Does anyone have a Treknology reason, written by Rick Sternbach or others, that explains why the warp nacelles are so tiny on the Intrepid-class relative to the size of the saucer and engineering sections? Does the class have super efficient bussard collectors and warp coils?
On the flipside, is their a Treknology reason why the warp nacelles and the impulse drive is so large on the Sovereign-class. From a production design standpoint I assume that they wanted a design that looks fast, but I was wondering if Rick Sternbach or others concocted a reason why they are so large?
Posted by Harry (Member # 265) on :
One treknology reason that explains this is quite nice.
Basically, short nacelles (like the Defiant [only 4 coils!] and Intrepid) have much higher plasma-firing frequencies than the longer nacelles (like the Excelsior or the Sovereign).
So there is a trade-off between number of coils and the plasma frequency. Perhaps longer, 'slower' nacelles are more durable and shorter, 'faster' nacelles are faster and more manouvrable.
It's only conjecture, and I don't think it's based on any TM.
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
In a few years Voyager's voice will start to change and it'll begin the akward change into a full grown starship.....
Posted by PsyLiam (Member # 73) on :
quote:Originally posted by Triton: Does anyone have a Treknology reason, written by Rick Sternbach or others, that explains why the warp nacelles are so tiny on the Intrepid-class relative to the size of the saucer and engineering sections? Does the class have super efficient bussard collectors and warp coils?
IT IS A WOMAN'S SHIP! Therefore it is tiny.
quote:On the flipside, is their a Treknology reason why the warp nacelles and the impulse drive is so large on the Sovereign-class. From a production design standpoint I assume that they wanted a design that looks fast, but I was wondering if Rick Sternbach or others concocted a reason why they are so large?
IS IT A MAN'S SHIP! Therefore everything is big and rargh!
It's not a Treknology answer, but they did try using short nacelles when they were originally designing the Ent-E. No-one liked them though, so Eaves made them all big and long and MAN LIKE!
Posted by MinutiaeMan (Member # 444) on :
Ahh, so it's the "mine's bigger" syndrome? Posted by Harry (Member # 265) on :
Mmmmmmm, sensor domes.
Posted by Triton (Member # 1043) on :
LOL!
But seriously, I was looking for the Treknology/technobabble explanation.
Posted by Guardian 2000 (Member # 743) on :
I was trying to come up with something, even something far-fetched, but couldn't. Sorry. Any idea I've come up with will only carry one so far before it peters out due to contradictions.
Any theory would need to account for such things as nacelle/coil endurance, the needs for the ship as far as warp speeds and duration of travel are concerned, and warp maneuverability.
The best bet would be that the variable-geometry warp nacelles of the Intrepids allow for the smaller nacelles for some reason, but that this technique is not applicable to all ship classes or has some sort of problems that prevent it from being used on other ship types.
Posted by Triton (Member # 1043) on :
I posed the question to Rick Sternbach on TrekBBS and I got the following response from him:
[QUOTE]Truth be told, the producers wanted the nacelles that size. I went through about thirty different drawings of nacelles, their positions, mounting schemes, etc. until they found a combination they liked. I have no big tech explanation for the design, except to say that the coils are densified over similar coils in the Ent-D size ships, so a smaller coil will yield the same basic warp field output and ship velocity.
Rick
-------------------- Senior Illustrator Emeritus Star Trek 1978-2001
[\QUOTE]
Posted by Peregrinus (Member # 504) on :
I found that if you add half again the length to the aft end of the nacelles they look a lot better.
For that matter, I like to leave the nacelles up, and they only drop for planetary landings. But that's just me.
--Jonah
Posted by Timo (Member # 245) on :
Which leads us to the most natural explanation for the tiny nacelles: they are small because the Intrepids can land on planets.
If warp coils are very dense and massive, you'd want to have as few of those as possible, and very small ones at that, when you build a planetfall/take-off starship. You may have to pay a price - perhaps the Intrepid nacelles are only half as good as the double-length Miranda ones. But if you can compensate in some other manner, you will.
