Go Back   Star Trek Online > Information and Discussion > Ten Forward
Login

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 11
06-04-2012, 08:49 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sovereign001 View Post
I'M GIVING EVERYTHING SHES GOT SIRRR!
MAN 'TH HARPOONS!!! THAAARRRR SHEEEE BLOOOWS!!!!!!!
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 12
06-05-2012, 06:31 AM
Two words: Fluidic. Space.

All ships seem to have no problems cutting through fluidic space, and with power boosted to the Structural Integrity Field I'm pretty sure the starships will be able to handle the pressures at depth. The only issue would be the massive displacement caused by the larger ships.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 13
06-05-2012, 08:36 AM
There is already a lot of evidence to support starships being water capable. Leaving aside the obvious fluidic space one:

Evidence
  1. They are airtight, They also have airlock capabilities similar to ships of our era.
  2. Almost all ships, even the ancient Bajoran sublight ship, can be equipped with anti-grav capability and have Structural Integrity Fields. They can clearly negate any kind of issues with displacement or pressure from depth that affects dive depth in submarines today.
  3. It's been established that forcfields can replace glass, are able to withstand significant abuse, and can hold large tanks of water effortlessly.
  4. Starship shields are able to withstand severe punishment from things far worse than water pressure and are built for the hazards of space.
  5. Deflector dishes are capable of providing additional protection. These were originally designed to protect a star ship from colliding with small particles what would destroy the ship instantly. This is a far more difficult task than holding back some water.
  6. Starship engines are capable of working in an atmosphere, meaning they can act like physical propulsion engines which work under water.
  7. Star ships are self contained, so they don't rely on anything externally available to function (i.e. diesel engines on subs require them to surface or use a snorkel). So there is no danger of flooding their propulsion system or anything that would cause the ship to break down.

Conclusion
Voyager's bubble shields will allow it to stay dry under water, at least at shallow depths. It's hard to say for sure how deep the bubble shield could go, but I would guess based on the technology of our era vs. depicted on screen Voyager can dive deeper than any vessel of our time. Even if the bubble shield didn't hold, combinations of structural integrity, forcefields, and hull plating means it will have no trouble surviving.

As for shuttles, the same as above would apply here as well. Smaller ones might have to specially fitted for the environment as we do with modern subs and aircraft. But it was obvious shuttles (not Fed ones though) had the ability to go under water in Enterprise, so adapting the technology wouldn't be far fetched.

Propulsion would be a non-factor given the number of different environments where it is clearly able to function. And warp drive is far more powerful than anything we are using today.

So in short, yes they can without question.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 14
06-05-2012, 09:32 AM
Isn't that what seaquest was? Star trek under water, or at least trying to be? Still though it would be a great featured series as well as a good use for the environmental suits as well.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 15
06-06-2012, 08:18 AM
was gonna state before the post above that starships are air tight, meaning they can survive space, they can survive water without any trouble. but there are themal limits to even subs, so working on the tech factor, even starships have thermal limits that they can not withstand very cold conditions for too long or gravity for very long if it was travelling to the deepest area on earths ocean, it may implode crushing everything and everyone onboard. considering water is on the surface on the planet and there are several layers and then the core, starships can not withstand it forever obviously.

the original answer is yes, they can fly in space without springing a leak, then it can survive water.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 16
06-06-2012, 10:34 AM
Under Earth gravity, every 33 ft you descend you are subjected to an additional 1 atmosphere of pressure. This should prevent any spaceship from descending underwater to any significant depth, unless they are built with massively over-engineered hulls.

Even submarines with 6-inch pressure hulls and reinforcing ribs every foot or so rarely can operate below about 1000 ft.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 17
06-06-2012, 12:48 PM
This sounds like the sort of thing in the DO NOT section of the user manual. Right in between inviting Orion women up onto the bridge and beaming objects into the warp core.

Just because something can survive in a vacuum does not mean it can survive under pressure. Under water a balloon just shrinks. In space it'll explode. In fact, things built specifically to operate in a vacuum, to contain pressure, like a spacecraft, would be terrible at resisting forces from the outside. The one thing Starfleet and its contempary vessels have going for them in that regard is that they're all armored, built to resist heat and kinetic forces, survive atmospheric entry, so maybe a case can be made for them operating under pressure. They do it in gas giants, or a sun's corona, with varying degrees of success. But I don't think those really compare to what you're thinking of...

Even if you can keep the engines going under water (Shields seems like a bad idea. Anything that can keep out countless tons of water, will also bounce back your impulse exhaust, negating any inertia you'd gain, and slowly cooking you in the process. In space you can build in a week spot for exhaust. Underwater, that's called a leak.), raising the ship up from any depth requires a lot more force than just taking off from the ground, and that required force increases with depth. Just because it can do the first thing, doesn't mean the second thing is likely to be part of the design specs. So while I might be able to believe some landing capable Starfleet ships surviving/hiding underwater, beyond a certain (probably not very deep) depth, it's probably not coming up again.

As for fluidic space, I like to think that fluidic space doesn't have a 'down'. No central source of gravity that all of fluidic space is rushing toward, and crushing your ship against. Basically the equivalent of a massive and really, really dense nebula. In that case pressure wouldn't really be that much of a factor there.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 18
06-06-2012, 01:47 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Xautos
was gonna state before the post above that starships are air tight, meaning they can survive space, they can survive water without any trouble. but there are themal limits to even subs, so working on the tech factor, even starships have thermal limits that they can not withstand very cold conditions for too long or gravity for very long if it was travelling to the deepest area on earths ocean, it may implode crushing everything and everyone onboard. considering water is on the surface on the planet and there are several layers and then the core, starships can not withstand it forever obviously.

the original answer is yes, they can fly in space without springing a leak, then it can survive water.
The problem isn't a matter of being air tight. Obviously they have that covered.

The real problem is that star ships are designed to keep air in, not to keep water out. They are designed to withstand weapon hits, but not for constant pressure beyond one atmosphere (if that) and constant higher gravity.

Most star fleet ships cannot land. This suggests they would have considerable difficulties under water. Shields are designed to keep the ship together, not to keep constant pressure out, and we know that gasses can permiate shields, so liquids may well be able to as well.

I also wouldn't want to be in the ocean anywhere near where the shield and water interact. I doubt it would be a good place to be.

So some ships might be able to handle it. Most would likely not.

Fluidic space is an interesting situation. Since the entire dimension seems to be fluid, it is not clear what the pressure situation is or how gravetic effects work. If it extends far enough that you are effetively 'near the center' no matter where you are, it might even function similar to a dyson sphere, with the gravity (and thus the pressure) offsetting in all directions.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 19
06-06-2012, 04:40 PM
I am glad that I opened this thread and found at least a couple posts pointing out that a hull fit for travel in a vacuum is not the same as a hull designed for travel under pressure while submerged.

There is evidence to show even a large ship can fly in an atmosphere, though. Clearly shuttles, runabouts, and fighters can. The Intrepid can -- it even landed -- without issue, and apparently the Galaxy can (it landed, too, but, eh.. haha, not quite by choice). So maybe if the shields were rigged to create a pocket of air around the ship to let it "fly" through the water, perhaps that would work.

But realistically I personally think it would be stupid for any large ship to operate anywhere within the atmosphere.


Also I take anything done in Voyager with a grain of salt, as that show kind of bugs me with BS (though to be fair most what bugs me is Janeway's fault).
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 20
06-06-2012, 09:21 PM
i dont see why not thats what shields are for also they need to suck in air so why not as for pressure they handle stars ok so water would be easy
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 01:07 AM.