If a starship is travelling at warp factor 6 (no matter which scale), and drops out of warp, how fast is it going in normal space? I find it hard to believe that its velocity would drop to 0 kps relative. But it obviously does not drop to just below c, because we would see the starbow effect (all stars dopplered to bright blue ahead, deep red aft).
Conjecture? Hints from shows?
------------------ Faster than light - no left or right.
Posted by TSN (Member # 31) on :
Well, the question is, when at warp, does a ship have inertia w/ respect to normal space? If not, as soon as they come out of warp, they should just stop. Or at least be moving however fast they were going when they went into warp. Right?
------------------ We are the Borg. Resistance is futile. You will be assimilated. "Wowsers!" -Star Trek: Series ?: "A Pair o' Docs, part II"
Posted by Shipbuilder (Member # 69) on :
I think in almost every onscreen instance when a ship drops out of warp it's impulse engines (when visible) were active, so the ship would still be moving at some sublight speed depending on impulse output.
Posted by Nim (Member # 205) on :
I thought the warp field made ships weigh practically nothing, letting the faintest push squirt them away like so much melon seed.
------------------ Here lies a toppled god, His turnip not a small one. We did but build his pedestal, A narrow and a tall one.
-Tleilaxu Epigram
Posted by MIB on :
I think that TSN is correct on this one. If I remember how warp fields work, a starship creates a warp bubble around itself. This warp bubble is what moves around the galaxy at faster-than-light speeds, not the starship its self. Sense the starship happens to be INSIDE the bubble, it happens to take the starship along with it. As for how the bubble move across the galaxy at faster-than-light speeds, it streches the fabric of space in front of the bubble and contracts the space behind the bubble (or it might be vice versa. I'm not sure). This causes a kind of tidal wave in the fabric of space. It's this tidal wave that the warp bubble uses to surf accross the galaxy.
I could try and explain the whole thing in more detail, but I'm too lazy. All of this, believe it or not, is theoreticly possible in the REAL world! Cool huh? I might be off on how warp fields work by quite a bit. In all honesty it's been a long time sense I read any papers on how warp drive is theoreticly supposed to work. Being a 16 year old geek is hard. I'll try to do a bit of reaserch on warp fields and post what I find if you'd like.
------------------ If anyone has a Star wars action fleet E-wing starfighter or Tie defender toy they want to sell, please E-mail me at [email protected]
Posted by Peregrinus (Member # 504) on :
In a nutshell, warp travel is non-Newtonian. Inertia does not factor. When the ship drops out of warp, she'll be travelling at the same speed she was before she went to warp, assuming the driver coils in the impulse engines are operating at the same capacity as prior to going to warp...
Jonah
------------------ "It's obvious I'm dealing with a moron..."
--Col. Edwards, ROBOTECH
Posted by Masao (Member # 232) on :
I think we talked about this before, and I'm pretty sure we reached a similar consensus that a ship leaves warp at the same speed it entered. The speed the ship (and the bubble) was travelling at during warp shouldn't affect speeds in normal space.
------------------ When you're in the Sol system, come visit the Starfleet Museum
Posted by Fabrux (Member # 71) on :
Dunno if this is spoiler material, so I'll add a few warnings for good measure.
Warning! Possible spoilers ahead!
In "Equinox, Part II", there's a nifty scene that involves the Equinox and Voyager dropping out of warp. They "stretch" into normal space, sorta the reverse of entering warp. Then they continue going at impulse.
------------------ "Lately I've noticed that everyone seems to trust me. It's really quite unnerving. I'm still trying to get used to it." - Garak, "Empok Nor"
Posted by Daniel (Member # 453) on :
An easily understandable explanation of warp drive. Now why couldn't I think to phrase it that way? Anyway, MIB you were correct, the contraction/expansion of space in a fore to aft motion is what propels starships at warp, except I think you got it flipped. But, question, how does the impulse/warp-engage overlap work? In other words how does a starship is traveling at full impulse then engage warp? Is there some sort of transition? Was there a thread on thi already? If there was, my apologies.
Posted by Timo (Member # 245) on :
One tidbit of relevance is that you can choose whether to use impulse engines at warp or not. Kirk used them in "Corbomite Maneuver" for extra oomph, but they were off-line and under repairs when the ship was at warp in "Obsession". So apparently impulse/warp interaction is up to the captain's discretion.
Another thing is that ships always seem to decelerate more violently than they accelerate, be they at warp or impulse. This makes me suspect there is a third major propulsion mode to the starships apart from the two drives. It probably doesn't require any extra hardware, but just uses the existing gear in an innovative way. Somehow, the ships are able to deploy a "subspace anchor" that is good for decelerating but no good for accelerating.
So when a ship goes to warp, it may retain a "memory" of its original inertia, for example measured against a static subspace background. When the warp engines shut down, the ship continues at this inertia wrt the subspace background of the downwarping point. It can then rapidly decelerate to zero speed by deploying this subspace anchor (and by applying the impulse engines at reverse, although this effect apparently will not be as great as that of the anchor).
Simple solutions for the subspace anchor are the subspace-manipulating devices aboard (warp coils and certain impulse engine components), or the gravity-and-inertia-manipulating ones (the aforementioned, plus the AG and IDF systems). Perhaps the warp drive can be used for "impulse" decelerations, but like a ramjet aircraft engine, is not very good at accelerations because it will only begin to operate above a certain initial speed wrt the subspace medium? Or perhaps one can simply run a special current through the warp coils to "grab" the subspace background like a grabber mechanism can slow down a falling elevator or a San Francisco cable car?
Timo Saloniemi
Posted by Peregrinus (Member # 504) on :
In the old days, they evidently had to start at warp one and then climb to their eventual cruising speed. One of the advances of the Excelsior class (or at least the E-B) was the ability to "jump" straight to the desired velocity.
Basically, whether the ship is travelling at .99c or is at all stop, the warp coils get energized to at least 1,000 millicochranes and the ship tunnels into subspace and proceeds on its merry way. If the ship was travelling at impulse speeds prior to going to warp, the propulsive end is shut down a la a computer's "sleep" mode, with the reactors ticking over to avoid having to cold start, as well as keeping the other impulse-dependent systems going.
Also, it seems that when a ship's engines are first being aligned, it is less stressful to some aspect of the ship's well-being to run up as close to lightspeed as possible before engaging at warp one (cf. ST:TMP).
--Jonah
------------------ "It's obvious I'm dealing with a moron..."
--Col. Edwards, ROBOTECH
Posted by Nim (Member # 205) on :
And we have seen ships go to warp from a standstill, like Voyager in "Scorpion", after 8472's lovetap, and the borg vessel in "BoBW", to name a few.
------------------ Here lies a toppled god, His turnip not a small one. We did but build his pedestal, A narrow and a tall one.
-Tleilaxu Epigram
Posted by Treknophyle (Member # 509) on :
"So when a ship goes to warp, it may retain a "memory" of its original inertia, for example measured against a static subspace background. When the warp engines shut down, the ship continues at this inertia wrt the subspace background of the downwarping point."
Thanks Timo - I really like this explanation. Note: with the above quote - there is no need for the subspace anchor.
------------------ Faster than light - no left or right.
Posted by Aban Rune (Member # 226) on :
I don't know if this is relevant or not but, Z. Cochrane's original warp engines apparently functioned much differently than those "today". Either that or there was no inertial dampening (which I think they mentioned the Phoenix had).
During the warp test flight, Cochran accellerated the Phoenix to "critical velocity". He was approaching light speed. He couldn't go to warp before this for some reason.
The TNG:TM says, though, that full impulse is only, like .5 or .75 c or something. Not .99c. And yet, ships have gone to warp from less than full impulse.
