The Phase II Enterprise

[Gotham Central]

I happen to suspect that the McQuarrieprise was not Adam's favored design. Every sketch of that one I'd seen was McQuarrie's. All the Adam sketches I've seen were for this narrower-bodied, big nacelled version:

You know...until you posted this picture, I had not noticed how much the Star Trek XI Enterprise resembles this. The new warp nacelles are a bit rounder, but otherwise are nearly identical...down to the exhaust areas in the rear.

 

[Uxi]

Couldn't it come off of the horizontal shaft going to the nacelles? You can see some angled purple tubes by the guys with the helmets in the back.

Those are the conduits leading up to the warp nacelles. I already mentioned them.

It could also go vertically below the tube towards the back at some point.

No, it couldn't. You can't tell from the image you posted, but like I said, there's really nothing beneath the horizontal intermix shaft but some fairly open framework holding them up. This isn't the best shot, but it's the best I can find at the moment:

http://movies.trekcore.com/gallery/albums/tmphd/tmphd0751.jpg

Did we ever the area back by the nacelles tubes very clearly? Enough to say the struts in the back are the same as those towards the front. Or that PTS for the secondary hull isn't behind the nacelle struts?

 

[Christopher]

^I found a picture earlier that I've forgotten how to find, but it showed that the support struts holding up the horizontal shaft are the same all the way back (allowing for the shrinking scale of the forced-perspective set). And there's nothing behind the nacelle pylons and the tubes going up through them except a vacant tunnel (or rather a forced-perspective painting of the tunnel continuing further back).

 

[Uxi]

Does that extend vertically down from the intermix chamber itself, too? I'm gonna have to take a break from the SW Saga and put in the BD of TPM in to take a look.

One thing this discussion does remind me of is how absurd the 'modern' Trek idea of ejecting the entire warp core is, instead of just the anti-matter bottles.

 

[Captain Robert April]

You don't think the core can explode?

 

[Uxi]

You don't think the core can explode?

Sure, if there was an uncontrolled matter-antimatter reaction. Rather than launch out the entire enchilada why not just eject one set from the mix?

 

[Christopher]

^I found a picture earlier that I've forgotten how to find, but it showed that the support struts holding up the horizontal shaft are the same all the way back (allowing for the shrinking scale of the forced-perspective set).

Turns out the reason I couldn't find the picture online is that it's actually in a book -- it's on p. 89 of Mr. Scott's Guide to the Enterprise (although it's printed backward).

And it does show that, while the five sets of support legs under the shaft are all the same, at the far aft end of the shaft is a more solid support that could conceivably house some power conduits going into the floor.

And there's nothing behind the nacelle pylons and the tubes going up through them except a vacant tunnel (or rather a forced-perspective painting of the tunnel continuing further back).

Does that extend vertically down from the intermix chamber itself, too?

I'm not sure what you're asking. The tunnel I'm referring to stretches back horizontally toward the rear of the ship.

The best view of the vertical intermix chamber is here:

http://movies.trekcore.com/gallery/albums/tmphd/tmphd0436.jpg

(Although I'm aware that link might not work. It's on p. 4 of TrekCore's HD screencaps page for TMP.)

One thing this discussion does remind me of is how absurd the 'modern' Trek idea of ejecting the entire warp core is, instead of just the anti-matter bottles.

You don't think the core can explode?

The core only contains a finite amount of antimatter at any given moment and it's in the process of reacting. So if you cut off the supply, it would run out pretty quickly.

Then again, now that I think about it, the core is where the reaction is taking place, so it's the part where an explosion would happen if anything went wrong. The antimatter bottles are no doubt carefully designed to be as disaster-proof as possible, so since they're not in the process of exploding as a matter of course, the danger from them would be less.

I guess it's a question of whether the danger comes from a malfunction in the reaction process itself, in which case you'd need to jettison the core, or some kind of exotic alien force suppressing the forcefields that contain the antimatter in the bottles, in which case you'd need to jettison the bottles.

 

[Captain Robert April]

Even if it's just the plasma causing a rupture, we're talking a sizable explosion capable of doing major damage to a critical part of the ship.

