• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

You know what REALLY SUCKS about TOS???

I'd say the nacelles on the Constitution class were too high. They should've been in-line with the ship's center of mass. As a result, Kirk's ship looks absolutely ridiculous. My dad and I always imagined the ship being incapable of flying straight because of that--it would be in a permanent nosedive. :lol:
Warped9 is correct- the matter-antimatter nacelles merely provide the warp reaction, the impulse engines provide forward or reverse thrust, and they're located, hey- look at that- at the ship's central mass line!!!!;)
 
I'd say the nacelles on the Constitution class were too high. They should've been in-line with the ship's center of mass. As a result, Kirk's ship looks absolutely ridiculous. My dad and I always imagined the ship being incapable of flying straight because of that--it would be in a permanent nosedive. :lol:
Only if you assume the nacelles operate on the principle of reaction thrust which they don't.
If all that's required is for the engines to be parallel to the direction of flight, then the engineers could've saved on materials by putting the two engines side-by-side and have it supported by a single pylon.

Those pylons look awfully fragile, by the way. ;)
 
I'd say the nacelles on the Constitution class were too high. They should've been in-line with the ship's center of mass. As a result, Kirk's ship looks absolutely ridiculous. My dad and I always imagined the ship being incapable of flying straight because of that--it would be in a permanent nosedive. :lol:

I figure that the nacelles are much denser than the rest of the ship and that the center of mass is more or less inline with the impulse engine. I once worked up a mass study in AutoCAD of that ship and the nacelles need only be about 2.5 times denser than the rest of the ship.
 
And...the...computers...talk...like...this...
Yes, I thought the monotone "robotic" computer voice was a bit dated even back in 1966. After all, Forbidden Planet's Robby spoke in normally inflected English ten years earlier. (I mean in real time, of course.)
 
And...the...computers...talk...like...this...
Yes, I thought the monotone "robotic" computer voice was a bit dated even back in 1966. After all, Forbidden Planet's Robby spoke in normally inflected English ten years earlier. (I mean in real time, of course.)
Computers in future will be designed to intentionally speak that way after the public boycott of government & private sector automated answering & notification machines of 2060. Led by a protest group known as the "Tin-Canners," who were disgusted with pre-recorded, human-sounding time-wasters, the movement sought to at least make machines immediately recognizable when one had to deal with them.
That early sentiment carried over into the 23rd Century, with the notable exceptions of pleasure-bots, android comedians & personal home domestic assistants ( those hilarious little cleaning droids introduced in 2217, of course).:guffaw:
 
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top