Why does each race's warships look different?

[Stark]

That is pretty lame - almost as lame as silly 'warp drive' stuff going FTL using wiggly blue lights.

Or is warp drive totally ok, but the fictional rules governing its operation not ok?

[Baffalo]

The fuck? They're lowered to a less 'streamlined' position when the warp core is running at idle? How do you 'streamline' a starship operating IN SPACE?

subspace quantum

Part of me wants to argue on behalf of writers with no scientific background writing for a technology-based television series, but at the same time I can't consciously do so because they wrote themselves into the corner and used technobabble to get back out by ripping out the wall and hoping no one notices the cheap plaster they throw up to try and cover up the damage.

Of course part of the problem is people who already have a hard enough time wrapping their minds around concepts such as astrophysics, but then tackling something as complicated as quantum physics is like a child learning how to count to 100 handed a trigonometry test with multiple choice answers and told to make a perfect score. It can theoretically happen, but the odds are so low that you're better off walking outside with a long metal rod during a thunderstorm and hoping you survive.

If they left the entire thing vague and focused on something else, like keeping Janeway on a short leash and keeping her away from anything sharp or shooty, I'd be happy. Instead, they bend science over, rape it horribly, and don't even have the decency to give a reach around. Star Trek writers need to get off the high horse they somehow got up on and realize it's just a character development in space rather than character development on a planet. </rant>

That is pretty lame - almost as lame as silly 'warp drive' stuff going FTL using wiggly blue lights.

Or is warp drive totally ok, but the fictional rules governing its operation not ok?

Warp drive is fine. They've remained fairly consistent with the components, sort of like showing the audience a rifle over and over. Knocking the stock off and replacing it with a block of cheese will make a few people scratch their heads wondering what the hell happened. However, because the argument of HOW the rifle is fired (does the powder explode or just burn really fast?) they can skirt around the issue of how it works by giving a quick explanation or analogy, but because different people are writing on different days of the week and they don't leave each other notes, they just write what they want and keep going.

Subspace contradicts itself in how it works. Writing a theory to explain every oddity that appears in the show is impossible because it'd be the same as if you wrote 5 > 7. It's impossible to prove. Either you have an error somewhere or the theory itself is wrong. Subspace is just a dumping ground for the idiotic ideas the writers come up with. Like technobabble, it's a hole in the corner covered with cheap plaster.

[Stark]

That's fine, but one of their stupid ideas is warp streamlining. That's why Voyager looks so fucking stupid, for instance.

[Stofsk]

What came first, the stupid ship model or the stupid fluff rationalisation?

[Baffalo]

What came first, the stupid ship model or the stupid fluff rationalisation?

According to Memory Alpha, they sketched out the ship first and then built the rest of the ship around that. It's not a bad idea, but that means they had the chance to keep it simple.

[Gandalf]

I kept waiting for that to be a plot point.

"We've broken one of the hinges on the warp nacelles. We need to [SOMETHING] or we'll never get home!"

[Stofsk]

What came first, the stupid ship model or the stupid fluff rationalisation?

According to Memory Alpha, they sketched out the ship first and then built the rest of the ship around that. It's not a bad idea, but that means they had the chance to keep it simple.

...Yeah I was joking buddy. Rhetorical question.

[Alyeska]

The thing about Voyager and its "variable geometry engines" was added very late into the design. They had the original Intrepid concept, then it got scratched after the design was publicized. Then they built the new Intrepid concept. After that someone thought it would be very cool to have hinged engines and that got added in even later.

[Baffalo]

I bet the guys over at ILM got a kick out of that.

"We're almost done with that new Star Trek model right?"
"Yeah just about done... which is why Berman sent over a new design."
"Again? That bastard can't make up his mind now can he?"

[CaptainChewbacca]

I'm enjoying this thread, but I have a question: Don't Cardassian and Ferengi warships not have nacelles? I seem to remember them having just rear mounted glowing engines, no nacelles at all.

