Post A Reply
my profile
|
directory
login
|
search
|
faq
|
forum home
»
Flare Sci-Fi Forums
»
Star Trek
»
Starships & Technology
»
Excelsior Class Question
» Post A Reply
Post A Reply
Login Name:
Password:
Message:
HTML is enabled.
UBB Code™ is enabled.
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Woodside Kid: [QB] Ahhh, where to begin..... [QUOTE] Do you know the mass of the 1701-B? [/QUOTE] No, particularly since the only "modern" source I've seen for that is the DS9 TM, and we all know how accurate [i]that[/i] is. However, think about this: [list] [*]The D's saucer is roughly 75% longer, 78% thicker, and nearly 2 1/3 times as wide as the B's saucer. [*]Starships in the 24th Century are generally made of more massive materials than those in the 23rd. Witness Voyager at 750,000 tons versus the TOS E at 190,000. [/list] Given those two points, I think I'm on pretty solid ground to assume that the D's saucer is more massive than the B's. [QUOTE] Maybe the Excelsior-refits mission profile specifically requires more impulse thrust. [/QUOTE] Really? Since saucer separation wasn't intended to be a routine maneuver in the TOS/Movie era, then the new engine pods (which, if you believe Eaves' statement about being for use after separation) are essentially useless for most of the ship's operational life. At any rate, why would you need more impulse thrust for the saucer alone than you would need when the ship is in one piece? [QUOTE] The 1701-C and 1701-D impulse engines both use subspace field coils to lighten the ships mass to propel it. Maybe the E-B didnt have that, so it needed bigger engines. Maybe it was using a different type of fusion reactor. [/QUOTE] Uh-huh. Remember Geordi's line to Scotty in "Relics" ? "Impulse engine design hasn't changed much in 200 years." Since Geordi was still using an impulse design specification that Scotty wrote more than 75 years earlier, I seriously doubt that there was enough difference in engine operations for it to effect a substantial design change. The point I was [i]trying[/i] to make with the Reliant/E-C blue glow thing is that we shouldn't assume that two things are the same simply because they both have a similar-looking visual effect. I know that most impulse drives we've seen had a red glow. However, the E-C and the NX-01's engines glow blue, the TMP E's engine glow was nearly yellow in the original theatrical issue, and the TOS impulse engines had no glow at all. [QUOTE] Probert and Okuda arent in charge of other ships. .their design intentions dont go beyond the ship they designed. A lot of Proberts intentions were vetoed during the first season, like the Sphinx and the Shuttle Front Door and the Velara III base. If Eaves or Mojo or whoever designs a new ship with blue red or purple glow tomorrow and Berman oks it and it gets on screen then thats the way it should be. Besides, once a ship has moved out of the designers hands and is run by new producers/advisors, their intentions are law. [/QUOTE] Oooookay. Let me see if I've got this straight. I'm supposed to accept Eaves' intention about the new modules and ignore the later art department input because I'm supposed to go with the designer's original intentions. But I'm also supposed to ignore Probert's idea for the warp engine glow and go with the later VFX input even though it's not the designer's original intention. Hmmmm. As Nomad would say, "Non sequitur. Your facts are uncoordinated." BTW, I didnt mean to say that Okuda had anything to do with the engine glow thing. He was the one involved in the Yamato registry number problem. [/QB][/QUOTE]
Instant Graemlins
Instant UBB Code™
What is UBB Code™?
Options
Disable Graemlins in this post.
*** Click here to review this topic. ***
© 1999-2024 Charles Capps
Powered by UBB.classic™ 6.7.3