posted
You should send it to Bernd so he can substitute it for the Manual pic he has in his database. (He's trying to get all-corrected versions.)
Your comment about thrusters confuses me. As far as I know, those squares around the saucer rim *are* the RCS quads...
And I thought we settled that the Ent-B aft saucer modules are additional IMPULSE ENGINES, not shuttlebays as you keep saying...have I missed something?
-MMoM
-------------------- The flaws we find most objectionable in others are often those we recognize in ourselves.
Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
Amasov Prime
lensfare-induced epileptic shock
Member # 742
posted
I'll send it to him when I completed the top-view.
And whether those are shuttlebays or impulse engines: the things are neither the former nor the latter. I have no idea what they are. The things on board the E-B are another question. The E-B MSD says they are shuttlebays.
Let's put it this way (concerning the thrusters): They appear to be RCS thrusters, but they could also serve a different purpose. I'm not sure about that.
-------------------- "This is great. Usually it's just cardboard walls in a garage."
Registered: Nov 2001
| IP: Logged
There's enough to go either way, but I prefer the notion that: 1) The stock Excelsior isn't THAT underpowered, 2) the MSD in Generations isn't THAT inaccurate, and 3) Starfleet engineers DIDN'T build something with impulse engines exhausting directly onto the nacelles.
--Jonah
-------------------- "That's what I like about these high school girls, I keep getting older, they stay the same age."
--David "Woody" Wooderson, Dazed and Confused
Registered: Feb 2001
| IP: Logged
Amasov Prime
lensfare-induced epileptic shock
Member # 742
posted
The diagram in the movie sketchbook says Main Shuttlebay, P/S. I wanted to post the picture here, linked from EAS. but the diagram there says 'Main Impulse Reaction chamber' or something, and has been modified (the shuttlehangar has been removed and replaced with some impulse engines). Still, I don't see a reason why there should be 3 impulse engines (the middle engine is remains from the standard-Excelsior). Furthermore, the exhaust of the engines is right in fron of the bussard ramscoops. And I don't have any idea how to explain that.
-------------------- "This is great. Usually it's just cardboard walls in a garage."
Registered: Nov 2001
| IP: Logged
quote:Originally posted by Peregrinus: There's enough to go either way, but I prefer the notion that: 1) The stock Excelsior isn't THAT underpowered, 2) the MSD in Generations isn't THAT inaccurate, and 3) Starfleet engineers DIDN'T build something with impulse engines exhausting directly onto the nacelles.
1.) It isn't, the upgrade is just THAT much more powerful. 2.) See my comment in above post. 3.) Good point, but I think there's probably enough space in between for whatever exhaust there is to dissipate without causing any bussard damage.
-MMoM
-------------------- The flaws we find most objectionable in others are often those we recognize in ourselves.
Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
Amasov Prime
lensfare-induced epileptic shock
Member # 742
posted
quote:Originally posted by The Mighty Monkey of Mim:
quote:And whether those are shuttlebays or impulse engines: the things are neither the former nor the latter. I have no idea what they are.
Wha?? Surely they would be whatever they are on the Ent-B...
You forget that the Impulse Modules/shuttlebay doors are missing. So if those are the impulse engines, this have to be some new sort of rocket drive, and if those are the shuttlebay, they have to nail the shuttles on the floor because they would fall out of the hangar at high velocity.
quote:
quote:The E-B MSD says they are shuttlebays.
The E-B MSD also completely omits the large protrusions on the secondary hull.
But after all, it's as official as every MSD.
quote:
quote:Furthermore, the exhaust of the engines is right in fron of the bussard ramscoops. And I don't have any idea how to explain that.
But you do have an idea how to explain shuttlebays that glow red at impulse?
They don't glow red. They are painted white, but the close red-glowing bussard ramscoops light them up.
Amasov Prime
lensfare-induced epileptic shock
Member # 742
posted
quote:Originally posted by The Mighty Monkey of Mim: 3.) Good point, but I think there's probably enough space in between for whatever exhaust there is to dissipate without causing any bussard damage.
Why should they put a second and third engine on top of the saucer if they knew the secondary hull has no impulse engine at all? What if they seperate? And don't tell me they do it the Constitution way: 'Eject and forget'. In 200 years they didn't learn how to build a ship with the ability to seperate and reconnect?
-------------------- "This is great. Usually it's just cardboard walls in a garage."
Registered: Nov 2001
| IP: Logged
quote:Originally posted by Cpt. Kyle Amasov: Why should they put a second and third engine on top of the saucer if they knew the secondary hull has no impulse engine at all? What if they seperate? And don't tell me they do it the Constitution way: 'Eject and forget'. In 200 years they didn't learn how to build a ship with the ability to seperate and reconnect?
You were CLOSE to my theory Kyle...
I reckon that the EXTRA impulse engines are separate from the original impulse engines. I.e. when the saucer separates, there will be now impulse engines for both the saucer AND the engineering section - I would say the 'middle engines' remain on the engineering section and the 'new' engines are employed in saucer operations. This then doesn't conflict with the 'being in the way of the nacelles' - they might GLOW but they might not be active. Only active when the saucer is separated.