However, if you don't have to compensate, you don't. Humungous Sovereign nacelles might be replaced by a combination of smaller nacelles and engineering doodad X, but why do that when you have no mass limitations and can have both the big nacelles *and* X?
The Defiant could have small nacelles/cowlings for similar reasons: low profile is more important to the ship than good warp performance. And we *know* the Defiant is a slacker at warp. The Intrepid isn't - but then again, we don't know how she compares to other modern designs, since there never was any data on Sovereign top speed, and the one Nova we saw in the timeframe was badly damaged when limited to warp 8.
Timo Saloniemi
Posted by Peregrinus (Member # 504) on :
Bear in mind, though, Timo, that Rick said the coils in the Intrepid were denser than normal due to their limited numbers, so they'd mass the same as longer engines... Maybe having that closer to the ship's centre of mass is sufficient?
--Jonah
Posted by Timo (Member # 245) on :
Could be... Or could be that the coils being dense is just another piece of Starfleet disinformation aimed at Klingon readers. Having small and light nacelles for planetary ops just sounds so simple and elegant when the only other known small-naceller is a) a distant background model and b) quite possibly another planetfaller anyway, with "wings" for pylons.
It might also be that the state of the art for nacelles in the 2370s-80s is the supercompact Intrepid standard - but the Novas and Sovereigns and Prometheii and whatnot use a lower standard for economic reasons, because Starfleet went bankrupt with the Galaxy generation of luxury-model ships.
Timo Saloniemi
Posted by PsyLiam (Member # 73) on :
quote:Originally posted by Timo: And we *know* the Defiant is a slacker at warp. The Intrepid isn't - but then again, we don't know how she compares to other modern designs
Well, she compares quite favourable with the Galaxy, and they're only 8 years apart, design wise.
Not to sound crazy though, but we've seen two modern Trek starships that are relatively small, and they both have small nacelles. Therefore, (and I know this is crazy mad sounding), perhaps smaller ships can have smaller nacelles and still get up to good speeds with modern technology?
And how do we know that the Defiant is a slacker at warp?
Posted by Sol System (Member # 30) on :
I believe poor high-warp performance was an oft-mentioned consequence of the Defiant's design, at least early on. But then, I can't think of an episode where this ever came up, and the Defiant never had any trouble getting where it needed to go as quickly as any other ship.
Posted by Timo (Member # 245) on :
Well, the E-D never really hit a speed at which LaForge would have said "we can't go faster". She did hit speeds at which LaForge said "the engines aren't making happy sounds", but that didn't prompt any command decisions out of Picard or Riker, save for "press on".
The Defiant, OTOH, hit a neutronium ceiling in "The Sound of Her Voice" at warp 9.5, *after* all the bubble gum and bale wire had been spent. Aboard the E-D, the whining from Engineering only started at warp 9.6 or so.
I wouldn't have minded if the Voyager had been a poor performer, really - the trip home that Ransom and the little Equinox had sounded quite a bit more dramatic than the one Janeway's big bad ship had. But now we have to accept that the Voyager is 1) superfast, has 2) swinging pylons for 3) tiny nacelles, and can 4) land and take off. Which of these features are novel performance-increasing inventions, and which are compromises made in order to allow for the other improvements? I'd like to label at least one of the features as a concession instead of an outright improvement...
Timo Saloniemi
Posted by Sol System (Member # 30) on :
That is, came up in connection to a plot point, rather than just a bit of world-building dialogue. Maybe "The Sound of Her Voice" has something relevant in it.
Posted by Sol System (Member # 30) on :
Curses to Timo and well-trained Finnish typing instructors!
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
Having small and light nacelles for planetary ops just sounds so simple and elegant when the only other known small-naceller is a) a distant background model and b) quite possibly another planetfaller anyway, with "wings" for pylons.