StarDestroyer.Net BBS

I know this has damn near been run into the ground but I came across this while reading Memory Alpha:

In 2365, the safety of the Galaxy-class, in particular its warp propulsion system, came into question when the USS Yamato was lost in a mysterious accident near the Romulan Neutral Zone claiming the lives of all personnel and their families. The ship had experienced massive system-wide failures which eventually led to a loss of antimatter containment. Further investigation by the Enterprise-D revealed the malfunctions were the result of an Iconian software transmission and not a design flaw inherent to the ship. (TNG: "Contagion")

Emphasis mine. I read that statement there at the end and guess everyone just forgot entirely about the numerous other issues involved with the destruction of the Galaxy class later on, including the fact that if you even tap the nacelles with a hammer too hard, they go boom.

Seriously, did they just brush all of it under the rug and blame the Iconians?

As you say... those happened later on. Not sure why you think they should me mentioned there?

Also not sure why everyone thinks that smacking the bit of the ship of ship that actively fucks with space-time should be no big deal.

It's not so much the smacking into it thing that worries me, it's just that we already saw something rather more catastrophic happen, and it wasn't the end of the world.

When the nacelle was blown off the Reliant.

I don't know whose idea it was, but I mean, it makes sense. If the nacelles were that damned sensative, then every tactical officer would be trained to fire on the nacelles. Because I mean, let's just take a look at that a moment. The nacelles are always mounted on the edges of the ship, they're just out there in the open, and they're nice juicy targets for anyone to take a potshot at. I know they fuck with space-time, but there should be SOME precautions involved with using them.

Baffalo wrote:It's not so much the smacking into it thing that worries me, it's just that we already saw something rather more catastrophic happen, and it wasn't the end of the world.

When the nacelle was blown off the Reliant.

I don't know whose idea it was, but I mean, it makes sense. If the nacelles were that damned sensitive, then every tactical officer would be trained to fire on the nacelles. Because I mean, let's just take a look at that a moment. The nacelles are always mounted on the edges of the ship, they're just out there in the open, and they're nice juicy targets for anyone to take a potshot at. I know they fuck with space-time, but there should be SOME precautions involved with using them.

Getting it's nacelle blown off was pretty much the death knell of the Reliant. Though it didn't directly cause it to go kaboom, I admit. Some possibilities:

1) Starfleet designers were idiots during the TNG era for no reason. (the old SDN favourite)
2)TNG warp drives are much more powerful than TOS ones. And much more reliant on warp power over impulse. This makes them more vulnerable to warp nacelle damage. But is seen as the price of doing business. (theory I just made up)

The nacelle fixation is odd especially with the increasing number of species even in TOS that don't use them. (First Federation, Tholians, spring to mind) Possibly it is the most efficient set up and that's the federation's building priority.

As for taking potshots at them, you posted the example of exactly that happening. When Sulu has his choice of targets on an unshielded ship, blowing off a nacelle in on the list.

but really once's you've got past the shields landing a hit anywhere is very bad news for the target. (see Generations) So you don't need to go to the trouble of targeting the nacelles. Weapons power just outstrips hull durabillity by so much yo have ot have shield to defend yourself.

Though the one ship I'm aware of canonically being armoured in the TNG period: The Defiant. Does have redesigned nacelles to keep them close in and armoured.

The fact that the Federation uses warp nacelles, but they are fairly rare on other cultures' ships (seriously, the only two I can think of off the top of my head are the Klingon Vor'cha and the Romulan D'deridex has those two nacelles although it doesn't have a warp core), is obviously an out-of-universe design decision for the simple fact that similar environments produce similar configurations. Space is going to work the same way no matter who's flying around in it.

That said, conceivably different cultures are using different sets of math to accommodate their various designs, or they accept inefficiencies in order to accomplish certain parameters. For example the Klingon Bird of Prey has its warp... thingies inside its hull for more protection (and then it still has those silly wings, but at least if it loses a wing, it's *probably* not going to explode). The Romulans use a singularity core on the D'Deridex, but it still has warp nacelles (according to Memory Alpha), so the nacelles there are performing some function that's not related to the warp core itself-- presumably the same thing that Federation nacelles do, likely the type of core is the only real difference.

MA also notes that Jem beetle-fighters have warp nacelles too. I suppose I'll have to revise 'fairly rare'. Possibly after first contacts with the Federation a number of alien races decided to adopt the nacelle configuration in favour of increasing warp efficiencies?

Anyway. They stick out there. They're fairly vital to the operation of the ship at FTL. So they're a fairly obvious target. Which begs the question of why they don't protect them a little more...

Anyway. They stick out there. They're fairly vital to the operation of the ship at FTL. So they're a fairly obvious target. Which begs the question of why they don't protect them a little more...

Perhaps a comparison with modern warships would be in order. Even the old battleships with their foot-thick armor plating still had the rudders and propellers out there in the water and totally unarmored. While a hit on the rudders was going to be really hard to pull off, it DID happen and the results were frequently bad (take the Bismark as the most obvious example). But why were they out there with no protection? They needed something to drive them through the water and control the ship.

