So the PTCs are first running up into the saucer, then down again, then back through the pylons, and then up again. Am I missing something and the engine room could be elsewhere, or is this very bad engineering?
posted
From the little footage I've seen, I'm thinking that the location you show as the engine room is actually the shuttle drop-bay. Recovery would be above it on the aft side of the saucer.
My best guess is that the Engine room is in the pod.
posted
Perhaps the design of the powerplant requires each PTC to run through a piece of machinery - a MHD tap or something? These machines would be housed within the saucer, where there's room for them, and only then would the PTCs go out to the nacelles along the straightest possible route.
Dunno. Looks odd to me. Then again, the interior of the ship may still be in flux, and the exact location of Engineering somewhere else altogether.
posted
The light on top of the pod matches the shape and look of the lights on top of the Miranda class and Constitution Refit. And in both ships it's the top of the warp core.
-------------------- "And they had other stuff (...) like pictures of the Vulcan woman on Enterprise." "OOOOhhh! Uhm, I mean: Nerds!"
- Willow and Xander, Buffy the Vampire Slayer
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
posted
I'm with Timo on this. Warp design being so new, there is probably a lot more equipment required to channel the power of the warp engine, which means a lot more equipment, which means a lot longer "trips" to the nacelles.
capped
I WAS IN THE FUTURE, IT WAS TOO LATE TO RSVP
Member # 709
posted
Dont try to infer evolution where none exists. Just because the Enterprise-Connie and Miranda have something doesnt mean theres a direct lineage back to its predecessor. The old Constitution certainly doesnt have anything like that.
And have we ever seen a canon Miranda MSD cutaway that shows where its warp core is?
-------------------- "Are you worried that your thoughts are not quite.. clear?"
posted
No but the Enterprise-D did shoot at that point when someone said to target the warp core.
-------------------- "And they had other stuff (...) like pictures of the Vulcan woman on Enterprise." "OOOOhhh! Uhm, I mean: Nerds!"
- Willow and Xander, Buffy the Vampire Slayer
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
capped
I WAS IN THE FUTURE, IT WAS TOO LATE TO RSVP
Member # 709
posted
When did the Enterprise-D shoot a Miranda?
-------------------- "Are you worried that your thoughts are not quite.. clear?"
Registered: Sep 2001
| IP: Logged
Chris Weyer
Ex-Member
posted
I believe, if memory serves, that the Enterprise-D destroyed the USS Lantree, to prevent the spread of the disease that infected it's crew. It is from the episode "Unnatural Selection".
IP: Logged
capped
I WAS IN THE FUTURE, IT WAS TOO LATE TO RSVP
Member # 709
posted
Ah yes.. how obscure.. i believe the torpedoes hit the back half of the ship. I believe the warp core is in the back half of the ship.
However, it proves nothing about what that particualr hull detail was for.
If you targeted the warp core of the Enterprise-D you may hit the following things: deflector dish, main impulse drive, rear torpedo line, lower cargo doors, tractor emitters, fore torpedo emitters. Doesnt prove that any of those things are the warp core
[ September 25, 2001: Message edited by: CaptainMike ]
-------------------- "Are you worried that your thoughts are not quite.. clear?"
Registered: Sep 2001
| IP: Logged
quote:Originally posted by Bernd: Am I missing something and the engine room could be elsewhere, or is this very bad engineering?
Assuming your location is correct, it's no worse than the engineering on the Galaxy. Enterprise has three kinks in the PTCs. The Enterprise-D did as well, if I remember correctly: she had PTCs that come out from the core, take a turn aft, turn outboard to the pylons, then turn up to reach the nacelles, right? So, as with most complaints regarding the Enterprise design, this boils down to being completely consistent with designs of the past. The only ship that we can say for sure had a fairly logical path to the nacelles was the refit Constitution. Even that isn't perfect.
My question is (slightly changing the topic): why do ships have these ridiculously long warp cores anyway? Why do you have to shoot the reactants through twenty meters of constriction segments to get to the reaction chamber? Isn't that just more room for error? Instead of having half a meter of containment to worry about, you've got twenty. One segment out of a hundred goes out, and you lose half the ship. At the very least, having the reaction chamber as close as possible to the antimatter makes sense, even if you have to pipe in the deuterium from ten decks up.
This is one area in which the original Constitution and the new Enterprise seem to make far more sense than their descendents, since both (apparently) have smallish reactors without all of the wasted space.
[ September 25, 2001: Message edited by: Ryan McReynolds ]
"Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away." --Phillip K. Dick
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
OnToMars
Now on to the making of films!
Member # 621
posted
quote: Am I missing something and the engine room could be elsewhere, or is this very bad engineering?
Bad engineering.
Kinks are probably unavoidable (bearing in mind other neccessary factors of starship designing). But according to basic engineering principles, the fewer kinks, the simpler the design, and the better the design.
But hell, it looks cool, right? So what difference does it make?
[ September 25, 2001: Message edited by: Stingray ]
-------------------- If God didn't want us to fly, he wouldn't have given us Bernoulli's Principle.
Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
posted
Oh yes...Starfleet prefered a cool ship to a safe one...
-------------------- "It speaks to some basic human needs: that there is a tomorrow, it's not all going to be over with a big splash and a bomb, that the human race is improving, that we have things to be proud of as humans." -Gene Roddenberry about Star Trek
Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged
Printer-friendly view of this topic