I guess one could argue that the IDF couldn't compensate for as much inertial displacement, so they had to get closer to light speed before making the jump.
------------------ "You don't tug on Superman's cape. You don't spit into the wind. You don't pull the mask off the ole' Lone Ranger And you don't mess around with Jim." Aban's Illustration www.alanfore.com
Posted by Shipbuilder (Member # 69) on :
So what happens if you cut the impulse engines off after going to warp? I think that once the warp field collapses the vehicle would immediately be subject to normal space and would require the impulse engines to maintain any sort of momentum. I assume the warp field decay period would be fairly short and would result in the stretching effect that is shown onscreen. We know this decay occurs because of the comments about warp sustainers and saucer sections being able to use the phenomena.
Anyway, I'd agree that the starship would move at whatever impulse speed it went into the warp jump with unless it cut the impulse engines off during warp flight. Immediately after coming out of warp, that ship would be stationary. If this isn't how it happens, some other unknown side effect of warp travel is a huge capability to conserve momentum at the moment of warp jump.
Posted by Peregrinus (Member # 504) on :
Depends on how complete the shutdown is. If just the thrusters are shut down, the ship will merrily coast for some time, with only the tenuous drag of the interstellar medium to contend with. If the whole system is shut down (for some unknown reason), things would be a little different. The space-time driver coils in the impulse engine systems reduce the ship's apparant mass, allowing relatively small engines to push a much bigger ship effeciently. As has been pointed out in other locations at other times, momentum is a product of mass. Shut down the driver coils and the sudden increase in localized mass for the level of kinetic energy present would slow the ship down suddenly and dramatically -- but not to a complete stop, as there IS still kinetic energy present.
However, I'm not too sure what effect shutting the driver coils down at warp would have on things... Someone better versed in the interaction of ship's mass to warp fields will have to fill that in...
--Jonah
------------------ "It's obvious I'm dealing with a moron..."
--Col. Edwards, ROBOTECH
Posted by Psi'a Meese on :
When I reviewed the NGTM, it states that 'driver coils' as a component of the impulse engine were only necessary for Ambassador-class starships and the even larger Galaxy-class due to mass. So I question that the Intrepid-class would even require them.
"...normal impulse velocities are limited to .25c."
"The IPS is cross-linked with its counterpart in the WPS for flight transitions involving warp entry and exit. Specific software routines react to prevent field energy fratricide (unwanted conflicts between warp fields and inpulse engine fields)."
As in above posts, starships have leaped to warp from dead stops and also stopped 'on a dime' in some examples. But not always. I suggest that it appears with or without the impulse driver coils, a starship is dependant upon both drive systems working together when entering or exiting "subspace" i.e. warp.
Purrrr....
[This message has been edited by Psi'a Meese (edited March 04, 2001).]
Posted by Nim (Member # 205) on :
So .25c is 75000 km/s? Damn that's fast... I wonder why you don't leave the current solar system when going to maximum impulse in the Trek-sims...
------------------ Here lies a toppled god, His turnip not a small one. We did but build his pedestal, A narrow and a tall one.
-Tleilaxu Epigram
[This message has been edited by Nimrod (edited March 04, 2001).]
Posted by DARKSTAR on :
IMPULSE-WARP-IMPULSE When a ship engages Warp drive, It can do at any sublight speed or when at a complete standstill. The Enterprise D has even warped out of Planetery Orbit. When at Warp, The Impulse engines aren't active but are on standby mode ready to propel the ship when it drops out of warp. When the ship drops out warp, The Impulse engines instantly come online. Warp drive works by compressing and warping space by pulling the space infront of it and pulling backwards, The higher the warp speed the faster this occurs. The speed of light is 700 million miles an hour which if if Full Impulse is 1/4 of This equals 175000000 million miles per hour The Solar system is 45000000000 million miles from the Sun to Pluto so an Full Impulse trip would take 25 hours or a day at full Impulse
Posted by Sol System (Member # 30) on :
Posted by Vacuum robot lady from Spaceballs (Member # 239) on :
8> <----- THAT"S A BIRD!! MY FRIEND ON AOL SHOWED ME IT!!!
