Warp Drive developement

[Hando]

Over the years and series we have encountered at least 5 evolutions of Earth/Federation based Warp Drives.

But I have to ask, what exactly are the scientist developing.

Going by the Warp speed/power graph from the Technical Manuals, it would seem that the only thing for a better drive/higher speed is energy (given in the manual)/power(seen in the ST Magazine, and more logical).

Or do they have to find the best place and best formation for the nacelles, so the warp bubble/field encompasses the ship with the smallest "volume", most effectively...
However I have to question this, as the warp field on shuttles would waste almost half of itself on empty space, as the nacelles generate the warp field in the middle/ from themselves on the vertical axis and as the case for the shuttles is, their nacelles are placed under the shuttle.

Also one should consider the size of a ship, and by extension the size of the warp field. A smaller filed at the same velocity should require less energy then a bigger ship, at least from where I am standing.
I suppose that Warp speed/power graph could had be set for a Galaxy class.


This shows a different light on the "First Flight" episode as if less energy is required to reach warp 2, or warp 3... what does this say about breaking the barriers...

 

[C.E. Evans]

It's all about what works best for a particular design, IMO. The recipe could vary from one to another.

 

[Ithekro]

The graphs and power curve charts may be more suited for TNG era ships rather than Kirk or Archer era ships. Kirk and Archer were supposedly using Warp Factors which was on a different scale than Picard and later's Warp speeds.

The theroy is that at some point in the late 23rd or early 24th centuries there was a change is how Warp travel was seen. We aren't sure what happened, nor can we put a finger on what the change actually was. All we know is that during the Five Year Mission, a starship could be pushed to go more than warp 10, though with either extreme risk, or some more advance species tinkering with the engines. At some point after that, starships could no longer reach warp 10 via any means. There were other methods to get around the the upper warp limits of conventional warp drives, but none were considered faster than warp 10, just faster that a starship could give with a warp drive. (that is until All Good Things... where they went Warp 13 like it was a normal high speed).

This change might have been the result of the transwarp experiments on USS Excelsior, or it may be been what lead to the creation of the large Ambassador-class starships, with there large but stubby looking nacelles (compared to the ship's hull that is). It may have even been the transition to the new style warp engines of USS Enterprise in TMP. I don't think we every saw Enterprise or any other ship knowingly go faster than Warp 10 in the movies. Though if the movies are on the new scale already, than a Klingon Bird of Prey can outrun a Galaxy-class starship nearly 80 years before USS Enterprise-D is completed.

 

[Timo]

Going by the Warp speed/power graph from the Technical Manuals

...And noting that they match the TNG warp scale but not the TOS one, one might draw the conclusion that the development work being done principally concerns trying to understand warp in the first place. Clearly, there was something wrong with the TOS warp scale since the TNG one matches this "underlying law of nature". But perhaps the TNG one is "off" somehow, too, and the scientists and engineers know this and struggle to find a more refined model.

the nacelles generate the warp field in the middle/ from themselves on the vertical axis

They probably don't, or else all the Enterprises would be of wrong shape! Symmetry of field seems to be the one thing that befits primitive attempts at warp, such as the Phoenix or the Warp Five testbeds; as a culture gets a better idea of what it should be doing, its nacelles go to strange places...

Timo Saloniemi

 

[T'Girl]

Kirk and Archer were supposedly using Warp Factors which was on a different scale than Picard and later's Warp speeds.

And I really wonder if Archer and Kirk were using the same warp scale either.

Archer's NX-01 could cruise at warp five, Kirk's Connie would cruise at warp six. The century between added only a single warp factor?

Archer's warp five might have been Kirk's warp two or three.

 

[Saturn0660]

Kirk and Archer were supposedly using Warp Factors which was on a different scale than Picard and later's Warp speeds.

And I really wonder if Archer and Kirk were using the same warp scale either.

Archer's NX-01 could cruise at warp five, Kirk's Connie would cruise at warp six. The century between added only a single warp factor?

Archer's warp five might have been Kirk's warp two or three.

If thats the case then the ECS Horizon must been just a tick over light speed.

 

[Avro Arrow]

Kirk and Archer were supposedly using Warp Factors which was on a different scale than Picard and later's Warp speeds.

