I was wondering if anyone has ever actually measured the volume of these two classes? I was thinking it could be done if one had the scale models and were willing to submerse them in water. Has anyone done this?
cm^3
Posted by CaptainMike (Member # 709) on :
incredibly ironic because i was just considering this question this morning as i walked up the hill to school (its a big hill, good for tech-think)
I think that Sternbach or Probert established the 1701-D had eight times the internal volume as the 1701-no suffix. They probably have a more exact figure on hand somewhere since they designed the thing. My guess is that the Sovereign has about half the internal volume of the galaxy, but thats just from eyeballing it
Posted by Masao (Member # 232) on :
At TrekBBS a few weeks ago, Alex Rosenzweig was answering questions about Starship Spotter, and I asked him how he reconciled the displacements of TOS ships with those of TNG and later ships. Anyways, I thought that EntD couldn't possibly weight 4.5 million tons, but I calculated the volume (with 8th grade geometry and calculator) and came up with 6.3 million cubic meters. The weight and the overall density (weight per unit volume) are consistent with those of TOS ships, if we assume stronger and lighter materials.
TOS Enterprise had a volume of about 200,000 cubic meters (my calculations), so Ent D had a volume 31 times greater.
I also calculated Voyager's volume as 620,000 cubic meters.
Posted by The359 (Member # 37) on :
Voyager has a mass of 700,000 metric tonnes, according to one of the episodes (I forget which, it's in the Encyclopedia).
Posted by Dax (Member # 191) on :
AFAIK it's from "Relativity".
Posted by MinutiaeMan (Member # 444) on :
I'd estimate that the E-E is no more than 2/3 the volume of the E-D. Also, there's the cutaway poster which gives the ship's mass, at somewhere around 3,500,000 tons.
I've got an AMT model of the E-E, and recently dug out an old same-scale model of the E-D, and I was quite surprised how much smaller it is.
Posted by Phelps (Member # 713) on :
The mass of Voyager was mentioned in a first or second season ep already by Neelix while standing in the mess hall, IIRC. Rick Sternbach accepted this figure, but said it was closer to 750,000 tons (in his opinion?).
Aren't there any cheap and tiny models of these ships around? Something like the Micromachine versions, keychains, whatever? One would also have an easier job of finding a big enough container to fill with water. It really is an experiment that should be done, because if a ship length is unquestionable, the volume is unquestionable as well. And knowing the volume of a ship can provide us with many interesting answers.
Posted by The Red Admiral (Member # 602) on :
Don't know about this, haven't got any physical models. But one thing I do know is the Intrepid Class mass is 700,000 metric tonnes, and the Galaxy Class is 4.96 Million metric tonnes.
Posted by akb1979 (Member # 557) on :
From an old Star Trek Mag - ". . . 42 decks with a minimum headroom of 8 feet and a raw deck space of 12,750,000 square feet, of which 67,320,000 cubit feet is people-accessible".
That help?
Posted by Ace (Member # 389) on :
LOL, it sounds like an ad.
Speaking of ship sizes, which ship is the largest in terms of volume? We know the Galaxy is larger than the E-E, but what about a Nebula class? The only thing I can think of that the Nebula misses is in the neck of the Galaxy, but what if you add in the pod?
Posted by akb1979 (Member # 557) on :
I heard that the Nebula was worth 85% of a Galaxy in volume and capacity . . . sounds about right I think.
Posted by Masao (Member # 232) on :
Voyager's weight was first given as 1.5 million tons (I think), then quickly revised down to 700,000. If EntD has a volume of 6.3 million m^3 and weighs 4.5 million tons or so, Voyager should weigh around 450,000 tons.
I'd guess the estimate of EntD having 8 times the volume of TOS Ent comes from EntD being twice as long: 2^3 = 8. Of course, Ent D is much wider and bulkier than TOS Ent, so that estimate is way off.
Posted by Phelps (Member # 713) on :
It was 1.5 million tons in the Voyager Technical Guide 1.0 (first season writers' tech guide by Rick Sternbach and Mike Okuda), but not in the show, where it's always been 700,000 tons as far as I know. The Magazine and Fact Files mistakenly adopted the 1.5 megaton mass, which Rick Sternbach had rejected. He went with 750,000 tons on startrek.expertforum.ricksternbach.
Posted by TSN (Member # 31) on :
A Nebula's secondary hull isn't identical to a Galaxy's, so there will be some difference there.
Posted by NeghVar (Member # 62) on :
Now I know that weight and volume do not go hand in hand, but when I weighed my scale models of the Nebula and the Galaxy, the Nebbie weighed in at about 115% of the Galaxy's weight.
Posted by TSN (Member # 31) on :
Which counts for nothing, since none of the interior is in the models. :-)
Posted by Phelps (Member # 713) on :
Ok, since no fan in the history of fandom has ever soaked a starship model into a container full of water, I think I'll go to NYC tomorrow and look for miniature keychains to soak into water.
Posted by OnToMars (Member # 621) on :
Well, now that I'm home, and have access to my semi-large no assembly required models of the E-D and E-E and I have absolutely nothing better to do until the rest of my friends come home, I'll see if I can jury rig a little experiment. And I would imagine that the larger the models, the more accurate the results.
