quote:Gee, I dunno. Maybe from the fact that its impulse engine was designed to move 5 million metric tons of mass on its own, and with the saucer separated a wanking big part of that mass is missing?
Oh, god yes! Thank you for bringing the light to eyes, Woodside Kid! I mean, how foolish for me to make that statement and not back it up with anything! Oh wait, I did.
CaptainMike: I think less length is lost overall in seperation than half. After all, the cobrahead that's cutout from the saucer extends 3/4 of the way from the aft edge of the saucer to the center. But I also think that we're underestimating the maneuverability of this ship. I think parallels could be drawn with the supercruise liners that are in service today. Many of them are extraordinarily massive, but are surprisingly agile since they were designed with extra thrusters, more powerful engines, and new engine refinements to compensate.
Ritten: That's actually a very good point. I think the TNG Tech Manual says that the computer already does this, but that engine efficiency still suffers to a degree since the saucer was designed to aid in slipping into warp drive.
-------------------- The philosopher's stone. Those who possess it are no longer bound by the laws of equivalent exchange in alchemy. They gain without sacrifice and create without equal exchange. We searched for it, and we found it.
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
posted
That is what I was thinking of, the field is shaped for the saucer to be the point to break the barrier, with the saucer gone the computers should be able to generate a sharper field, to slip in to warp better.....
My thoughts anyhow....
Registered: Sep 2000
| IP: Logged
posted
Sounds right to me. As soon as the saucer separates, the Chief Engineer in the Battle Section tells the computer: "Delete warp dynamic v1.0. Load warp dynamic v2.0".
And yes, with the enormous mass of the saucer removed, the center of mass comes closer to the center of the Battle Section (I'm not sure how much - would depend on the mass of the saucer, and remember, much of the mass of the ship is in the warp core/antimatter pods/nacelles. This is referred to as the 'moment arm' in classic Newtonian physics.
-------------------- 'One man's theology is another man's belly laugh.' - Lazarus Long
Registered: Feb 2001
| IP: Logged
posted
Also extra room for scientific facilities, crew quarters, support facilities, sensors etc.
-------------------- "I am an almost extinct breed, an old-fashioned gentleman, which means I can be a cast-iron son-of-a-bitch when it suits me." --Jubal Harshaw
Registered: Feb 2002
| IP: Logged
posted
According to the TNGTM, the main impulse engine on the stardrive section provides more than sufficient power to accelerate the ship to about 0.75c, any more than that would likely require power from the saucer section. Considering normal operating speed is only around 0.25c, it seems that mass is not a big issue for the main impulse engine.
Of course, on their own, the separated saucer and stardrive sections could probably accelerate better and be more manuverable, it's just that their top impulse speed is reduced.
And then there's the bloody phaser thing...
"I'm hold them off with this pistol, while you runaway with the rifle." Yeah, sure.
-------------------- "God's in his heaven. All's right with the world."
Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged
posted
Its like if you and a friend are in the woods and come across an angry bear..... You don't need to out run the bear, just your friend.....
Then again, we would have seen a few more separations had the Warp section had had bigger guns....
-------------------- "You are a terrible human, Ritten." Magnus "Urgh, you are a sick sick person..." Austin Powers A leek too, pretty much a negi.....
Registered: Sep 2000
| IP: Logged
posted
Okay, Siegfried, let's look at your back-ups, shall we?
quote: The stardrive has one impulse engine and would need to depend a lot on its thrusters. Add the saucer section into the mix, and you have two additional engines that are in prime positions to add more thrust into turns than thrusters alone would allow. In addition, the saucer would bring its own thruster system which helps balance out the added mass of the saucer.
1) What other thrusters are we talking about here? Aside from the ones used in "Booby Trap", I don't recall the ship ever using another type of thruster.
2) If the saucer engines were so advantageous in maneuvers, why in 7 years of TNG were they only used when the saucer was separated? As far as I remember, the first time we ever saw the saucer engines used while a Galaxy-class was in one piece was during the Dominion war.
quote: There have already been good ideas presented for carrying the saucer. It has a massive shuttlebay that could carry several fighters. Plus, if we are to believe the DS9 Tech Manual is right about large internal portions of the ship being empty, then the bay could have been temporarily expanded.
This may surprise you, Siegfried, but I actually don't have much of a problem with this part. Always assuming, of course, that Starfleet doesn't have ships designed for fighter support available at the time.
quote:The many fusion reactors housed in the saucer can greatly augment the ship's power output. Plus, the main phasers of the Galaxy-class starship (based on the sheer number of times we've seen those fired over the other arrays) are on the saucer. The array on the dorsal surface of the stardrive doesn't look like it has the degree of range that the saucer's arrays have.
1) Would the fusion reactors put out enough power to equal the savings earned by not having to drag around a million or so tons of unnecessary mass? And would those reactors even be there if the hull is largely empty?
2) The phaser array on the head of the secondary hull doesn't need the degree of range of the saucer array. A large part of that array is there to allow the ship access to areas blocked by its own hull. Get rid of the saucer, and the three arrays on the battle head can cover the area quite nicely.
quote: Other benefit of having the saucer, if I remember the TNG Tech Manual correctly, then the Galaxy-class starship generates its most efficent warp fields while both sections are docked together.
Granted. And in the long run, on a multi-year mission, the energy savings would add up. However, in the short term, I think it would make more sense to simply produce the stardrive section. Devoid of the need to move the extra mass of the saucer (in either flight mode) and to power the saucer's systems, the stardrive section could devote its entire energy output to combat (which is the whole point of the saucer separation in the first place). Besides, if the whole point of an accelerated production schedule is to churn out ships for the war effort, why waste time and materials on something that's not absolutely necessary?
posted
I guess there could be two kinds of histories behind the creation of the Galaxy class:
1) Starfleet decides it wants more families in space. It needs to protect the families. Comes up with the idea of an evacuation section. Engineers tell the easiest way to do that is to adapt the saucer. Design proceeds, through minimal modifications to an originally non-separating (or at least non-reattaching) model.
Lots of vital stuff is left unmodified or poorly modified, so the ship is a cripple when separated. Stardrive section is not a good warship due to too short phaser strips and too little impulse power, and requires the things left in the saucer. Starfleet admits the shortcomings when forced to, abandons separated flight mode during late TNG.
2) Starfleet decides it wants to try separation/reattaching, since this has recently become a possibility. Invents a rationale for this afterwards: saucer becomes evacuation section, the rest becomes battle section. Neither of the parts is really designed with the mission in mind, but rather built to the exacting requirements of the separation/reattaching thing. Those requirements in fact dictate that the battle section is no good in battle and the evacuation section is no good in evacuation. Starfleet admits error in late TNG, discontinues the separate evac and battle missions.
Both histories would explain why stardrive sections aren't built separately - they aren't practical starships, having been hobbled by political decisions. They are merely "the half of a split Galaxy that's less poor in battle", not warships superior to, say, an intact Galaxy or an Akira or an Excelsior.
quote:1) What other thrusters are we talking about here? Aside from the ones used in "Booby Trap", I don't recall the ship ever using another type of thruster.
There are four RCS thruster units on the edge of the saucer section. Those are the little yellow-brown rectangular things. Other than "Booby Trap," we've never seen a thruster fire period although we've heard orders for them several times.
quote:2) If the saucer engines were so advantageous in maneuvers, why in 7 years of TNG were they only used when the saucer was separated? As far as I remember, the first time we ever saw the saucer engines used while a Galaxy-class was in one piece was during the Dominion war.
And that's the point. The Federation goes to war, and suddenly the Galaxy class starships are using all three sets of impulse engines. In wartime, the ship needs to be more maneuverable, so those engines were brought online. Hell, some of the Mirandas flew around with extra impulse engines, too.
quote:1) Would the fusion reactors put out enough power to equal the savings earned by not having to drag around a million or so tons of unnecessary mass? And would those reactors even be there if the hull is largely empty?
Temporary decking could be laid in place to keep the components from rolling around. The Galaxy class is 5 million metric tons. About half that is in the saucer... when the ship is completely outfitted to the standards in the TNG Tech Manual. If the vast majority of the saucer is empty, it wouldn't be adding as much mass as you think. I think that the output does justify it.
quote:2) The phaser array on the head of the secondary hull doesn't need the degree of range of the saucer array. A large part of that array is there to allow the ship access to areas blocked by its own hull. Get rid of the saucer, and the three arrays on the battle head can cover the area quite nicely.