And I really wonder if Archer and Kirk were using the same warp scale either.

Archer's NX-01 could cruise at warp five, Kirk's Connie would cruise at warp six. The century between added only a single warp factor?

Archer's warp five might have been Kirk's warp two or three.

I've wondered that myself, especially since TATV made it sound like warp 7 ships were right around the corner.

If there was such a scale change, maybe it's related to the breaking of the "time barrier", and that's why in Pike's era they still specified speeds on the new scale using "time warp factor"? Then by Kirk's era, when everyone's familiar with the new scale, it's just back to "warp factor".

OTOH, NX-01 didn't really "cruise" at warp 5, did it? IIRC, it was more like an emergency speed. So maybe in ENT's parlance, Kirk's engine would be more appropriately called a "warp 9 engine", which I guess is more reasonable for a century of development?

 

[Ithekro]

Archer's ship's top speed was Warp 5 at that time. Cruise was more like Warp 3 or 4. They didn't really pushing it past warp 4.5 all that much until the fourth season.

Kirk's Enterprise was cruising at Warp 6 and could do Warp 8 with Scotty complaining about it. It could be pushed much higher than that. It made Warp 14.1 with the matter-antimatter integrator bypass fused.

 

[Timo]

It does sound as if the difference between cruise and dash is much more extreme in warp drives than in any of today's propulsion systems. Even if the difference is just one warp factor, the scale gives every indication of being exponential or worse.

Should warp drive evolve much between ENT and TNG, though? Earth supposedly benefited from Vulcan research in ENT, and Vulcans had been at it for three thousand years already, if P'Jem is any indication. It may simply not be possible for any single culture to improve much upon the galactic average - or to start out much below galactic average, that is, truly indigenously without outside help.

For all we know, everybody in local space was under the mistaken belief that the TOS scale, and engines of TOS type, were how warp worked, right until Earth vessels began trying to break records (something Vulcans would have no interest in, and others perhaps no patience for) and found that the models and theories really break down at the higher warp factors. Until this realization, it wasn't possible to the make ships that would go much past warp seven; Vulcan ships already did it in (and presumably before) ENT, while Kirk's ship was thought to be at the danger of exploding if she exceeded that speed (see e.g. "Arena"), a belief Kirk's own adventures probably put an end to.

Timo Saloniemi

 

[T'Girl]

Earth supposedly benefited from Vulcan research in ENT

Wasn't Archer's big bitch that Earth didn't benefit from Vulcan warp drive knowledge?

His father (and others) had to actual do it themselves, instead of the Vulcans presenting it to them on a silver platter.

 

[Timo]

It doesn't sound as if Henry Archer was actually of that opinion. His son just got the impression. That, plus it clearly wasn't a silver-platter deal, as Vulcan ships could do warp seven and NX-01 couldn't, but that's only to be expected. On their own, Earthlings might never have gotten past warp two. Except by buying their engines or ships readymade from aliens, which I suppose happened often enough even before the Warp Five project and its "breakthrough" test flights.

Timo Saloniemi

 

[Ronald Held]

Progress is certainly not linear in time. How long did it take to homogenize the initial member's tech and get it to work reliability? Might be decades. Also pushing the warp drive envelope might be a human drive and not all of Starfleet. Things might have sat at a warp 7 dash for decades more until the Constitution class starship were designed.

 

[Crazy Eddie]

Over the years and series we have encountered at least 5 evolutions of Earth/Federation based Warp Drives.

But I have to ask, what exactly are the scientist developing.

Going by the Warp speed/power graph from the Technical Manuals, it would seem that the only thing for a better drive/higher speed is energy (given in the manual)/power(seen in the ST Magazine, and more logical).

Or do they have to find the best place and best formation for the nacelles, so the warp bubble/field encompasses the ship with the smallest "volume", most effectively...
However I have to question this, as the warp field on shuttles would waste almost half of itself on empty space, as the nacelles generate the warp field in the middle/ from themselves on the vertical axis and as the case for the shuttles is, their nacelles are placed under the shuttle.

Also one should consider the size of a ship, and by extension the size of the warp field. A smaller filed at the same velocity should require less energy then a bigger ship, at least from where I am standing.
I suppose that Warp speed/power graph could had be set for a Galaxy class.


