Has anyone ever wondered if perhaps the large interior cavity of Earth's giant spacedock had a substantial atmosphere contained within? Evidence for this:

1. The spacedock spotlights, have a noticeable dispersion of the light in their beams. (although it is not as noticeable in TSFS). The fact that you can make them out as beams at all suggests some medium through which the light must pass, but these beams seem to be passing through a relatively dense atmospheric medium. I suspect this was done to augment the sense of scale inside the model.

2. The simple fact that the entire (and substantially huge) structure is an enclosed one (unlike say, dry-dock or McKinley station) with huge exterior doors that open and close. These doors are the only means of access or egress for the coming and going starships. Maybe the doors or their surrounding frame members house some type of force field technology that prevents the escape of atmospheric gases.

We have known since at least The Motion Picture, that Starfleet has had some form of forcefield technology that allows large cavernous spaces to maintain atmosphere, even when exposed to the vacuum of space. In TMP the refit Enterprise in dry-dock had its landing bay doors open to space while workbees with cargo sleds entered from outside the ship, and crew members walked freely about the interior without the aid of environmental suits. If the case were the same for spacedock, it would be beneficial in that starship maintenance and repair could be carried out with more ease, comfort and efficiency; no bulky space suits.

The only problem I might foresee with this scenario would be possible radiation contamination from the ships themselves. Who knows what kind of radiation hazards might arise from a ship's exhaust systems or plain and simple leaks. Something tells me that there would be contingencies for these problems though.

So is it just me or is it reasonable to think that the spacedock mushroom might have a breathable interior space. Your thoughts....

------------------
Just a thought...A grain of salt-season to taste-lather, rinse, repeat
 

------------------
It doesn't matter if you don't know what you're doing as long as you look good doing it.

That is, the enclosed environment is desirable for a reason other than creating a breathable atmosphere (but we don't know the reason) and a toxic or at least unbreathable atmosphere results from the fact that starships are operating in this enclosed environment. No forcefield is applied over the big doors, but the existence of the doors themselves is sufficient to retain a light-scattering atmosphere inside the dock area, even if the area is vented to space every now and then.

Timo Saloniemi
 

fructose1: I too had thought about the thruster only rule, but I didn't know if it was related to possible exhaust hazards or if they simply didn't want ships barreling out of spacedock so fast they take half the super structure with them.

Timo: This is exactly the kind of counter-thought I wanted and it makes sense. Maybe that is why the spotlights are less "beam" like in TSFS, and much more noticeable in STIV and VI. Higher traffic means more emissions. However it still does not explain why the structure is even enclosed in the first place. Dry-docks, McKinley station, and DS9 were all dockable without having such elaborate and complete enclosures. Having such a huge closed off environment without any other obvious purpose screams wasteful and extraneous to me.
Your thoughts...

------------------
Just a thought...A grain of salt-season to taste-lather, rinse, repeat
 

--------------------

Quantum Threshold--Redesigned!
Avalon Sector--Redesigned!
 

I think the "atmospheric haze" is just an attempt to give a sense of scale. They probably also provide atmospheric haze even for scenes in space.

------------------
When you're in the Sol system, come visit the Starfleet Museum

The structure should date back at least to the birth of the Federation, or parts of it should at least. Then we could assume that the enclosed environment was created in order to protect the ships inside from things like thermal stresses, micrometeoroid (mainly lost nuts, bolts and spanners) bombardment and radiation while they are being services.

Modern starships are of course impervious to mere thermal stresses, and the enclosing is currently more of a hindrance than an asset. In case your starbase is attacked, you don't want to protect the ships inside. You want to deploy them as soon as possible, so that they are of some use to you. Having them emerge from a few cramped doors makes them sitting ducks for the attacker.

This idea of the Spacedock being an old structure has an obvious weakness: we know of at least three big deep-space starbases that share the shape if not the size. Supposedly these are newer than the Earth Spacedock. But perhaps the increased size of the stations and thus of the exit doors negates some of the problems. And perhaps the environment near these stations poses some special risks even to modern starships, against which enclosing is needed.

Timo Saloniemi

 

Anyway, I also think they just did the beam of light for effect, not thinking that we would start theorizing about the scientific background.

------------------
RIMMER [as Ace]: "Stoke me a clipper, I'll be back for Christmas."