Better to have a service vessel bring out a new core to install in the empty space than have the ship hauled back to the nearest spacedock for a whole new secondary hull.

 

[Uxi]

The idea of an ejection of the entire thing is absurd, though. Just remove the matter or anti-matter and there's no problem. To say nothing of the mechanics of having the entire thing be ejectable, it'd be far easier to rig your anti-matter supply.

Regarding the lack of matter, would make more sense to have the matter supply static in (or close to) the center and just add anti-matter as needed.

It also occurs to me that there isn't any need for PTS for the secondary hull coming off the Intermix chamber. Think about it... the secondary hull only exists to remove the area of relative danger from the primary hull, which is the "main" crew area. In the event of a it going bad, eject the anti-matter bottles and if it's going REALLY bad, initiate saucer separation. Remember, this wasn't reversible in the TOS or TMP/refit conceptions outside of a starbase as it was accomplished with explosive bolts. The secondary hull has no means of propulsion without the primary hull and has no need of power distribution either. In the event they're separating, the secondary hull is likely in danger of explosion and doesn't need power. So the M-AM reaction and intermix takes place in the secondary hull and PTS happens from the primary hull.

This doesn't apply to later ships, for example the Galaxy class, which can separate and reconnect and the secondary hull has it's own means of propulsion and thus would need PTS, as well.

 

[Christopher]

The idea of an ejection of the entire thing is absurd, though. Just remove the matter or anti-matter and there's no problem.

Easier said than done. If something's going wrong with the containment mechanisms within the engine core, how could you trust those same mechanisms to eject the antimatter from the core while leaving the core intact?

It also occurs to me that there isn't any need for PTS for the secondary hull coming off the Intermix chamber. Think about it... the secondary hull only exists to remove the area of relative danger from the primary hull, which is the "main" crew area. In the event of a it going bad, eject the anti-matter bottles and if it's going REALLY bad, initiate saucer separation.

There's more to the secondary hull than just engines -- it contains the hangar bay, cargo facilities, the navigational deflector, the arboretum, etc.

 

[Uxi]

The idea of an ejection of the entire thing is absurd, though. Just remove the matter or anti-matter and there's no problem.

Easier said than done. If something's going wrong with the containment mechanisms within the engine core, how could you trust those same mechanisms to eject the antimatter from the core while leaving the core intact?

It's the same principle as ejecting the entire core but an order of magnitude less difficult since you have to store the antimatter separately anyway.

It also occurs to me that there isn't any need for PTS for the secondary hull coming off the Intermix chamber. Think about it... the secondary hull only exists to remove the area of relative danger from the primary hull, which is the "main" crew area. In the event of a it going bad, eject the anti-matter bottles and if it's going REALLY bad, initiate saucer separation.

There's more to the secondary hull than just engines -- it contains the hangar bay, cargo facilities, the navigational deflector, the arboretum, etc.

Sure and absolutely no reason why it must come off the main reactor in a redundant PTS instead of off the main PTS in the primary hull, most likely near the impulse engines.

 

[Christopher]

Easier said than done. If something's going wrong with the containment mechanisms within the engine core, how could you trust those same mechanisms to eject the antimatter from the core while leaving the core intact?

It's the same principle as ejecting the entire core but an order of magnitude less difficult since you have to store the antimatter separately anyway.

I'm not talking about ejecting the antimatter bottles here. As we already established upthread, that's a separate issue from the problems caused by an uncontained antimatter reaction within the core itself. That's what a core ejection is designed to deal with. The antimatter currently inside the core is the stuff that's annihilating, the stuff that poses the danger. Ejecting the bottles won't make any difference to that reaction, at least not soon enough to prevent disaster. You have to get rid of the antimatter that's already inside the core. And if the core's own internal mechanisms are what's malfunctioning, it doesn't make sense to rely on those mechanisms to eject said antimatter. Using a separate, backup system that ejects the core itself is more effective in that context.

There's more to the secondary hull than just engines -- it contains the hangar bay, cargo facilities, the navigational deflector, the arboretum, etc.

Sure and absolutely no reason why it must come off the main reactor in a redundant PTS instead of off the main PTS in the primary hull, most likely near the impulse engines.