[CaptHawkeye]

I've always been confused as to when warp drive and warp power became the same thing. In TOS they talked about the engine core a lot but do they ever necessarily refer to it as a "warp core"? When was the concept of a "core" even introduced?

[Baffalo]

I'm enjoying this thread, but I have a question: Don't Cardassian and Ferengi warships not have nacelles? I seem to remember them having just rear mounted glowing engines, no nacelles at all.

The image shows lights on the tips of their little 'wings', so I think that's their nacelles, just incorporated into the hull.

I've always been confused as to when warp drive and warp power became the same thing. In TOS they talked about the engine core a lot but do they ever necessarily refer to it as a "warp core"? When was the concept of a "core" even introduced?

Apparently the idea of a "core" was there from the beginning, incorporated into the set but looking like a set of engines arranged horizontally. From what I read about the design of the Enterprise initially, the entire ship model was supposed to be saucer down with the main hull up above, and the two nacelles were supposed to be massive rocket engines, not much different from the Buck Rodgers era.



They changed the set, but not that much. Here's the redesigned set.



In 1977, Roddenberry began playing around with a new series, and wanted to bring back the Trek crew from before. Called Star Trek: Phase II, they actually built a few sets but it went nowhere, later becoming Star Trek: The Next Generation a few years later. Some of the sets built already were a great influence on the TNG sets, as seen by a few of the images from the partially built Engineering set.





And then in 1987 we see TNG come out and we see our pretty warp core for the first time in its current vertical configuration

[El Moose Monstero]

Didn't we see a core in the Wrath of Khan? I can't remember and don't have the discs to hand, but wasn't there some sort of tall core like unit in main engineering during the inspection or something?

[CaptHawkeye]

We saw it in TMP too but it didn't really demonstrate many of the characteristics of a TNG-era warp core. Scotty I don't think ever referred to the Constitution Refit engine as a warp core either.

It also was substantially less likely to encounter a breach or runaway reaction. When Khan did a drive-by on the Enterprise's engine section all it did was destabilize the reaction which led to it failing. Scotty later had to disable the warp core entirely but not because it was going to blow, because it was spreading radiation all over the secondary hull.

The impression I get though is that Federation ships during the TOS era were woefully underpowered. It may be a matter of perspective but I don't think we ever saw the Consitution/Reliant/Excelsior class vessels of the era pulling the same maneuvers as a Galaxy and especially Sovereign could.

[Uraniun235]

The Enterprise sets built for the first four movies were just about all scavenged and redressed for TNG. Even the general floor plan of the soundstage remained largely intact. The movie bridge became the TNG Battle Bridge (and also just about any other bridge needed for a non-Enterprise ship), Engineering was rearranged, the corridors got new paint, the transporter room was reused, and I think Sickbay was also largely reused. The TNG Main Bridge was a wholly new construction, as was Ten Forward (which would later be redressed as the President's Office for Star Trek 6).

[Uraniun235]

In order: the floorplans for Stage 9 as it existed for TMP, and later TNG:

[Baffalo]

I keep trying to pull up the TNG budget but for some reason, Paramount hasn't released that kind of data. I found the budget for TOS ($200,000), but nothing about TNG. Considering how they recycled everything, it was probably very low. Which is surprising considering that TMP had a budget of $46 million and pulled in $136 million, which showed there was a definite Star Trek fanbase. What I find odd is how much they trimmed the budget for Wrath of Khan, only $11 million and pulling in a respectable $97 million. Of course, then we had Search for Spock, which had a slightly bigger budget of $16 million and it still pulled in $87 million. Given this, it's probably no surprise that the guys at Paramount wanted to keep the budget low in case Roddenberry's latest venture didn't do so hot. They were probably still banging around when Voyage Home came out and shattered the record, but meh.

I guess the argument could probably be made that Paramount was scared of using a crew other than Kirk and crew. Remember, it was Kirk and crew that was planting asses in seats, so throwing them out and bringing in a new crew was a risky gamble. I remember my parents telling me they didn't want to watch TNG because it wasn't Kirk and crew, only coming around later. So... take that how you will.