Oh and remember the bussards of the Ex-Ref are blue.
-------------------- "Bears. Beets. Battlestar Galactica." - Jim Halpert. (The Office)
posted
Then again, just because the 23rd century shipwrights might have been able to build ships that separate and reattach doesn't mean they would want to. Even in the 24th century, this capacity is considered a novelty, and a curiosity of little operational value.
If the extra impulse engines are only supposed to operate in cases of saucer separation, then why are they lit in "Generations"? And why couldn't shuttlebays glow red on this ship when they glow so distinctly blue on the Mirandas? Is there a regulation about shuttlebay glow colors? There doesn't seem to be one on impulse engine colors...
In any case, even if the Medusa thingamabobs aren't complete assemblies (lacking the "door" part and the lower half), they could still be shuttlebays. The mechanical doors could have been jammed open, or the forcefields rendered inoperable, by battle damage...
posted
There's a lot more. The E-refit's impulse engines glowed a dull orange-red at some times, but a bright blue at others...
The Reliant's shuttlebays also glowed bright blue -- or did they...
The E-D's shuttlebay doors -- from the inside -- usually show a ruddy glow of some kind through the translucent inner door panels. The outer doors of more recent ships -- the Galaxy and Ambassador classes, for example -- have opaque outer doors. The glow from the Miranda and Constellation shuttlebays (again, for example) is coming through the doors from inside. Supposing these are landing floodlights, I see them switching from blue to red, as red preserves night vision. And they switched to the opaque outer doors when pilots objected to flying toward what looked like powered impulse engines.
Don't ask me why Mirandas and Constellations didn't make the same switch -- the real-world explanation is they don't ponder such things, and just carry the models, unmodified from their first appearances, forward into a completely different timeframe. It would be something I'd modify in any "Special Edition" treatment, myself...
--Jonah
-------------------- "That's what I like about these high school girls, I keep getting older, they stay the same age."
--David "Woody" Wooderson, Dazed and Confused
Registered: Feb 2001
| IP: Logged
Shik
Starship database: completed; History of Starfleet: done; website: probably never
Member # 343
posted
What if it's both.
Now, before you start conjuring up images of toasted shuttles flying into fusion plasma wake, hear me out. What if the extended box structures can be shuttlebays OR impulse decks? The former can provide extra evac room & the latter extra STL maneuverability. When I built my Juno-class model, I used the E-B saucer & I made the boxes shuttlebays because I had a better place to put the impulse deck. Why can't it be that on the E-B & Lakota they were IPS, but on, say, the Livingston & the Berlin they wanted extry shuttles?
Time & time again, we're told that every Starfleet ship is "modularly adaptable." Here's a new module. Here's more adaptability.
-------------------- "The French have a saying: 'mise en place'—keep everything in its fucking place!"
Registered: Jun 2000
| IP: Logged
posted
Personally, I often try hard to invent specific and special roles to any "modifications" done on a select few ships of an established design. In contrast, I try hard *not* to invent too specific roles for the gadgetry I see on "regular" starships - because if I decide that a component seen on two ship types is a vital thing (like a nav deflector) and then I see a third ship that lacks this component, I'm screwed.
The boxes on the Excelsior-mod saucer are definitely non-vital additions, since they didn't become a standard feature of all the Excelsiors. They must give the Ex-mod some special and specific capability. But if they are impulse engines or shuttlebays, they don't introduce any new capability, they just augment an existing one.
On a ship kitbashed from Excelsior components, however, the boxes could be crucial. A ship like the Centaur or the Medusa could lack shuttle capability altogether if not fitted with such boxes. Perhaps we could say that the 2290s saw the introduction of the first Excelsior derivatives, with the same saucer but without the secondary hull. This necessitated the invention of the shuttle boxes, and Starfleet then tried them out on a standard Excelsior just for the heck of it...
Any of the DS9 TM Excelsior-kitbashes could date from the 2290s, really, with prototype introduction followed by an extensive period of very low-intensity production - just as with the regular Excelsiors. That would nicely explain the use of Miranda components on the Centaur, or LN-64-lookalike nacelles on the Curry and the Raging Queen, since those were in abundance in the 2290s.
quote:What if they seperate? And don't tell me they do it the Constitution way: 'Eject and forget'. In 200 years they didn't learn how to build a ship with the ability to seperate
...well they also didnt learn that seatbelts are pretty important and perhaps getting a bunch of fuses on the bridge consoles might be a safe investment too!
Buzz
-------------------- "Tom is Canadian. He thereby uses advanced humour tecniques, such as 'irony', 'sarcasm', and werid shit'. If you are not qualified in any of these, it will be risky for you to attempt to decipher what he means. Just smile and carry on." - PsyLiam; 16th June
Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged
![[Confused]](confused.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Mad]](mad.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic
