Warp 9.9

[nx1701g]

Noncanonly in one of the Technical Manuals it says that the ships can't maintain their maximum speeds for long periods of time because it exhausts the engines and they're forced to slow down to allow them to recover. I think it's the excuse they use to explain Voyager at impulse so frequently...

 

[Deks]

No, the dialogue states clearly they were flung 70,000 lightyears and yes it would take 75 years to get home, there is absolutely no reason to believe that they travelled 1000 lightyears per year. There is absolutely no reason that the ship didn't travel only 933 lightyears per year.

Rewatch Caretaker in that case.
Kim clearly stated that they are OVER 70 000 Ly's from where they were.
Janeway and her crew were using the 75 000 Ly's figure at the start, which got 'subdued' in the dialogue to 70 000 figure as the show went on.

It's a messed up dialogue for one thing, but 75 000 was the first mentioned.

If it's 1000 Ly's per year at maximum warp ... and they say 75 years would be the amount of time for the ship to get back, then logically, 70 000 ly's is an innacurate figure.

Finally ... the ship was practically never shown at maximum warp when traveling back to the AQ, so the statement they pulled anywhere near 1000 Ly's in a year is a bit far fetched.

 

[Timo]

Or in fact much less than that - let's keep in mind that Janeway qualified the idea of 75 years for 70 or 75 kly with "even at maximum speed", heavily suggesting that she thought this could never be done in practice.

The ship being able to sustain warp 9+ for years is completely out of whack with other Treknology observed in the other spinoffs of the era. The ship being able to sustain warp 9+ for a few days is perfectly all right, though - Kirk's TOS ship was capable of maintaining Scotty-frightening speeds for such periods of time, too. Perhaps that would allow us to accept the idea of warp 9.975 as a "sustainable" speed, even though all other evidence is solidly against it (top speed being just warp 9.9 in "The 37s", the ship never sustaining warp 9+ speeds on screen for any appreciable length of time, the trip home proceeding at warp 6.8 on the average, and so forth).

The general trend seems clear: even the Defiant, an established propulsive failure, was able to maintain warp 9.5 with some jury-rigging for hours or perhaps days, but not even the E-D, a supposed propulsive masterpiece, was able to maintain warp 9.5 for more than that. Probably Starfleet takes satisfaction where it can get it, and considers trips of twelve hours "sustained cruises".

As for Stadi's state of mind, she was in a pissing contest with the self-declared greatest stud in the galaxy. Since she couldn't brag with the size of her organ (we trust), it's obvious what alternative paths she could pursue...

Timo Saloniemi

 

[jaspertjie]

Ex Astris Scientia's warp table

 

[Unicron]

EAS doesn't like hotlinking. I've converted it into a regular link instead. If you want to post images, you need to put them on a free host like Photobucket or Imageshack.

 

[Timo]

What is a "regular link"?

I mean, what's there now seems to be what was there before, and both trigger the same EAS hotlink warning.

Typing the link address out and telling people that they should cut-and-paste it onto their own browser seems to be the only way to get around that warning. That is, unless you want to take bits of Bernd's work away from him and post them on your "own" free page under Photobucket or Imageshack, which to me sounds like a worse form of theft.

Really, it only becomes "hotlinking" once somebody clicks on that link; the one posting the link address can't help it much, because TrekBBS turns all link addresses automatically into links. Is there some way to turn off the automatic conversion of link addresses to links?

Timo Saloniemi

 

[Mytran]

You mean by copying and pasting this:

__http://www.ex-astris-scientia.org/treknology/warptable.gif

but without the underscores?

 

[Timo]

I'd think that should be okay. Underscores it is, then...

Timo Saloniemi

 

[Unicron]

Well, I can see it fine by clicking on the link, and I know the EAS server has been known to act a little wonky when it comes to displaying the warning sign. I've had that issue before posting links to them. The difference is that the link simply goes to the appropriate part of the EAS site, whereas it was originally posted as an image by someone not affiliated with EAS, thus making it hotlinking.

The issue with hotlinking is that it amounts to stealing bandwidth, which is an entirely separate issue from copying Bernd's image and claiming it's yours. Uploading a copy to someplace like Photobucket and giving proper credit for it seems fine to me, cause that's what most of us do with our avs and other images.

 

[Timo]

It seems to me that any attempt at linking with EAS ends up hotlink-blocked, unless you yourself have visited that page and sucked it up into your browser's buffer. You keep seeing it fine until you empty your buffers, then, but others can't use the link.

Can you use this one? I can, as the page is in my buffer now.

http://www.ex-astris-scientia.org/scans/vulcans1.htm

How about this one, which is an image from the above page? I can, for now.

http://www.ex-astris-scientia.org/scans/drex/vulcan-survey-views.jpg

Timo Saloniemi

 

[Mytran]

Top one worked, bottom one blocked.