[Baffalo]

In case you guys haven't seen this, I found this blog called Forgotten Trek full of concept art and background info. Pretty good. That's where I found the pictures for Phase II's engineering set.

I think tng had about $1M / episode; pretty good shit.

I keep trying to find budgets for TV shows from 1987 for comparison, but finding ANY budget is a pain in the ass. I understand some companies would want to keep their budgets a secret for competitive reasons, but come on! It's been 24 years.

[Skylon]

The impression I get though is that Federation ships during the TOS era were woefully underpowered. It may be a matter of perspective but I don't think we ever saw the Consitution/Reliant/Excelsior class vessels of the era pulling the same maneuvers as a Galaxy and especially Sovereign could.

Didn't the Ent-Nil engage in combat at warp speed during the course of TOS? Something we never saw a TNG era ship do.

The Enterprise sets built for the first four movies were just about all scavenged and redressed for TNG. Even the general floor plan of the soundstage remained largely intact. The movie bridge became the TNG Battle Bridge (and also just about any other bridge needed for a non-Enterprise ship), Engineering was rearranged, the corridors got new paint, the transporter room was reused, and I think Sickbay was also largely reused. The TNG Main Bridge was a wholly new construction, as was Ten Forward (which would later be redressed as the President's Office for Star Trek 6).

And ironically engineering, the transporter room and corridors continued to serve as the Ent-A in the last two TOS films. Engineering I believe was heavily redressed for Voyager and was determined structurally unstable and struck after that show finished production. Sickbay also carried over to Voyager, hell, I think it was even used for Enterprise, in which case they got a ton of mileage out of that set.

[Stofsk]

The impression I get though is that Federation ships during the TOS era were woefully underpowered. It may be a matter of perspective but I don't think we ever saw the Consitution/Reliant/Excelsior class vessels of the era pulling the same maneuvers as a Galaxy and especially Sovereign could.

Didn't the Ent-Nil engage in combat at warp speed during the course of TOS? Something we never saw a TNG era ship do.

The Enterprise did indeed engage in combat at warp speeds as well as impulse. The show also implied it could do some heavy manoeuvring. I blame it on Wrath of Khan and the rest of the TOS films for showing the Enterprise as a slow ass ship.

[Uraniun235]

I keep trying to pull up the TNG budget but for some reason, Paramount hasn't released that kind of data. I found the budget for TOS ($200,000), but nothing about TNG. Considering how they recycled everything, it was probably very low. Which is surprising considering that TMP had a budget of $46 million and pulled in $136 million, which showed there was a definite Star Trek fanbase. What I find odd is how much they trimmed the budget for Wrath of Khan, only $11 million and pulling in a respectable $97 million. Of course, then we had Search for Spock, which had a slightly bigger budget of $16 million and it still pulled in $87 million. Given this, it's probably no surprise that the guys at Paramount wanted to keep the budget low in case Roddenberry's latest venture didn't do so hot. They were probably still banging around when Voyage Home came out and shattered the record, but meh.

I guess the argument could probably be made that Paramount was scared of using a crew other than Kirk and crew. Remember, it was Kirk and crew that was planting asses in seats, so throwing them out and bringing in a new crew was a risky gamble. I remember my parents telling me they didn't want to watch TNG because it wasn't Kirk and crew, only coming around later. So... take that how you will.

I remember running into an article... ah, here we go:

According to an LA Times article, "Paramount decided to sink a reported $1.3 million per episode into production--a sum equal to or beyond the cost of most one hour prime-time network programs."

Paramount did not cheap out at all on TNG, nor is 'recycling everything' an indication that they had no money. Any studio is going to look to save money where possible. Also remember that television accounting and movie accounting may vary somewhat, which might make it easier for a movie budget to absorb large set construction costs than for a television budget to do so.

Sets are expensive to build. So much so, in fact, that the arrival of Pegasus in neoBSG was only made possible by the failure of a Lost In Space reboot pilot and the cheap availability of the sets constructed for said pilot. If Lost In Space hadn't failed (or hadn't been attempted), we would not have seen Pegasus at all because the show producers felt they could not afford to build the sets for it.

