Post A Reply
my profile
|
directory
login
|
search
|
faq
|
forum home
»
Flare Sci-Fi Forums
»
Star Trek
»
Starships & Technology
»
Aft vs. Fore warp field dynamics
» Post A Reply
Post A Reply
Login Name:
Password:
Message:
HTML is enabled.
UBB Code™ is enabled.
[QUOTE]Originally posted by CaptainMike: [QB] Jefferies of course didnt come up with the warp coil or the warp field.. he said, like Roddenberry, that the future science should be vague (since it wasnt the star of the show, the people were). He simply stated that he imagined the nacelle acted like two giant magnets, suspended away from the ship, with the field interacting between them (hence the empty space). That was why nacelles were always supposed to be in pairs, and always supposed to have nothing in between them. Most of the other rules of 'Jefferies/Roddenberry warp physics' remain followed today (that nacelles should alway be at least partially visible in the forward view [i.e. nothing in front of them]), and that they be suspended away from the body of the ship. The ships with inboard nacelles are of course possible, but it almost looks like they disregarded the 'empty space between them' rule (to be fair, the nacelles on the [i]Steamrunner[/i], [i]Defiant[/i] and [i]Delta Flyer[/i] all curve below the axis of the ships hull to have empty space between them, so they are departures but not violations, as the Cardassian [i]Galor[/i] is. And of course we know the ships that violate the paired rule: [i]Freedom[/i] and the [i]Galaxy[/i] refit. (and of course the [i]Hermes[/i], [i]Saladin[/i] and [i]Federation[/i], but fans want to explain that away so badly...). This 'interaction' was slated to be shown, as energy arcing between the nacelles' inner surfaces in TMP, but was later dropped. [/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