Captain
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 1,063
# 21
03-11-2014, 07:58 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by disposeableh3r0 View Post
I think the reason for the 3rd necelle was that in the episode it appeared it could do warp 14. so the third necelle is supposed to be somehow related to this higher warp capacity. Since the art department was just gluing things on the origional model I imagine it made sense and looked cool to them at the time and no real technomagic reason was given.
And I'm not denying that. However, the Pasteur had two nacelles and still made warp 14. While it is arguable that the nacelles in the Galaxy class might be regarded as 'underpowered' in this context, I would think that it would be a lot easier to put updated nacelles (or at least warp coils) on than build an entire infrastructure for a third nacelle.


Quote:
Originally Posted by disposeableh3r0 View Post
Warp propulsion in startrek functions similarly to nuclear power in the modern navy.

A nuclear reactor produces heat, that heat is then used to boil water and create steam pressure. That steam pressure is then used to drive a turbine, and that turbine drives either your propulsion directly or creates electricity to drive an electric motor.

I would imagine that a warp propulsion unit behaves in a similar fashion, so the necelle is just the motive portion of the system and it would stand to reason that the more necelles you have the more capeable your propulsion system is.
This has been often said to be rather untrue. The TNG Technical Manual flat-out states that early experimentation showed that two nacelles were the optimal configuration for efficiency and stability. Furthermore it has long been a general Star Trek rule that nacelles should only be run in pairs, along with a few other rules (e.g. relating to line-of-sight). While some of these have been pretty badly violated, nacelles are generally shown to run in pairs. So far as I know, almost all canon or semi-canon designs have 1, 2 or 4 nacelles, with the 1-nacelled ships being EXTREMELY rare.

As per the propulsion angle, warp travel is much less associated with general propulsion (push in the direction you want), and instead reshapes a small portion of reality in a manner that allows the ship to travel in a particular direction. As such, the paramount concern is the geometry of the warp bubble and how it relates to both subspace and standard spacetime.

Quote:
Originally Posted by disposeableh3r0 View Post
In the case of a warp field this may mean that you can run your necelles at lower than peak output individualy but achieve the same overall output allowing you to run them longer at a higher speed than with fewer necelles.

In the case of 4 necelle ships I have seen it stated that these ships only run their necells in pairs but can switch between them at will to facilitate longer duration high warp travel, I don't remember where I saw this but I believe it was a non canon source.
The DS9 tech manual mentions specialized courier ships optimized to go at high speeds for long duration. These were suggested to be ships with two warp systems mounted, which would mean two warp cores and four nacelles alternating. This would presumably give warp 9.9+ for days or weeks at a time, whereas most Trek ships seem to have their 'maximum speed' rated at the highest speed the ship can safely tolerate for 12 hour stretches, with occasional bursts significantly above that.

However, the idea of having the different nacelles simply "take over" like that is a bit difficult to buy. This is because the ship is designed to optimize the warp field. In fact, I think in some semi-canon sources, the stardrive section of a Galaxy class by itself is significantly less efficient at warp without the saucer, because the warp drive was optimized for the larger profile to shape the warp field around. I'm not sure if that affects maximum warp or not, but the reason we've seen steadily more streamlined ships, aside from RL tastes for design style, is because they're becoming more efficient at using the ship's hull to shape a warp field for maximum safety, speed and efficiency.

Simply put, the geometry just doesn't cut it elegantly, and while it may be possible to brute force it, it still seems inefficient and suboptimally effective. There are also other factors in play, such as synchronizing three nacelles instead of two, which is of vital importance because without it one half of the ship is going at a different warp than the other half and results in, as the TNG manual puts it, "linear dissociation," which is not a term you want to hear in an engineering report, I imagine.
Starfleet Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 1,618
# 22
03-11-2014, 10:42 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by red01999 View Post
And I'm not denying that. However, the Pasteur had two nacelles and still made warp 14. While it is arguable that the nacelles in the Galaxy class might be regarded as 'underpowered' in this context, I would think that it would be a lot easier to put updated nacelles (or at least warp coils) on than build an entire infrastructure for a third nacelle.