It seems to just be image files which have the "no-go" code

 

[Unicron]

* shrugs * They both work fine for me. Perhaps it's partially a browser/system sort of issue, as I know in the past I've had issues viewing images on certain hosts, and people have said they can't see my stuff on Photobucket.

Sorry to have dragged this off topic a bit...

 

[Timo]

Apologies on my part, too...

(Incidentally, is it just a local problem that the forum today expects me to sign into slipserver every time I change pages? Since I don't/can't, the forum doesn't show me any ads, which would be nice if I didn't have to double-click cancel on the login box...)

Anyway, here's Bernd's warp chart properly shunted via a free host:



Timo Saloniemi

 

[Mytran]

It's a problem with the advertisements on the site, so everyone is experiencing it (which was a great relief when I found out!)
There's a thread in Tech Support about the issue here.
The Windows solution works, can't speak for the others (I'm running Windows XP)

 

[Saturn0660]

...the ship indeed spends a lot of time at impulse, to let the engines "cool". Perhaps they do move at warp nine-plus a lot, but then pay the price, so their average speed is no better than warp six...

That would explain why they spend so much time at impulse, something that always bothered me about Voyager. Of course it was really done for budget reasons, since hanging the starfield curtain outside the set is a lot cheaper than matting a starfield in all the time. However, I can certainly buy your theory; thanks Timo.

Regarding the issue of Voyager's speed, I give you this quote from "Caretaker"

STADI: Intrepid class. Sustainable cruise velocity of warp factor nine point nine seven five...

The key word there is "sustainable". I suppose we could just say that Stadi got it wrong, or was exaggerating?

She may very well have been able to maintain 9.975. But what would fuel usage look like? Think of something like the SR-71. She can go mach 3.2+, at least till she's out of fuel. However, she does have a longer Ferry Range, just at a lower speed. No reason to think StarShips are any different.

 

[Saturn0660]

1. You can't necessarily cruise at your maximum speed, very few modern ships can.

The big advantage of nuclear-powered ships today is that they can do exactly that. But Star Trek ships have always been portrayed as having big troubles with reliability whenever they operate above their usual speed range - yet being capable of operating significantly above that usual range for short periods of time. Warp seven was already hair-rising stuff in TOS, yet warp fourteen could be rather easily achieved if one wasn't concerned about surviving beyond the next minute.
Timo Saloniemi

But thats just it.. They don't just go around all day at max speed. you are forgetting wear and tear on the ship itself. Just because your "engine" can do it doesn't mean your ship can.

 

[USS KG5]

1. You can't necessarily cruise at your maximum speed, very few modern ships can.

The big advantage of nuclear-powered ships today is that they can do exactly that. But Star Trek ships have always been portrayed as having big troubles with reliability whenever they operate above their usual speed range - yet being capable of operating significantly above that usual range for short periods of time. Warp seven was already hair-rising stuff in TOS, yet warp fourteen could be rather easily achieved if one wasn't concerned about surviving beyond the next minute.
Timo Saloniemi

But thats just it.. They don't just go around all day at max speed. you are forgetting wear and tear on the ship itself. Just because your "engine" can do it doesn't mean your ship can.

Also nuclear power means unlimited energy - but all the parts of the reactor and the engines suffer from wear and tear, and you can push things too far, like the Alfa that melts down in "Hunt For Red October".

 

[Saturn0660]

The big advantage of nuclear-powered ships today is that they can do exactly that. But Star Trek ships have always been portrayed as having big troubles with reliability whenever they operate above their usual speed range - yet being capable of operating significantly above that usual range for short periods of time. Warp seven was already hair-rising stuff in TOS, yet warp fourteen could be rather easily achieved if one wasn't concerned about surviving beyond the next minute.
Timo Saloniemi

But thats just it.. They don't just go around all day at max speed. you are forgetting wear and tear on the ship itself. Just because your "engine" can do it doesn't mean your ship can.

Also nuclear power means unlimited energy - but all the parts of the reactor and the engines suffer from wear and tear, and you can push things too far, like the Alfa that melts down in "Hunt For Red October".

The Alfa didn't melt in the movie... It was blown up by it's own torpedo.

 

[Wingsley]

I'm still looking forward to the ultimate Berman/Braga TREK series:

STAR TREK: WARP 9.9999

with the tagline:

"Where the bullshit stretches to Infinity"

 

[USS KG5]

The Alfa didn't melt in the movie... It was blown up by it's own torpedo.

I was referring to the book where in fact two Alfas bite it - one melts and the other is rammed by Red October.