Why does the Phoenix have Bussard collectors?

[Captain Robert April]

Consider this: The current description of how impulse engines work basically boil down to a sublight version of warp drive, powered by a fusion reactor instead of a matter/antimatter reactor.

So, since we've managed to cobble together a plausible explanation for how the Phoenix's warp drive could've been powered by a nuclear reactor, why not follow that up with that same reactor powering the warp engines, but at a lower power level, for the trip back, providing speed at the equivalent of, oh, say, one quarter impulse?

After that, it's just a matter of how the hell he landed the damn thing.

 

[Crazy Eddie]

Consider this: The current description of how impulse engines work basically boil down to a sublight version of warp drive, powered by a fusion reactor instead of a matter/antimatter reactor.

Description by WHOM? The TNG manual describes them as a reaction engine that uses a subspace field to alter the ship's inertia. It's only fandom--and a small portion at that--that supposes impulse engines are ANYTHING like warp drives.

Generally, there's no reason for a separate propulsion system if space warp engines are capable of sublight speeds. If they are not--and they don't appear to be--then impulse engines are used only for orbital maneuvering, where a physical impulse would be a requirement anyway. If warp engines ARE capable of sublight speed, there's no reason for impulse engines in any way shape or form, no matter what they're powered by. It would be like installing a sail on a nuclear submarine for running on the surface.

 

[Tiberius]

Let's assume that the Phoenix travelled for about 10 seconds at Warp one. At 300,000 kps, that's 30 million kilometers. Let's assume an arbitrary time of 10 hours for the return journey. That's three million kilometers an hour, which works out to 830 (or so) kilometers a second. That's 0.003% of light speed.

Significantly faster than any rockets we have today, but granting that it is very plausible that space propulsion technology could advance in the next 50 years or so, I don't see it as implausible.

ETA: Here's an example of a form of propulsion that could theoretically get to mars in a few weeks. Not really possible for the Phoenix though, but there's lots of ideas on that page.

And here's Plasma Thrusters from the same page, more like something the Phoenix could have...

 

[Timo]

Didn't we actually get to see how far the Phoenix got? That is, didn't we see Earth through the windshield after Cochrane turned the crate around? It's not among the TrekCore screencaps, but I sort of remember it from the movie. Falsely?

Timo Saloniemi

 

[Vance]

Generally, there's no reason for a separate propulsion system if space warp engines are capable of sublight speeds.

Sure there is. Efficiency. I could use a jet engine to go 50 miles per hour, but it would be a huge waste. In the same way the power requirements for a ship at sub-light wouldn't warrant micro-pushing the warp engines, and the hard fusion impulse drive COULD push warp speeds, but only for short durations and at limited velocities.

It seems like you're conflating the drives and engines, though, something common in Trek fandom (and the writers themselves do it too). I can channel impulse power into either drive, or M/AM power into either drive.

It would be like installing a sail on a nuclear submarine for running on the surface.

You are aware that nuclear subs do have conventional engines for emergencies, etc. Most have a steam turbine system that can run from backup generators in case the nuclear reactor fails?

 

[UssGlenn]

Didn't we actually get to see how far the Phoenix got? That is, didn't we see Earth through the windshield after Cochrane turned the crate around? It's not among the TrekCore screencaps, but I sort of remember it from the movie. Falsely?

Timo Saloniemi

its in chapter 28
http://movies.trekcore.com/gallery/albums/firstcontact/ch28/firstcontact1523.jpg

 

[TIN_MAN]

Well, my two quatloos FWIW is that the impulse engines take advantage of the low level warp field continuously generated by the warp engines, to cheat the light-speed barrier by altering the ships inertia? Then at warp, the coils are used in a sequential "strobe" fashion that provides actual warp drive, at much greater speeds? YMMV

 

[Tomalak]

God, this is 8 pages of awesome.

Ten pages now. I love Star Trek fans.

 

[Patrickivan]

The problem I see with you description of the Phoenix's internal layout is that you don't seem to be taking into consideration the lift off/stored position of the warp nacelles. Most everything aft of the control capsule and forward of your line number two would at the time of take off be storage space for the warp nacelles. Anything else in the small remaining area of that section would likely be structural members and control runs. Once the nacelles swing out the majority of that area would be empty.

There isn't even much room for the swing arms/pylons, they're nestled in slots in the sides of the nacelles themselves, their main body pivot point would seem to be on the centerline where your line three crosses the centerline. If the intermix chamber is located within the main body, it too would have to be aft of line two along with any reactor in that section.

And despite it's shape, I'm not convinced that the large bell shaped object is a rocket engine exhaust (although is hard to see what else it might be), there doesn't seem to be room for fuel tanks for a large engine to go along with a bell of that size. Perhaps it is some kind of heat radiator?

We might have to consider that the Phoenix has double reactors (of whatever fuel type), one located in each nacelle.

In either case, eight streams in from the reactor/turbine section, two out to the nacelles.

Manifold?

There's no reason why the reactors can't be in each nacelle...

 

[Saquist]

There's no reason why if you're Fanatic of Star Trek.
But if you're actually rationally working out the possibilities of minaturizing the Fusion tech to the size of Large "Cruise missles" as Timo describes them then you're just out of your mind because that would esstential be a micro fussion reactor just like they have in the 24th century, it doesn't matter how you speculate on it's power output the mere ability to micronize a world changing piece of tech like Fussion power is lightyears beyond the current day tech, which is only 50 years distant.

 

[sojourner]

^maybe that means in the Trek universe at least, Polywell fusion works?