I suppose a version of the SIF field mentioned in TNGTM could account for this better than pressurizing the interior volume, but I think its still a valid point.

If I had to guess tho, I'd say it wasn't pressurized basically because the ships aren't designed to operate in an air environment so why "store" them in one?
 

------------------
love's function is to fabricate unknownnness
--
E. E. Cummings
****
Read chapter one of "Dirk Tungsten in...The Disappearing Planet"! And party everyday.

 

------------------
"It's like the Star of David or something. But without the whole Judaism thing."
-Frank Gerratana, 17-Aug-2000
 

As to atmosphere. The waste gas idea seems the most plausible and not all that harmful since star ships moving in and out would expel very little in the way of gasses that could easily be filtered out.

PS the cover would also thwart any attempts at telescopic observation.

 

------------------
[Bart's looking for his dog.]
Groundskeeper Willy: Yeah, I bought your mutt - and I 'ate 'im! [Bart gasps.] I 'ate 'is little face, I 'ate 'is guts, and I 'ate the way 'e's always barkin'! So I gave 'im to the church.
Bart: Ohhh, I see... you HATE him, so you gave him to the church.
Groundskeeper Willy: Aye. I also 'ate the mess he left on me rug. [Bart stares.] Ya heard me!

[This message has been edited by PopMaze (edited September 15, 2000).]
 

------------------
Where's the bathroom on this ship?
 

If Spacedock is primarily an "airport in orbit", a facility only designed to handle the "passenger interface" of starships, then the enclosed nature could be simple aesthetics. Perhaps the facility is civilian, even, with Starfleet just operating a pier or two? The structure could be Earth's primary spaceport, and would mostly handle passenger liners and the like.

This would also help explain why Kirk and pals flew a "civilian" shuttle (no Starfleet markings, but instead a UFP logo plus a NAR registry) to the station in ST6. They simply took the "regular" transportation instead of the "military" one, perhaps because Starfleet prefers to give its personnel vouchers to civilian flights instead of maintaining a dedicated passenger shuttle that has few military uses (the "Generations" rescue being one of the few).

And since some civilian passengers prefer old-fashioned shuttles to transporters, the shuttles are kept as a sales gimmick. Or then public transporters back in the days of ST6 simply weren't all that good, and shuttles were the preferred means of transportation of medium to large groups of people, unless there was an emergency.

Timo Saloniemi

Timo Saloniemi
 

I imagine all Federation Starbases serve Federation civillians to some extent, tho (just look at DS9).

------------------
My roomate is a stupid, often-drunk, country-listening, non-cleaning, non-choring redneck ... kill him now ...

------------------
Predict the unpredictable, but how do you unpredict the unpredictable?

------------------
Ready for the action now, Dangerboy
Ready if I'm ready for you, Dangerboy
Ready if I want it now, Dangerboy?
How dare you, dare you, Dangerboy?
How dare you, Dangerboy?
I dare you, dare you, Dangerboy...

�on Flux, "Thanatophobia"

Perhaps Kira was not speaking specifically of impulse engines. Perhaps she just meant that atmospheric stresses would impose a common speed limit for both types of vessels? Or perhaps the small sub-impulse raider would fare better when deeper in the gravity well of the planet?

Also, it seems that impulse engines can be used in some types of atmospheres at least. Starships dip into the upper atmospheres of planets now and then, and maneuver at impulse. The Defiant went down into a gas giant in "Starship Down", and I believe impulse travel was at least implied. And the Voyager has battled atmospheric storms at impulse in at least "Tattoo".

So perhaps one should just say that impulse engines suffer severe performance limitations in atmospheres: so if there is an alternate propulsion system available, it should be used. But if no alternative exists, impulse engines can be used, even though they no longer are a superior form of Newtonian propulsion.

Why won't an impulse engine perform well in a thick atmosphere? Well, one might surmise the engine uses an extremely high-speed jet in order to expend as little mass as possible, and thus to keep propellant tank size down. A low-mass-flow, relativistic-speed jet would have trouble pushing against atmospheric pressure, while a slower jet of greater mass flow would suffer less problems.

Also, the mass-reducing subspace thingamabobs in the impulse engines might not like atmospheres. One wonders if the common and robust antigravs of Trek work on some other principle than subspace mass masking - often they simply seem to lift objects without reducing their inertial mass. Perhaps mass reduction is not possible within an atmosphere at all?

Timo Saloniemi