Hobbyist Forums banner

1 - 20 of 25 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
983 Posts
Interesting animation, but I take exception to the primary hull flying like the J2 after seperation. Impulse engines fine, but the manuevering thrusters would not give the saucer that rapid change in vector.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
8,335 Posts
Ohio_Southpaw said:
Interesting animation, but I take exception to the primary hull flying like the J2 after seperation. Impulse engines fine, but the manuevering thrusters would not give the saucer that rapid change in vector.
Please don't take this personally, 'cause it's not directed at you - or at least solely at you! - but I always find it funny when folks can't suspend their belief and complain about ships in Trek "swooping like a fighter" and the like. Several folks have mentioned this here at HT and elsewhere on DaNet lately and it's gotten me to thinkin'....

Why is it that we can imagine a ship traveling at literally hundreds of multiples the speed of light, a crew that can push a couple of buttons on a display board that allow them to bypass any system on the ship (any episode of Trek from TNG on!), ships that use their warp field to reduce the mass of a frakkin' moon to nearly nuthin' to try and keep it from impacting with a planet (TNG's "Deja Q"), they can transport matter literally tens of thousands of miles across space and have ships that can travel through time using a slingshot maneuver or adjusting it's warp field for "chroniton particles" (from TOS thru ST:FC) or other equally weird things.

However, the same folks who are fans of this show and have seen all these things can't believe that the Impulse drive or Warp drive on a starship can reduce the mass of said ship - as per comments from both the Treknology folks behind the show and dialogue from the crew - can allow these ships to maneuver with a LOT less bulk than their mass should normally allow. Why is that, exactly?

That always gets me. :p
 

·
Starship Class
Joined
·
11,880 Posts
Griffworks said:
. . . However, the same folks who are fans of this show and have seen all these things can't believe that the Impulse drive or Warp drive on a starship can reduce the mass of said ship - as per comments from both the Treknology folks behind the show and dialogue from the crew - can allow these ships to maneuver with a LOT less bulk than their mass should normally allow. Why is that, exactly?
I think it's an artistic choice and there can be no complete satisfaction of all parties in such a subjective and arbitrary call.

Griff, your points are all valid and I concur in that the producers of such shots, on the shows or by fans, go to a lot of trouble to make sure that the movements of the ships are at least reasonably believable in the style of the show.

The original shots from ST:TOS are, in terms of physics, absolutely laughable but look great in the context of the show to deliver the impression of size and mass. The effects of the ship moving are derivative of old movies and TV shows that used models of earthbound ships (on water) and rarely seem to reflect how a spaceship would really behave in three dimensions.

I think the later ST shows made more of an attempt to show that the ships are capable of great speed and were inclusive of more of the actual manuevers than seen on the original series. One may not find this new style to his liking but it seems reasonable to me that if what we saw on the original series could be done, the later maneuvers shown by ships on later series making high speed turns and such are as equally probable. ;)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
983 Posts
Griffworks said:
Please don't take this personally, 'cause it's not directed at you - or at least solely at you! - but I always find it funny when folks can't suspend their belief and complain about ships in Trek "swooping like a fighter" and the like. Several folks have mentioned this here at HT and elsewhere on DaNet lately and it's gotten me to thinkin'....

Why is it that we can imagine a ship traveling at literally hundreds of multiples the speed of light, a crew that can push a couple of buttons on a display board that allow them to bypass any system on the ship (any episode of Trek from TNG on!), ships that use their warp field to reduce the mass of a frakkin' moon to nearly nuthin' to try and keep it from impacting with a planet (TNG's "Deja Q"), they can transport matter literally tens of thousands of miles across space and have ships that can travel through time using a slingshot maneuver or adjusting it's warp field for "chroniton particles" (from TOS thru ST:FC) or other equally weird things.

However, the same folks who are fans of this show and have seen all these things can't believe that the Impulse drive or Warp drive on a starship can reduce the mass of said ship - as per comments from both the Treknology folks behind the show and dialogue from the crew - can allow these ships to maneuver with a LOT less bulk than their mass should normally allow. Why is that, exactly?

That always gets me. :p
For me, personally it is because they tend to overuse the technology to solve problems.

I can believe in using the computers to bypass ships systems in a matter of minutes because complicated systems, even today have built in redundency and bypass option. Commercial Aircraft have triple redundent systems to ensure that system wide failures do not occur.. although we have seen instances where they do, and the flights crews are forced to improvise in an attempt to save the ship.

A starship would have this capability for the very reason of your life depending on keeping the ships critical systems functional. I will admit that the ease of some operations is stretched thin.