[Baffalo]

I'm not balking at the $1.3M/episode price tag, I'm just saying that in comparison to the movies, it's relatively low per filmed hour. I'm going to lay it out by how much each minute cost in relation to the overall budgets.

The Motion Picture: $46M/132 minutes = $348,500/minute
The Wrath of Khan: $11M/116 minutes = $94,800/minute
Search for Spock: $16M/105 minutes = $152,400/minute
The Voyage Home: $21M/119 minutes = $176,500/minute
The Final Frontier: $28M/107 minutes = $261,700/minute
Undiscovered Country: $27M/109 minutes = $247,700/minute

Compared with 45 minutes for each episode of TNG, it comes out roughly to be $1.3M/45 minutes = $28,900/minute.

Now, a little explanation on why I pulled those figures up. Each of the movies was produced close to the time of TNG, so even the cheapest production, that of Wrath of Khan, had three times the budget and even then, they still had the sets from The Motion Picture. I'm just reinforcing the point here, but that's why I said they were 'cheap'. Compared to the movies, each minute of TNG was cheaply made, which is definitely a bonus for TV. Still, there are times you can see where the budget runs short. ILM models aren't cheap. Makes me wonder how much the cast and crew of the show were making and how much got left for set design and production.

[Elheru Aran]

Coming back to the warp nacelle thing... I always wondered just where the Klingon Bird of Prey's are. I'd say astride the wings, but no, that's a big-ass hinge section so they can go up and down... wings are too skinny, and I don't think they're under the main body of the ship... so they're inside the ship... like, where? They had to fit a bloody tank for humpback whales in there, after all!

[Uraniun235]

I'm not balking at the $1.3M/episode price tag, I'm just saying that in comparison to the movies, it's relatively low per filmed hour. I'm going to lay it out by how much each minute cost in relation to the overall budgets.

The Motion Picture: $46M/132 minutes = $348,500/minute
The Wrath of Khan: $11M/116 minutes = $94,800/minute
Search for Spock: $16M/105 minutes = $152,400/minute
The Voyage Home: $21M/119 minutes = $176,500/minute
The Final Frontier: $28M/107 minutes = $261,700/minute
Undiscovered Country: $27M/109 minutes = $247,700/minute

Compared with 45 minutes for each episode of TNG, it comes out roughly to be $1.3M/45 minutes = $28,900/minute.

Now, a little explanation on why I pulled those figures up. Each of the movies was produced close to the time of TNG, so even the cheapest production, that of Wrath of Khan, had three times the budget and even then, they still had the sets from The Motion Picture. I'm just reinforcing the point here, but that's why I said they were 'cheap'. Compared to the movies, each minute of TNG was cheaply made, which is definitely a bonus for TV. Still, there are times you can see where the budget runs short. ILM models aren't cheap. Makes me wonder how much the cast and crew of the show were making and how much got left for set design and production.

A couple of nitpicks:

- Not all $46 million "spent" on TMP was actually spent on TMP itself - a good chunk of it, like at least $10 million and perhaps closer to $15M, was spent on the aborted Phase II TV series that was being developed prior to it becoming a movie. This includes spacecraft models that had already been largely built and then abandoned because they were too low-quality to be suitable for use on the big screen, test photography, TOS costumes made for the cast (there's a picture of Persis Khambatta out there of her in a TOS skirt uniform), and story outlines and even a few scripts. That cost got folded into TMP for purposes of accounting. That said, a substantial amount of inflation occurred between TMP and TNG. $46 million in 1979 dollars would be roughly equivalent to $72 million in 1987 dollars.

- ILM only did the effects for Encounter at Farpoint. To my knowledge there were no other TNG episodes for which they were contracted.

[Stofsk]

ATTN: Uraniun

if there's a picture of Persis Khambatta in a TOS-era miniskirt uniform 'out there' maybe you could bring it 'in here'

i dunno i'm just sayin'