Except for part of the area covered by the ventral saucer array. The large array on the stardrive's head is near the same orientation as the dorsal saucer array. The ventral stardrive array could compensate, but it's degree of range is severely limited due to its positioning.
quote:Granted. And in the long run, on a multi-year mission, the energy savings would add up. However, in the short term, I think it would make more sense to simply produce the stardrive section. Devoid of the need to move the extra mass of the saucer (in either flight mode) and to power the saucer's systems, the stardrive section could devote its entire energy output to combat (which is the whole point of the saucer separation in the first place). Besides, if the whole point of an accelerated production schedule is to churn out ships for the war effort, why waste time and materials on something that's not absolutely necessary?
Which is why I ended my original post with the opinion that in spite of some incentives for having the saucer section attached to the ship, the reality is that I doubt the make the need for the saucer absolutely necessary.
[ April 17, 2002, 10:38: Message edited by: Siegfried ]
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
posted
Hmm... As a matter of pure speculation, one wonders if later refits of the Galaxy could actually incorporate smaller nacelles that would deploy from the hull a la Prometheus, giving it limited warp capability. I'm a proponent of the notion that the Sovereign saucer would have a similar ability - it's simply too silly to leave a huge spacecraft full of people at the mercy of even the tiniest shuttles that have greater FTL power.
quote:Originally posted by Woodside Kid: 1) Would the fusion reactors put out enough power to equal the savings earned by not having to drag around a million or so tons of unnecessary mass? And would those reactors even be there if the hull is largely empty?
The main fusion reactors for the Saucer section are all part of the saucer's impulse drive. Believe me, I checked the blueprints, you'd think there'd be a lot more reactors placed around the saucer section, but there aren't. Not full sized ones anyways. As I said before, the main impulse engine on the stardrive section has no problem pushing the ship up to 0.75c, which is three times the normal operating speed. The power from the saucer's engines therefore can be completely devoted to other ship functions.
quote: 2) The phaser array on the head of the secondary hull doesn't need the degree of range of the saucer array. A large part of that array is there to allow the ship access to areas blocked by its own hull. Get rid of the saucer, and the three arrays on the battle head can cover the area quite nicely.
The Type-X phaser array depends heavily on the coupling effect to generate its full power, so the longer the strip, the more output. The saucer section actually has more than TWICE the phaser output of the entire stardrive section, plus enough juice from her reactors to run them for ~20min straight at full power. Plus, the single forward strip on the stardrive can at best engage only one opponent at a time with any sort of a respectable output, while a single phaser strip on the saucer can engage 4 or 5 enemies at once with more firepower.
Going into battle without the saucer section would be a distinct disadvantage.
-------------------- "God's in his heaven. All's right with the world."
Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged
posted
Mark, Peter David certainly believes so. He puts these pop-out nacelles onto the newest USS Excalibur, a Galaxy class vessel captained by his literary hero Mackenzie Calhoun. Now if he only hadn't insisted on one of those stupid suffix registries...
I guess warp coils could also be mounted internally if need be - the majority of alien starships seem to swear by this configuration. We could even assume that the saucers have always had internal warp engines. Perhaps that's what the blue glow at the aft rim of the saucer really is. What canonical references do we have to the theory that the saucer is limited to impulse speeds, anyway?
(Umm, "BoBW" might have some. But "Encounter at Farpoint" and things like "Arsenal of Freedom" would immediately become more logical if the saucer was indeed supposed to have warp drive.)
posted
The TNG TM says that the saucer is capable of impulse only. Some episodes says this as well. However Data once at Farpoint, that if the ship is at warp, and seperates, the suacer can sustain wapr, just not capable of going to warp by herself.
-------------------- Matrix If you say so If you want so Then do so
Registered: Jul 2000
| IP: Logged
posted
I can't see the Saucer going to warp by using the space-time drive coil from the Impulse engines... I think those things are too small to get it to warp. But like a torpedo, I think the saucer could possibly use the drive coil to sustain warp.
-------------------- Later, J _ _ _ _ _ ___ _ _ _ _ _ The Last Person to post in the late Voyager Forum. Bashing both Voyager, Enterprise, and "The Bun" in one glorious post.
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic
