warp geometry

[Johnny7oak]

Warp field geometry is primarily about three things: 1)Deflector Field arc across hull, 2) Contain/constrain of field, 3) the thrust from the intertwined fields. THe Vulcan vessel is stream lined to spread the field in "warpfield dynamics" (sort of like aeronomics of the warp ship). The Enterprise (TOS) widens the field to encompass a large saucer section... the Kelvin shows thrust can be gathered from a partial field constrain in one nacelle... the constrain of field is possibly to spare resources and maybe allow for science to grab better readings inconjunction with warp

 

[C.E. Evans]

I've always felt that the deflector dish is really more useful at impulse than at warp, but I guess it depends if you believe a ship is traveling though subspace at warp or through regular space at warp (but surrounded by a subspace field).

 

[Johnny7oak]

Structural integrity field from aux computations keeps the ship in one piece... but the deflector is probably "pulsing" a field infront... I'll think about it some more... tc

 

[Go-Captain]

The field geometry concept I have is pretty straight forward. Ships either have wide front or rear field, or a balanced field. What determines that is fore and aft hull narrowness. I don't bother with side profile, only top-down profile since the latter is always more significant than the former.

The D'Deridex and Defiant have balanced fields. The Galor has a bow heavy field, but only a bit more than any Starfleet ship. Klingon ships have very narrow bows, and very wide tails.

7 of 9 states that mass negatively effects warp speed. A huge ship like the D'Deridex might be slower than the Enterprise-D due fewer watts per ton, or there could be some sort sort of non-linear relation between tonnage and warp factor.

Nacelle length doesn't matter except in regard to over all hull shape, and longer nacelles either influence the maximum ability to apply power to overcome hull limitations, or greater efficiency in extracting power from the warp plasma, or offers warp engines with longer life coils as each coil undergoes less stress with the load spread among more coils. Unfortunately these ideas are still awaiting confirmation or contradiction of fact from the shows or movies.

I think pointy and narrow geometries should be fastest, and the closest confirmation of this I have is in how the Defiant has a top speed of warp 9.5, and the Nova class has a top speed of warp 8. It's not perfect, but their volumes should be similar; on the other hand the Defiant is probably at least four times stronger. A further point against this is, the Defiant is noted as having structural integrity issues during warp flight, implying its engines are pushing too hard for the hull geometry, meaning its natural top speed might be lower than warp 9.5.

It also implies hull shape doesn't influence warp field geometry, but that hull shape only matters in regard to avoiding hull stresses.

 

[publiusr]

The ring ships are best long range. Nacelles let you turn easier--warp fields like tank treads.

 

[C.E. Evans]

The Intrepid-class could be a textbook example of how hull shape influences warp field geometry. When the nacelles draw inward, it does change the overall shape of the vessel. A case could be made that it also creates a different warp field geometry than it would have had with the nacelles down. Sort of like how variable geometry wings on some aircraft produce different aerodynamics when engaged.

 

[Go-Captain]

The Intrepid-class could be a textbook example of how hull shape influences warp field geometry. When the nacelles draw inward, it does change the overall shape of the vessel. A case could be made that it also creates a different warp field geometry than it would have had with the nacelles down. Sort of like how variable geometry wings on some aircraft produce different aerodynamics when engaged.

Voyager has always been an annoying example because it only ever adjusts its nacelles during warp initialization and always from the same position to the same position before moving at warp. My only conclusion so far has been that swinging the warp engines upward during warp engine power up somehow makes the sequence more efficient or something else. I don't think it makes it any faster and it should have no effect on anything which occurs once it is moving at warp, as no more visible adjustments are made.

This fits with the Bird of Prey ships, where their wings are only ever in one position for warp, despite a wide range of available angles.

 

[C.E. Evans]

Voyager has always been an annoying example because it only ever adjusts its nacelles during warp initialization and always from the same position to the same position before moving at warp. My only conclusion so far has been that swinging the warp engines upward during warp engine power up somehow makes the sequence more efficient or something else. I don't think it makes it any faster and it should have no effect on anything which occurs once it is moving at warp, as no more visible adjustments are made.

Actually, a case could very well be made that it does make the ship go faster--up to Warp 9.975. Bringing the warp nacelles closer would definitely produce a different warp geometry than if the warp nacelles stayed down, likely creating an even more streamlined warp envelope and a faster top speed than the design would otherwise have.

 

[Go-Captain]

Actually, a case could very well be made that it does make the ship go faster--up to Warp 9.975. Bringing the warp nacelles closer would definitely produce a different warp geometry than if the warp nacelles stayed down, likely creating an even more streamlined warp envelope and a faster top speed than the design would otherwise have.

But, if having the warp engines higher and at a angle is superior to other positions, it stands to reason keeping them in that position would be even better if for no other reason than superior mechanical simplicity.

Actually, it occurs to me that having the warp nacelles in the down position might aid impulse propulsion. Except, that is a baseless guess, even if the warp engines do provide motive force for the impulse system.

 

[C.E. Evans]

Actually, it occurs to me that having the warp nacelles in the down position might aid impulse propulsion.

We pretty much have to take this as a given, otherwise the Intrepid-class wouldn't have variable geometry nacelles. Some non-canon sources have proposed that the raised nacelle configuration was also more "environmentally friendly" to subspace and reduced the chances of subspace ruptures caused by high warp flight, but subsequent ships like the Enterprise-E and the Prometheus seem to suggest that environmental problem was fixed not long after the Voyager disappeared.

 

[Mytran]

Actually, it occurs to me that having the warp nacelles in the down position might aid impulse propulsion. Except, that is a baseless guess, even if the warp engines do provide motive force for the impulse system.

Given the teeny size of Voyager's impulse engines (and the inability of the Intrepid class to separate its saucer) I could argue that the job of a mass-reduction driver (specified in the TNG-TM as an integral part of the saucer's IE) is probably performed by the nacelles.

It's probably just more efficient for STL operations to have the nacelles in the "down" position compared to the "up" position, which is more efficient for warp.

 

[David cgc]

Do the bussard collectors work at warp speed? On the Intrepid, they're blocked in the raised position but unobstructed while horizontal. That might also be a consideration, if they mostly collect material at sublight (or if interstellar gas can be funneled around the primary hull by the warp field). It seems like a bigger factor to me than the impulse engines, which are right next to the axis of rotation on the pylons, so they move much less when the engines change position.

Though if the ramscoop having line-of-sight was really important, they could've fixed the engines upwards and put the scoop somewhere else on the ship, but then we get into the whole question of why are the ramscoops attached to the warp engines, and how it came to be decided that's what the red glowing parts were on the nacelles....

Rather than get into that rabbit hole, I'll just leave off that we can also invoke production limitations, and say the warp nacelles on Voyager "really" rotated into multiple positions depending on speed or spatial conditions, and it was only because of stock footage and such that it looked like there was just one "active" orientation.

 

[C.E. Evans]

Do the bussard collectors work at warp speed? On the Intrepid, they're blocked in the raised position but unobstructed while horizontal. That might also be a consideration, if they mostly collect material at sublight (or if interstellar gas can be funneled around the primary hull by the warp field).

I think the only times we've seen bussard collectors actively deployed in stories have been while ships have been moving at impulse (usually within a nebula or some region with high particle density). A reference book claimed that the collectors can be used at warp for emergencies, although it requires a reconfiguration of their systems.

 

[Ronald Held]

I would expect them to only work at impulse, not near lightspeed.

 

[Go-Captain]

We pretty much have to take this as a given, otherwise the Intrepid-class wouldn't have variable geometry nacelles. Some non-canon sources have proposed that the raised nacelle configuration was also more "environmentally friendly" to subspace and reduced the chances of subspace ruptures caused by high warp flight, but subsequent ships like the Enterprise-E and the Prometheus seem to suggest that environmental problem was fixed not long after the Voyager disappeared.

The warp pollution problem had to have been fixed far in advance of Voyager, as the speed limit was dropped only a few episodes after it was introduced. After that point they never ask for permission to use warp in excess of 5 like they were required at the end of the particular episode.

 

[Mytran]

I seem to remember the E-D still conforming to the Warp 5 limit in Generations, so not fixed straight away.

 

[Go-Captain]

I seem to remember the E-D still conforming to the Warp 5 limit in Generations, so not fixed straight away.

They used to cruise at 7, but I think they tended to cruise at 5 afterward but never asked for permission to go faster. Maybe you're right, maybe there was still an issue, but it couldn't have been as big a deal as they first suspected.

 

[C.E. Evans]

The warp pollution problem had to have been fixed far in advance of Voyager, as the speed limit was dropped only a few episodes after it was introduced. After that point they never ask for permission to use warp in excess of 5 like they were required at the end of the particular episode.

I seem to remember the E-D still conforming to the Warp 5 limit in Generations, so not fixed straight away.

Yeah, the Warp 5 speed limit was still in play during "All Good Things..." which took place only a few months before the Voyager disappeared. The behind-the-scenes rationale given for the Voyager's pivoting warp nacelles was that the Intrepid-class was a new "environmentally-friendly" design that could achieve higher warp factors without damaging the fabric of space like earlier designs did.

 

[Praetor]

IIRC, the real world reason for dropping the warp speed limit was that it hamstrung plots significantly.

 

[Nebusj]

IIRC, the real world reason for dropping the warp speed limit was that it hamstrung plots significantly.

I don't see how. What's the plot difference between ``set a course for Denobusous XII, warp seven'' and ``set a course for Denobusous XII, warp five''? If these were real places that would affect how much time the heroes should spend in transit, but since they're not the warp speed number is a meaningless label. It could even add to the sense of drama, in that here is a problem so serious it requires going past the speed limit.

I wonder if the limit might have lasted longer, in production, had it not got started with such an awful episode. Every time it got brought up it reminded folks of one of those episodes it was really best to just move past and not rub in the audience's faces.