 

[Saquist]

The problem I see with you description of the Phoenix's internal layout is that you don't seem to be taking into consideration the lift off/stored position of the warp nacelles. Most everything aft of the control capsule and forward of your line number two would at the time of take off be storage space for the warp nacelles. Anything else in the small remaining area of that section would likely be structural members and control runs. Once the nacelles swing out the majority of that area would be empty.

There isn't even much room for the swing arms/pylons, they're nestled in slots in the sides of the nacelles themselves, their main body pivot point would seem to be on the centerline where your line three crosses the centerline. If the intermix chamber is located within the main body, it too would have to be aft of line two along with any reactor in that section.

And despite it's shape, I'm not convinced that the large bell shaped object is a rocket engine exhaust (although is hard to see what else it might be), there doesn't seem to be room for fuel tanks for a large engine to go along with a bell of that size. Perhaps it is some kind of heat radiator?

We might have to consider that the Phoenix has double reactors (of whatever fuel type), one located in each nacelle.

Well the nacelles aren't completelly tucked and the conflicting thing is that Janeway apparently made some mention that the Secondstage was a chemical rocket propulsions (I remember from Memory alpha.

^maybe that means in the Trek universe at least, Polywell fusion works?

...what's that...

 

[Tiberius]

Regarding where the warp reactor (whatever it was) could have been, let's not forget that there would have been plenty of space above and below the nacelles when they were stowed.

And that big rocket nozzle on the back could have been the engine used to return to Earth. Then the cockpit pops off and returns to earth via parachute, much the same way the Apollo capsules did, and that the Russians have used a great deal.

 

[Captain Robert April]

Well, my two quatloos FWIW is that the impulse engines take advantage of the low level warp field continuously generated by the warp engines, to cheat the light-speed barrier by altering the ships inertia? Then at warp, the coils are used in a sequential "strobe" fashion that provides actual warp drive, at much greater speeds? YMMV

Works for me.

 

[Crazy Eddie]

Generally, there's no reason for a separate propulsion system if space warp engines are capable of sublight speeds.

Sure there is. Efficiency. I could use a jet engine to go 50 miles per hour, but it would be a huge waste. In the same way the power requirements for a ship at sub-light wouldn't warrant micro-pushing the warp engines, and the hard fusion impulse drive COULD push warp speeds, but only for short durations and at limited velocities.

This ignores the fact that fusion reactions in and of themselves are considerably less energetic than a matter-antimatter reaction. ANY warp drive powered by antimatter will always be more efficient than one powered by fusion, just as a function of fuel expenditure and power density. IF warp drives were capable of producing those low velocities, therefore, there wouldn't be a need for a SEPARATE engine system, you could just stick the impulse driver coils on the back of the nacelles and run them from the warp core.

It seems like you're conflating the drives and engines, though, something common in Trek fandom (and the writers themselves do it too). I can channel impulse power into either drive, or M/AM power into either drive.

In SOME designs you can. Virtually none of the 24th century Starfleet vessels have this feature: they share a common power bus with the SHIP, but not a direct crosslink to the engines themselves (except for apparently running from the same fuel supply).

You are aware that nuclear subs do have conventional engines for emergencies, etc.

Yes they do. And those conventional engines drive the PROPELLER, not a totally separate drive system with totally different principles.

The presence of the impulse engine directly implies that there are certain limits to the performance of a warp drive, namely that it cannot be used or controlled at sublight velocities. Much more interestingly, there's the fact that Cochrane had to launch the Phoenix using a conventional chemically-fueled rocket before he could even engage his warp drive; efficiency or not, IF a space warp could produce sublight velocities, then Cochrane could have activated the warp engines at ground level and used them for the launch.

 

[Crazy Eddie]

There's no reason why if you're Fanatic of Star Trek.
But if you're actually rationally working out the possibilities of minaturizing the Fusion tech to the size of Large "Cruise missles" as Timo describes them then you're just out of your mind because that would esstential be a micro fussion reactor just like they have in the 24th century

Or a polywell fusion reactor like Bussard himself was developing in the 1990s.

 

[Saquist]

There's no reason why if you're Fanatic of Star Trek.
But if you're actually rationally working out the possibilities of minaturizing the Fusion tech to the size of Large "Cruise missles" as Timo describes them then you're just out of your mind because that would esstential be a micro fussion reactor just like they have in the 24th century

Or a polywell fusion reactor like Bussard himself was developing in the 1990s.

you mean like the myth of cold fusion?

Regarding where the warp reactor (whatever it was) could have been, let's not forget that there would have been plenty of space above and below the nacelles when they were stowed.

And that big rocket nozzle on the back could have been the engine used to return to Earth. Then the cockpit pops off and returns to earth via parachute, much the same way the Apollo capsules did, and that the Russians have used a great deal.

No that chamfer areas would hold no significant volume or shape for what we an expect a reactor to fit. Those areas would be slim and restrictive...good for running conduit and electrical systems but not for any reactor it's less than the space of the nacelles themselves.

 

[Crazy Eddie]

No, I mean the demonstrated and DoD funded magnetic confinement fusion reactors that Doctor Robert Bussard--from whom we get the term "bussard collector" in the first place--was developing in the 1990s at the time of his death, whose contemporaries are still developing at this time. Bussard's original prototype was about the size of a beach ball IIRC.

 

[sojourner]

you mean like the myth of cold fusion?

No. We mean nothing like the myth of cold fusion.

 

[Saquist]

No, I mean the demonstrated and DoD funded magnetic confinement fusion reactors that Doctor Robert Bussard--from whom we get the term "bussard collector" in the first place--was developing in the 1990s at the time of his death, whose contemporaries are still developing at this time. Bussard's original prototype was about the size of a beach ball IIRC.

Has it been proven.
Has it been confirmed