I do not follow the Warp= Mass reduction theory. I believe the warp field is nothing more than an extremely powerful energy field used to bend space/time (warping) to reduce the DISTANCE the ship travels relatively when compared to normal space. The mass of the ship is constant. The proplusion is provided solely by the impulse engines. The 'illusion' of speed is merely a product of how much the space/time continuum is warped by the warp engines in the bubble that surrounds the ship. Therefore the warp engines would be useless to reduce the mass of ANY object, Moon, Ship or Tribble.

I have my doubts about the veracity of time travelling by hyper-accellerating an object. I would think at one point the accelleration would exceed the capabilities of the inertia dampeners and everybody would end up as big red splats on the rear bulkheads before the ship vaporizes into a puff of debris.

Now we come to the navigational deflector. Here we have something that originated as emitter of an energy field to used to deflect objects/debris out of the path of the starship to keep them from impacting the hull of the ship and causing catastrophic damage. Believeable. From TNG on, it is now the "Emitter of whatever energy beam/exotic quantum particle/Soft Serve Ice Cream Flavor we need for this weeks episode". Not so believeable. To think that a subsytem of a ship specifically designed for one purpose can be instantly reconfigured to a myriad of other options without a major overhaul/redesign or other engineering feat stretches the credibility factor of the technology.

I'll pause here before I lose track all together and just say that there is a thin line between the believeable and the ridiculous when the writers and such change the ships capabilites to suit their needs, it oftentimes. I know it seem an oxymoron when I can easily accept gravity plates, inertia dampeners and beaming capabilites and then reject a starship flitting around like a fighter.

In a nutshell, I am in the size=mass=speed and manueverabily camp. I can accept Vipers whipping around as the Galactica moves slowly but determinedly forward. I can accept Klingon Birds of Prey being more manueverable than Heavy Cruisers. I cannot accept a Galaxy Class Starship manuevering at speeds like the viper.

The Mutara Battle in TWOK, IMHO was the epitome of what starship combat would really be like. Massive ships moving in 'relatively' slow speeds compared to each other.

I love these types of debates.

*All statements and opinions are solely Southpaw's and in no way reflect the views or opinions of any other sentient being*
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,176 Posts
The video linked in the first posting here shows the apparent detonation of "explosive bolts" or some such fasteners to separate the sections of the ship. I doubt that explosive charges would be used for this purpose by engineers of that time but if they were, the "bolts" would all fire at exactly the same time, not in sequence like a zipper. By firing in sequence they would tend to concentrate the overall loads to the remaing unexploded bolts, possibly tearing the structure appart before the sequence could be completed.

This problem was a major hurdle that had to be overcome when multi-stage rockets began to be designed. If all the bolts did not fire at exactly the same time, the rocket would tear itself appart. It took considerable work to acheive a reliable (man-rated) method of similtaneous detonation. A huge amount of money and research went into solving this problem. This is an aspect of the history of space exploration technology which is rarely acknowledged, eventhough it might have been a show-stopper if no answer could be found.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,318 Posts
While you are building models, we'll discuss the what for and where to. :) Anybody would think this was a model forum or somesuch! :)
(I enjoy both.)
 

·
Oxidation Genius
Joined
·
31,239 Posts
First off, a fan film isn't proof positive of anything.

As for maneuvering - it WAS a bit spry, but remember there are two impulse engines that can accelerate the whole ship to 25% the speed of light almost instantly. Full forward on one with nill thrust on the other and that saucer is gonna turn pretty quick.
 

·
Starship Class
Joined
·
11,880 Posts
I think it's a really neat little CGI clip. I bought the maneuvers and even the explosive (if that's what they were) bolts going off in sequence.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
983 Posts
John P said:
First off, a fan film isn't proof positive of anything.

As for maneuvering - it WAS a bit spry, but remember there are two impulse engines that can accelerate the whole ship to 25% the speed of light almost instantly. Full forward on one with nill thrust on the other and that saucer is gonna turn pretty quick.

I would agree with you if we were discussing the NX-01 or Enterprise-E, with the twin impulse units offset on each side of the saucer section.

IMHO,with the centerline impulse drive on the refit, even with differential thrust you won't get much displacement in either X,Y direction in such a short distance. You'd have to use the manuevering thrusters to change the vector in tandem with the impulse drives, and that is going to take some room.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
250 Posts
Given that the Enterprise in all it's marks is the most blatantly unlikely, indeed seriously flawed from an engineering point of view, shape for a spacecraft, nothing surprises me.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
983 Posts
DX-SFX said:
Given that the Enterprise in all it's marks is the most blatantly unlikely, indeed seriously flawed from an engineering point of view, shape for a spacecraft, nothing surprises me.
Perhaps.... but she is pretty!
 
1 - 20 of 25 Posts
Top