new type of Warp the Vengeance used I am hoping that they spent the year between the Vengeance crash and rechristening retrofitting the NuEnterprise with it.

 

[F. King Daniel]

It seems the USS Vengeance may actually be larger than we thought. It's 2.5x the Enterprise's size in this graphic:

And here's the ever-changing bridge window. It seems the taller, narrower veraion seen when the Enterprise is on the Klingon border and again at the very end correctly matches the window on the set (which has a definite height of 8', I guesstimated a width of 25'):

Forgive the shitty quality of the pics, they're from YouTube clips. Enterprise pic from www.cygnus-x1.net.