This shows a different light on the "First Flight" episode as if less energy is required to reach warp 2, or warp 3... what does this say about breaking the barriers...

I would consider the possibility that "warp drive" is a generic term for any type of non-newtonian propulsion system that uses energy fields to distort space rather than create movement through action/reaction. There are probably a dozen different methods of achieving this, using combinations of artificial wormholes, subspace fields, hyperspace dimensions, even the physical folding of space. All of those would be classified as "warp drive." The only thing they would have in common is the magnitude of the spatial distortion they create, which would be measured by the familiar "warp factor."

It's also likely that no two warp drives produce the exact same kind of movement for a given warp factor. A system that folds space may allow instantaneous movement, but a particular warp factor would only dial a set distance. A warp drive that uses subspace displacement might be able to cover that same distance in less time than it takes a fold drive to spool up to power. Likewise, a warp drive that works by collecting gravitons and antigravitons on different sides of the ship might only produce ACCELERATIONS for a particular warp drive and would take days or even weeks to build up to FTL velocity.

To that end, slipstream and transwarp drives would probably fall under the same umbrella and are only referred to separately because Voyager dialog is heavy with technobabble.

 

[Timo]

It's also likely that no two warp drives produce the exact same kind of movement for a given warp factor.

...Yet "warp factor" is also used as a unit of speed by our heroes. Sure, they may be saying "These Klingons can do warp five on our scale and thus we can catch them" rather than merely "These Klingons can do warp five and thus we can catch them", even though the expression "on our scale" never appears in Trek. But at the very least, we must accept that every ship operated by our heroes has the same sort of warp drive, giving the exact same speeds for a given warp factor. Otherwise, there would be too much ambiguity for them to accept the simplistic usage where a warp factor is a speed (or possibly an acceleration).

are only referred to separately because Voyager dialog is heavy with technobabble

Or because the VOY heroes are examining a wide range of options for making their homeward journey faster and easier, and want to distinguish between those. Using the exotic native name for the drive is probably more convenient than trying to memorize the differences by referring to Uumogian vs. Zorohumbian vs. Budotite vs. Lopsistid vs. Motian (trans)warp.

Timo Saloniemi

 

[Crazy Eddie]

It's also likely that no two warp drives produce the exact same kind of movement for a given warp factor.

...Yet "warp factor" is also used as a unit of speed by our heroes.

Sure, but since in the real world -- which Star Trek pretends to be -- there's no such thing as an "absolute airspeed" as such, those references can't actually refer to a fixed relative velocity. And they clearly don't; warp drive is an FTL velocity in "Elaan of Troyus" and impossibly fast in "That which survives." Clearly it isn't a unit of speed per se, but a magnitude of engine output for whatever type of engine is being used.

Sure, they may be saying "These Klingons can do warp five on our scale

Nah. Warp five is warp five. Just because the Klingon engines at warp five produce a gravity surfboard that produces acceleration rather than linear motion doesn't mean the Klingon ship is slower than yours at the same speed, and navigation wouldn't be that straightforward even if they were both using the same engine type (it already isn't with aircraft or even real spacecraft).

 

[Ithekro]

If they used a jump drive or hyperspace travel of some kind, I doubt Federation sensors would be able to tell how fast they are going by a warp factor system if they can't scan the end point of the jump when the ship leaves verses seeing it enter the jump. A Babylon 5 or Star Wars Hyperspace method could be tracked if the sensors could still spot the ship in the parallel dimension of hyperspace. The Star Blazers/Space Battleship Yamato method seems to be more like making a personalized wormhole where the jump itself takes only a second or so between entry and exit points (when everything works). It might be possible to predict the exit point though if one knows how that method of travel works. Plus the ships seem sublight bound when not "warping" from point to point, while Federation/Star Trek ships seem to be able to operate or interact with normal space from subspace, or at least be able to shift around in subspace to anyplace in the nearby normal space.

 

[Timo]

Sure, but since in the real world -- which Star Trek pretends to be -- there's no such thing as an "absolute airspeed" as such, those references can't actually refer to a fixed relative velocity.