This has been often said to be rather untrue. The TNG Technical Manual flat-out states that early experimentation showed that two nacelles were the optimal configuration for efficiency and stability. Furthermore it has long been a general Star Trek rule that nacelles should only be run in pairs, along with a few other rules (e.g. relating to line-of-sight). While some of these have been pretty badly violated, nacelles are generally shown to run in pairs. So far as I know, almost all canon or semi-canon designs have 1, 2 or 4 nacelles, with the 1-nacelled ships being EXTREMELY rare.

As per the propulsion angle, warp travel is much less associated with general propulsion (push in the direction you want), and instead reshapes a small portion of reality in a manner that allows the ship to travel in a particular direction. As such, the paramount concern is the geometry of the warp bubble and how it relates to both subspace and standard spacetime.



The DS9 tech manual mentions specialized courier ships optimized to go at high speeds for long duration. These were suggested to be ships with two warp systems mounted, which would mean two warp cores and four nacelles alternating. This would presumably give warp 9.9+ for days or weeks at a time, whereas most Trek ships seem to have their 'maximum speed' rated at the highest speed the ship can safely tolerate for 12 hour stretches, with occasional bursts significantly above that.

However, the idea of having the different nacelles simply "take over" like that is a bit difficult to buy. This is because the ship is designed to optimize the warp field. In fact, I think in some semi-canon sources, the stardrive section of a Galaxy class by itself is significantly less efficient at warp without the saucer, because the warp drive was optimized for the larger profile to shape the warp field around. I'm not sure if that affects maximum warp or not, but the reason we've seen steadily more streamlined ships, aside from RL tastes for design style, is because they're becoming more efficient at using the ship's hull to shape a warp field for maximum safety, speed and efficiency.

Simply put, the geometry just doesn't cut it elegantly, and while it may be possible to brute force it, it still seems inefficient and suboptimally effective. There are also other factors in play, such as synchronizing three nacelles instead of two, which is of vital importance because without it one half of the ship is going at a different warp than the other half and results in, as the TNG manual puts it, "linear dissociation," which is not a term you want to hear in an engineering report, I imagine.
All valid points but most of the sources mentioned were either already considered obsolete, I.E. the line of sight and 2 necelle rule were genes rules and he broke them quite often, most notably the federation class dreadnaught (as it was to appear in the motion picture so he directly signed off on it). Or were written after the fact.

And for fun the gal x necelles do have line of sight.

Also the necelles we see are merely housings for warp fied projectors, who is to say each necell doesn't contain a pair of these projectors. In reality while we may see 2 or 3 necells there may be 4 or 6 actual propulsion units installed.

Really tho techno babble asie alot of these ships were built from spare parts and were only to appear on screen in the background or just look future familiar for a short time.

There may be no reason for these things to exist other than it was what they had at the time.

I remember talk of one class of ship thats necelles were actually highlighters.

I do wish we has something else to put on that pylon just for varietys sake, I also with I gould have the galaxy necells with the venture neck, as it is the necell and neck are one piece.
Actualy reading things pefore posting will make you look smarter than yelling loudly. Reading comprehension is aparently a lost art.

Not everything you see on the internet is true - Abriham Lincoln
Captain
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 1,127
# 23
03-11-2014, 11:21 PM
funny you say that the DS9 manual mentions this on some of the one nacelle ships it shows. they have 2 sets of warp coils in one housing
Starfleet Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 1,618
# 24
03-11-2014, 11:34 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by gpgtx View Post
funny you say that the DS9 manual mentions this on some of the one nacelle ships it shows. they have 2 sets of warp coils in one housing
Does it? Well that makes necelles in general make more sense.
Actualy reading things pefore posting will make you look smarter than yelling loudly. Reading comprehension is aparently a lost art.

Not everything you see on the internet is true - Abriham Lincoln
Starfleet Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 314
# 25
03-12-2014, 10:07 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by gpgtx View Post
funny you say that the DS9 manual mentions this on some of the one nacelle ships it shows. they have 2 sets of warp coils in one housing
Doug Drexler made a comment once that suggested this was the case with the Galaxy-X. The third nacelle had two sets of coils mounted in it. So in theory of the two original nacelles burnt out, the third would be used as a spare tire to get the vehicle to a safe port of call. Not very efficient, mind you. But let's face it, with a hundred year trip at sublight being your only other option, warp 5 doesn't look quite so terrible.
Vice Admiral Corris Sprint (@sprint01)
Commanding Officer - 26th Fleet [RP]
Star Trek: Praetorian Official Website
Commander
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 484
# 26
03-13-2014, 01:57 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by disposeableh3r0 View Post
I remember talk of one class of ship thats necelles were actually highlighters.
That would be the Cheyenne Heavy Cruiser.
Weyland-Yutani Joint Space Venture - Always open to new members!

My name is Rage, and I too support a revised Galaxy family.
Quote:
Originally Posted by khayuung View Post
Firstly, be proud! You're part of the few, the stubborn, the Federation Dreadnought Captains.
Captain
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 2,027
# 27
03-13-2014, 02:34 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by gpgtx View Post
funny you say that the DS9 manual mentions this on some of the one nacelle ships it shows. they have 2 sets of warp coils in one housing
True. I think the reasoning was that the Galaxies' nacelles housed two warp coils each (which was also an advancement over previous ships), equaling four. With the third nacelle they would be six.

Though the "spare warp coil" aside, the thrid nacelle doesn't make much sense in treknobabble, really. It was just to look futuristic and cool. On my character I use a Venture with Galaxy nacelles and pylons which means the third nacelle is looking different from the others which makes it better in my opinion. I'd also go for a Nebula mission pod, doesn't look too bad.
-> STO players unite and say NO to ARC <- -> Click if you prefer the old forum design! <-
-----------------------------------------------------------------
"No. Men do not roar. Women roar. Then they hurl heavy objects... and claw at you." -Worf, son of Mogh
Starfleet Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 1,618
# 28
03-13-2014, 07:12 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by angrytarg View Post
True. I think the reasoning was that the Galaxies' nacelles housed two warp coils each (which was also an advancement over previous ships), equaling four. With the third nacelle they would be six.

Though the "spare warp coil" aside, the thrid nacelle doesn't make much sense in treknobabble, really. It was just to look futuristic and cool. On my character I use a Venture with Galaxy nacelles and pylons which means the third nacelle is looking different from the others which makes it better in my opinion. I'd also go for a Nebula mission pod, doesn't look too bad.
There was also starship creator which featured an option for a 4 nacelled version.

http://www.geocities.ws/nkeck98/gal.html


Ahhh '98 gfx.
Actualy reading things pefore posting will make you look smarter than yelling loudly. Reading comprehension is aparently a lost art.

Not everything you see on the internet is true - Abriham Lincoln
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 203
# 29
03-13-2014, 01:57 PM
I just don't understand this topic. Its the Galaxy Dread. and thats what it looks like. If you don't like it fly something else. Cryptic doesn't need to start wasting time or resouces on every little cosmetic thing that someone doeasn't like.
Captain
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 2,027
# 30
03-14-2014, 12:43 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by disposeableh3r0 View Post
There was also starship creator which featured an option for a 4 nacelled version.

http://www.geocities.ws/nkeck98/gal.html


Ahhh '98 gfx.
Yeah, there is also a blueprint of that version floating around somewhere. It completely insane, yet if I'm honest, I think it looks better than the thrid middle nacelle - would love an option on the dread

EDIT: This one, although I'd prefer the nacelles turned like the starship creator model you linked.
-> STO players unite and say NO to ARC <- -> Click if you prefer the old forum design! <-
-----------------------------------------------------------------
"No. Men do not roar. Women roar. Then they hurl heavy objects... and claw at you." -Worf, son of Mogh

Last edited by angrytarg; 03-14-2014 at 12:50 AM.
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 06:58 AM.