Umm, because it's closer to the engines? Wouldn't a more direct link be more efficient and less wasteful? Why use a roundabout connection when you can use a direct one?

 

[Captain Robert April]

^ My argument in a nutshell for putting the matter/antimatter reactor in the secondary hull rather than the nacelles.

 

[Uxi]

Easier said than done. If something's going wrong with the containment mechanisms within the engine core, how could you trust those same mechanisms to eject the antimatter from the core while leaving the core intact?

It's the same principle as ejecting the entire core but an order of magnitude less difficult since you have to store the antimatter separately anyway.

I'm not talking about ejecting the antimatter bottles here. As we already established upthread, that's a separate issue from the problems caused by an uncontained antimatter reaction within the core itself. That's what a core ejection is designed to deal with. The antimatter currently inside the core is the stuff that's annihilating, the stuff that poses the danger.

The AM in the core IS being annihilated isn't it? more power = more AM. How is it different from a "controlled explosion" inside, say... an internal combustion engine? What other way is there for it to go out of control other than losing control of the flow of AM into the intermix?

Ejecting the bottles won't make any difference to that reaction, at least not soon enough to prevent disaster. You have to get rid of the antimatter that's already inside the core. And if the core's own internal mechanisms are what's malfunctioning, it doesn't make sense to rely on those mechanisms to eject said antimatter. Using a separate, backup system that ejects the core itself is more effective in that context.

That seems to be going deeper in the tech than has been established anywhere AFAIK. Is there a canon or even speculative non-Trek source that indicates some AM in the mixture isn't being used?

There's more to the secondary hull than just engines -- it contains the hangar bay, cargo facilities, the navigational deflector, the arboretum, etc.

Sure and absolutely no reason why it must come off the main reactor in a redundant PTS instead of off the main PTS in the primary hull, most likely near the impulse engines.

Umm, because it's closer to the engines? Wouldn't a more direct link be more efficient and less wasteful? Why use a roundabout connection when you can use a direct one?

Closer? lol well it's only what a couple hundred meters at most. It's nonsensical to waste that space for a secondary hull section that is useless without the primary hull anyway. Especially for something as trivial as the arboretum or hangar bay. If your main PTS was out for the Primary hull, you have much bigger problems than landing a shuttle and your navigational deflector is worthless since you're not going to be going anywhere.

 

[Uxi]

^ My argument in a nutshell for putting the matter/antimatter reactor in the secondary hull rather than the nacelles.

Eh? It is isn't it?

 

[Christopher]

The AM in the core IS being annihilated isn't it?

Yes, but not instantaneously. If something goes wrong with the containment fields before the antimatter in the core is used up, then you can get an explosion. Presumably that's what a warp core breach is. It's a breach in the fields that keep the annihilation reaction contained within the warp core.

How is it different from a "controlled explosion" inside, say... an internal combustion engine? What other way is there for it to go out of control other than losing control of the flow of AM into the intermix?

Like I said, a breakdown in the containment fields. The difference is that the gasoline in your car won't blow up just from touching the walls of the engine.

That seems to be going deeper in the tech than has been established anywhere AFAIK. Is there a canon or even speculative non-Trek source that indicates some AM in the mixture isn't being used?

What I'm saying is that it wouldn't be instantaneous. It would take time. Heck, that's the whole point of the "swirl chamber" design in TMP, all those swirling lights inside the whole long shaft. The idea is that the matter and antimatter are mixing all the way along the shaft, a gradual process rather than an instantaneous one.

And that's consistent with the real science of something like this. Subatomic particles are very small. You smash a stream of protons and a stream of antiprotons together, and a lot of them are quite simply going to miss each other. If you want the majority of the particles and antiparticles to annihilate each other, either you need to focus them insanely accurately (which seems to be part of what dilithium does according to the TNG Tech Manual) or you need to give them more than one chance to react, let them mix together for a while to maximize the number of particle collisions.

Closer? lol well it's only what a couple hundred meters at most. It's nonsensical to waste that space for a secondary hull section that is useless without the primary hull anyway. Especially for something as trivial as the arboretum or hangar bay. If your main PTS was out for the Primary hull, you have much bigger problems than landing a shuttle and your navigational deflector is worthless since you're not going to be going anywhere.

Haven't you got it backwards? The primary hull is the one that's useless without the secondary hull. Or rather, neither hull is functional without the other. The hangar bay and nav deflector are hardly useless, and if you had to spend five years cooped up in a tin can in space, you'd no doubt rethink your opinion about the importance of the arboretum. (Which, by the way, would no doubt produce a fair amount of the ship's oxygen.)

^ My argument in a nutshell for putting the matter/antimatter reactor in the secondary hull rather than the nacelles.

Eh? It is isn't it?

That's accepted these days, but there were a couple of references in TOS and TAS that suggested otherwise, so it's been a matter of debate in technical fandom for decades.

But this Doug Drexler cutaway (or essentially the same one) appeared onscreen in ENT: "In a Mirror, Darkly," making it the closest thing we have to a canonical Constitution-class layout, and it puts the M/ARC in the secondary hull, running beneath the engine room.

 

[CorporalCaptain]

But this Doug Drexler cutaway (or essentially the same one) appeared onscreen in ENT: "In a Mirror, Darkly," making it the closest thing we have to a canonical Constitution-class layout, and it puts the M/ARC in the secondary hull, running beneath the engine room.

TAS: One of Our Planets Is Missing notwithstanding.

 

[Christopher]

TAS: One of Our Planets Is Missing notwithstanding.

Well, yeah. Sometimes canon contradicts itself, and you have to go with the preponderance of evidence. "The Alternative Factor" portrayed antimatter in a way that contradicted the earlier "The Naked Time" as well as everything that came later. VGR: "Fury" said you couldn't safely turn while in warp, contradicting everything that came before and later. And so on.

In my upcoming TOS-era novel Forgotten History, I have a scene actually set in the reactor core of the pre-refit Enterprise, and I based its description on a blend of the Drexler cutaway and the "antimatter nacelle" scene from OoOPiM. There was only one line that called it a "nacelle," so it's easy enough to ignore that bit and pretend they were actually in the warp core.

 

[CorporalCaptain]

^ Seems reasonable.

 

[Uxi]

The AM in the core IS being annihilated isn't it?

Yes, but not instantaneously. If something goes wrong with the containment fields before the antimatter in the core is used up, then you can get an explosion. Presumably that's what a warp core breach is. It's a breach in the fields that keep the annihilation reaction contained within the warp core.

That sounds like a retcon rather than the idea that there is no containment field (or at least that it's failure is what's necessary to eject the core when the core ejection idea only came much later (not before Voyager AFAIK), which makes it sound like circular logic instead of what was intended at the time.

What I'm saying is that it wouldn't be instantaneous. It would take time. Heck, that's the whole point of the "swirl chamber" design in TMP, all those swirling lights inside the whole long shaft. The idea is that the matter and antimatter are mixing all the way along the shaft, a gradual process rather than an instantaneous one.

Interesting. I never interpreted it that way. Is there a canon explanation for that or is it your conjecture?

I understood it that the antimatter bottles were in the bottom of the secondary hull and met in main Engineering in the secondary hull. The tube going to the top was to carry the power to the "main" ship (the saucer/primary hull) which is where the weapons, crew, and main power would be sent. The shape of the secondary hull mostly being to wrap around that and to supoprt the warp engines, which were kept away from the crew because they were powerful/dangerous ('warping' space and all that).

Haven't you got it backwards? The primary hull is the one that's useless without the secondary hull. Or rather, neither hull is functional without the other. The hangar bay and nav deflector are hardly useless,

Note the context I made that remark in, which you seem to have lost. Useless in the event of the main primary hull PTS being out. The hangar bay and nav deflector are useless without the primary hull since the ship isn't going anywhere. I certainly recognize their necessity and utility in a fully functioning ship!

The primary hull IS the lifeboat for the ship so can and is designed to survive without the secondary hull. The secondary hull has no means of sublight propulsion without the primary hull however and I posit that it has thus has no need of redundant power without the primary hull, either, thus no need for PTS which explains the lack of visible connections around the vertical intermix chamber or the shafts carrying the generated power to the warp engines.

I think the other theory of power transmission being wireless also has some merit too, particularly given the TOS and Cage references...