...And yet they do.

"How fast can their ship go? Warp five? Then they can outrun us, if only barely!" (say, DS9 "Dax")

"What is their speed? Warp 9.2? Keep on their tail, match that! Aye, warp 9.2 it is!" (say, TNG "Survivors")

That's absolute across ship types and cultures. Unless the heroes are using the engines of their own ship as a yardstick, and any cuts to the enemy bridge where the same warp factors are being mentioned are only due to the Universal Translator being really helpful.

And they clearly don't; warp drive is an STL velocity in "Elaan of Troyus" and impossibly fast in "That which survives."

That is in no conflict with the idea that warp factor would be a measure of speed that's valid for all ships in a particular situation. It's just that sometimes the subspace weather is really bad, or there's a good headwind, or whatever - but dialogue still suggests the same warp factors are valid for everybody involved in a chase at the very least.

Clearly it isn't a unit of speed per se, but a magnitude of engine output for whatever type of engine is being used.

Only if the UT is toying with us, sometimes even when everybody involved is already speaking English. That is, whatever the background process, the end result is an universally valid speed scale - one where our heroes can, say, deduce the ETA of an alien ship from her speed, as given in warp factors, and then use the same warp factors for their own ETA/catchup calculations.

Nah. Warp five is warp five. Just because the Klingon engines at warp five produce a gravity surfboard that produces acceleration rather than linear motion doesn't mean the Klingon ship is slower than yours at the same speed, and navigation wouldn't be that straightforward even if they were both using the same engine type (it already isn't with aircraft or even real spacecraft).

Sorry, that just doesn't compute. Could I have it phrased differently somehow?

Timo Saloniemi

 

[Ronald Held]

I thought that all alien warp speed values are being translated into the Federation Standard scale.

 

[ThankYouGeneR]

Interesting discussion

 

[Crazy Eddie]

Sure, but since in the real world -- which Star Trek pretends to be -- there's no such thing as an "absolute airspeed" as such, those references can't actually refer to a fixed relative velocity.

...And yet they do.

Not even in those cases, really. It's enough to know that two ships with similar engine performances will travel at similar speeds if they're running at the same output. Similar, but not exactly; a Mig-17 is a little faster than an F-14 at cruising velocity and an F-14 is MUCH faster at full afterburner. On the other hand, an F-22 Raptor at cruising velocity is significantly faster than an F-14 Tomcat, even though the Tomcat is slightly faster than the Raptor at full afterburner.

The reality of warp flight may mean that their actual relative velocities are impossible to precisely measure or are changing too quickly for a measurement to be useful. It's rare for different engines to have so big of a mismatch between output and speed for that lack of knowledge to be a problem; the few times it is (if the bad guys are using some sort of exotic drive or transwarp) Our Heroes don't bother calling out warp factors, because the comparison has become irrelevant.

Unless the heroes are using the engines of their own ship as a yardstick, and any cuts to the enemy bridge where the same warp factors are being mentioned are only due to the Universal Translator being really helpful.

None of the examples you cited have cuts to the enemy bridge or comparable speed callouts from the people they're chasing. For that matter, the ship from "The Survivors" was never really there in the first place.

Clearly it isn't a unit of speed per se, but a magnitude of engine output for whatever type of engine is being used.

Only if the UT is toying with us

It's actually pretty rare to have speed factors read out from the enemy bridge during a chase scene, especially in TOS, where shots of the enemy bridge AT ALL are rare. The only time this happens in TNG is in "Gambit" where there seems to be agreement between Baran's crew and the Enterprise as to what the ship's maximum speed is; then again, if Baran's raider uses the same basic type of engine as Enterprise, that's to be expected.

What's somewhat more interesting is that transwarp drive, slipstream drives and other exotic propulsion systems do not measure their velocity in terms of warp factors. You would think that they would, given that warp factor is otherwise implied to be a geometric relationship based on a regular formula. If, on the other hand, the relationship between warp factor and velocity is a more complicated one determined by several variables in local space and/or engine type, then "warp factor" isn't being used because those drive systems are way too fast for the output quotation to be useful (sort of like how they never refer to sublight speeds in terms of "kilometers per hour" until after the impulse engines are stop working)