Posted by Masao (Member # 232) on :
For the water displacement method, the bigger the model, the better. Key chains are so small that the level of uncertainty for any measurement would probably be very high. A key chain is, what, about 6 cm long? That's 1/10,000th of the length of the "real" Ent D and about 1/10^12 the volume. Make sure to get a nice graduated cylinder! Simple paper geometry would probably give you just as good a figure.
Instead of water, you might try using sand and hollow, larger-scale models. Sand is less likely than water to get inside the model. You could also just tape together an unbuilt model to measure different parts of the ship separately. You could even wrap a finished model in Saran Wrap or something to protect it.
I actually tried using water to measure a plasticine model of one of my own ships. I didn't have the right tools. I only had a kitchen measuring cup, so I abandoned the attempt pretty quickly. The wife also told me to stop making such a mess.
Posted by OnToMars (Member # 621) on :
How's this for a plan:
1. Measure the volume of an empty bathtub.
2. Fill it to the aforementioned volume.
3. Submerge both models separetly and measure the difference.
The only problem I have is finding a way to measure the difference in the filled bathtub.
Posted by CaptainMike (Member # 709) on :
I hate to dis these enterprising techniques, but is there anyway to do this with a 3d model? im not sure which programs can measure what, but it seems like you could take the model and convert it into simpler shapes and measure their volume (therefore revealing the vessels displacement) rather than this wet solution
Posted by Shik (Member # 343) on :
Won't work. You'd have to create your own models to exacting perfection.
Let's say we used the extant 1/1400-scale AMT Galaxy & Sovereign models. Never mind that they're hollow, they also aren't consistent. That is to say, the plastic used with differe from each kit & sometimes WITHIN each kit. Varying thicknesses, differing densities, & general materiels composition would drastically fuck with the numbers.
Posted by Cartman (Member # 256) on :
Mike: breaking a wireframe/CGI model apart isn't too difficult, but it would result in a *large* number of (irregularly shaped) geometric pieces. Thus, you'd still only have an approximation of the volume... though a more accurate one than could be obtained via ol' Archimedes.
[ December 13, 2001: Message edited by: Cartman ]
Posted by TSN (Member # 31) on :
Shik: That would alter any attmepted mass values, but it wouldn't have any effect on measuring volume via displacement. As long as no water gets inside the model, you'll still get an accurate figure.
Posted by Masao (Member # 232) on :
I've asked several people about getting volumes from CGI models, but no one has ever come through. They either say that it can't be done, or they simply won't do it. Now, if you had a CAD program, which is designed to calculate volumes of materials for manufacturing...
Anyways, how accurate do we actually need these calculations to be? Is plus or minus 10% good enough? If you dealing with something like EntD, whose volume is something over 6 million cubic meters, is greater accuracy going to help you much? I don't trust my calulations much past three figures (6.30x,xxx m3), but that's good enough for a ship this big, I think.
Measuring displacements of scale models in water is tricky because they're hollow. Unless they're sealed tight, water will get in, but if they're sealed tight, they won't sink in the water because of trapped air. So, they have to be sealed tight and maybe filled with a material that will make them sink or prevents water from filling the interiors. If you want to avoid water you could fill a hollow plastic model with sand and measure the sand to get a rough underestimate of the volume. Another way would be to get make a papier mache model using your plastic model as the inner mold. Cut it off and fill each piece with sand. Measure the sand.
The easiest way to measure volume by water displacement is to stick the object you want to measure in a big graduated cylinder with numbers on the side and partially filled with water: you drop in the object and see how much the water level goes up. If you don't have a large graduated cylinder, you can measure fluid differences by overflow replacement. Take a bucket or other container of water and fill it to overflowing. You have no idea of its volume, but it doesn't matter. You then put in the object you want to measure, and the water overflows. Take out the object (tying a string to it would help) and let all the water drain back into the bucket. Then see how much water it takes to fill the bucket to overflowing again. That should be the volume of your object.
If you're using sand instead of water, put your object in a container slightly larger than the object, then fill the container with sand. Take out the object, then see how much sand it takes to fill the container up again. That amount is the volume of your object. Again, the total volume of the container is not important.
Posted by Masao (Member # 232) on :
Alright! Put away your water and sand, because I've calculated Sovereign's volume geometrically.
If we use the overall density of EntD of 0.71 t/m^3 (4.5 Mt/6.3 Mm^3), EntE should weigh 1,439,000 tons.
The big difference between EntE and EntD is the primary hull. That of EntD is enormous, its volume (3.7 Mm^3) is more than the whole EntE.
Posted by OnToMars (Member # 621) on :
Oooooo...
*drains bathtub*
Posted by Cubic Centimeter (Member # 747) on :
You could also place the model in your container then fill it with water. Pull it out and measure the amount of water needed to fill it to the top and you should have your volume.
cm^3
Posted by Masao (Member # 232) on :
Headline: Machine beats Man!!!
"Nob Akimoto" at the TrekBBS has used the "measure" tool of 3-D Studio Max to automatically calculate the volume of meshes. He got these figures:
I'm retiring from these calculations and letting Max take over.
Posted by Phelps (Member # 713) on :
Excellent!
The Defiant would mass roughly 50,000 tons assuming a Galaxy-class density. However, it's overgunned and overpowered for its size; specifically, we know its SIF can't withstand the full power of its engines. Since a lot of a ship's mass is in its warp coils, I wouldn't be surprised if the Defiant massed 100,000 tons or more.
Posted by Masao (Member # 232) on :