------------------ "This is such an amazingly minor complaint. Does anyone actually watch episodes anymore, or is it just a notebook + pause button exercise these days?" -Sol System on what constitutes modern day Star Trek watching, 02-22-01
Posted by Masao (Member # 232) on :
On a related note, it's not clear to me why impulse should only be .25 c. I thought that as long as you kept applying thrust, you would continue to accelerate until you reach c. I guess impulse is more like a car engine or space is a lot more like pea soup than we thought.
------------------ When you're in the Sol system, come visit the Starfleet Museum
Posted by thespaceboy on :
I believe Full Impulse= .25c is more of a self-imposed speed limit, to avoid time dialation.
-The SpaceBoy
Posted by Peregrinus (Member # 504) on :
It's the common-sense-imposed speed limit on normal Starfleet ops. Much faster than .25c and the crew starts to have to deal with relativistic considerations.
And as for the driver coils, many consider that passage from the TM to be poorly-thought-out. Look at the Excelsior. Or even the TOS Enterprise. Think those impulse engines can push those ships at those sublight speeds as is? Sure. Tell me another.
--Jonah
------------------ "It's obvious I'm dealing with a moron..."
--Col. Edwards, ROBOTECH
Posted by Masao (Member # 232) on :
What's so bad about relativity? I thought that's what stardates were for.
------------------ When you're in the Sol system, come visit the Starfleet Museum
Posted by Timo (Member # 245) on :
But generally, speaking, you can't keep a stardate if you arrive two centuries older than your girlfriend.
Timo Saloniemi
Posted by DARKSTAR on :
Sorry about the wrong distance for Sun-Pluto. The correct distance is around 3000 million miles and a full Impulse trip leaving Sun Orbit and arriving in Pluto's orbit should take 17 hours.
Posted by DARKSTAR on :
and a Warp 1 trip would take 4 hours. and a Warp 9 trip would take 0.0028 seconds
Posted by Treknophyle (Member # 509) on :
Ultra Magnus: "8>" Congratulations, you've just introduced the new symbol for Roddenberry.
------------------ Faster than light - no left or right.
Posted by Psi'a Meese on :
----------------------------------------------------- Look at the Excelsior. Or even the TOS Enterprise. Think those impulse engines can push those ships at those sublight speeds as is? Sure. Tell me another. -----------------------------------------------------
Well. Actually, yes I do.
[This message has been edited by Psi'a Meese (edited March 08, 2001).]
Posted by Vacuum robot lady from Spaceballs (Member # 239) on :
Treknophyle: Well, I suppose I am proud, but for all the other members who may not have gotten that reference, perhaps you could explain it to them. You know, so they understand what you meant, exactly.
------------------ "I WANT A POST VOY SERIES STAR TREK ORIGINAL MESSAGE WAS LOOKING FORWARD NOT LOOKING BACK."
-Darkstar
Posted by Peregrinus (Member # 504) on :
Most Great One (Ultra Magnus for those who didn't benefit from a classical education): There's a reason my AOL Instant Messenger user name is "GreatBird2"... *hee hee*
--Jonah
------------------ "It's obvious I'm dealing with a moron..."
--Col. Edwards, ROBOTECH
Posted by TSN (Member # 31) on :
UM: I'll put it in the proper terminology, so you can easily understand it:
GENE RODDENBERRY GOT THE "GREAT BIRD OF THE GALAXY" POWERUP AND WON THE GAME!!!
Understand now? :-)
------------------ "...I know this board in secret, intimate ways which are beyond your comprehension.... Let's just say that people should *not* be telling me what to do; it should always be the other way around." -"Red Quacker", conspiracy theorist and contemporary lunatic
I'll try to do a bit of reaserch on warp fields and post what I find if you'd like.