So perhaps the nacelles need to be exposed to provide optimum performance. The alternative would be like the BoP where it's inside the hull, comparable to the modern Virginia-class submarine which uses a pump-jet instead of a traditional propeller.

Elheru Aran wrote:The fact that the Federation uses warp nacelles, but they are fairly rare on other cultures' ships (seriously, the only two I can think of off the top of my head are the Klingon Vor'cha and the Romulan D'deridex has those two nacelles although it doesn't have a warp core), is obviously an out-of-universe design decision for the simple fact that similar environments produce similar configurations. Space is going to work the same way no matter who's flying around in it.

That said, conceivably different cultures are using different sets of math to accommodate their various designs, or they accept inefficiencies in order to accomplish certain parameters. For example the Klingon Bird of Prey has its warp... thingies inside its hull for more protection (and then it still has those silly wings, but at least if it loses a wing, it's *probably* not going to explode). The Romulans use a singularity core on the D'Deridex, but it still has warp nacelles (according to Memory Alpha), so the nacelles there are performing some function that's not related to the warp core itself-- presumably the same thing that Federation nacelles do, likely the type of core is the only real difference.

MA also notes that Jem beetle-fighters have warp nacelles too. I suppose I'll have to revise 'fairly rare'. Possibly after first contacts with the Federation a number of alien races decided to adopt the nacelle configuration in favour of increasing warp efficiencies?

Anyway. They stick out there. They're fairly vital to the operation of the ship at FTL. So they're a fairly obvious target. Which begs the question of why they don't protect them a little more...

Which does beg the question.

Why not have a backup warp nacelle (located behind a dozen feet of hull) that would allow the ship to have warp capability (albeit reduced) in case the main exposed nacelles are damaged or destroyed?

Given what we've seen, taking extensive damage to a nacelle is basically a game-over anyway. It's not a matter of "oh noes we no longer have a functioning warp drive" it's "oh fuck, we've taken catastrophic damage and we're running for the escape pods."

Eternal_Freedom wrote:Given what we've seen, taking extensive damage to a nacelle is basically a game-over anyway. It's not a matter of "oh noes we no longer have a functioning warp drive" it's "oh fuck, we've taken catastrophic damage and we're running for the escape pods."

Which, again, begs the question of why they're not better protected. If they're that vital... why put them way out in the open like that, big fat juicy targets that are a significant portion of your ship's size? Just doesn't make sense.

Presumably there is some physical or engineering constraint that makes it optimal or most effecient. Starfleet, designing ships for exploration, is more interested in efficiency rather than protection.

Indeed, the non-canon novel Federation features Cochrane looking at a schematic of the E-Nil and remarking it's an optimal design, then looks at Klingon D-7 battlecruisers and says they clearly traded maximum efficiency for combat capability, small target profile etc.

Elheru Aran wrote:

Eternal_Freedom wrote:Given what we've seen, taking extensive damage to a nacelle is basically a game-over anyway. It's not a matter of "oh noes we no longer have a functioning warp drive" it's "oh fuck, we've taken catastrophic damage and we're running for the escape pods."

Which, again, begs the question of why they're not better protected. If they're that vital... why put them way out in the open like that, big fat juicy targets that are a significant portion of your ship's size? Just doesn't make sense.

And Again: The primary defence mechanism of ships is bubble shields which protects all the ship. When the shields go down you're essentially screwed where ever they hit you.

eta: Is this really a big as deal as people are making it out to be? I can only think of two times in all of canon where the nacelle thing comes up: The Reliant in TWoK and Cause and Effect. And of those is the standing example of 'well it shouldn't be a big deal'. So one incident among hundreds of episodes...

Am I missing any? There's Nemesis where a chunk of blown up warbird collides with the E-E's nacelle. And it's no big deal because the shields are up...

Baffalo wrote:It's not so much the smacking into it thing that worries me, it's just that we already saw something rather more catastrophic happen, and it wasn't the end of the world.

When the nacelle was blown off the Reliant.

I don't know whose idea it was, but I mean, it makes sense. If the nacelles were that damned sensative, then every tactical officer would be trained to fire on the nacelles. Because I mean, let's just take a look at that a moment. The nacelles are always mounted on the edges of the ship, they're just out there in the open, and they're nice juicy targets for anyone to take a potshot at. I know they fuck with space-time, but there should be SOME precautions involved with using them.

The fact that not every tactical officer is trained to fire on the nacelles should show you that your logic is faulty.

Could it be that there were special circumstances in TNG: "Cause and Effect" that were not present when the Reliant's nacelle was blown off?

Crazedwraith wrote:Am I missing any? There's Nemesis where a chunk of blown up warbird collides with the E-E's nacelle. And it's no big deal because the shields are up...

Two I can recall off the top of my head. The first is in The Search for Spock, where a torpedo hit to the Enterprise's unshielded warp nacelle doesn't cause any obvious structural damage, but causes catastrophic damage to the ship's systems (though that's largely because of Scotty's jury-rigged automation). The second is in Star Trek Into Darkness, where the Vengeance blows the hell out of one of the Enterprise's nacelles at warp, which violently knocks her back into sublight speeds but doesn't seem to cause any other major damage in of itself.

DaveJB wrote:

Crazedwraith wrote:Am I missing any? There's Nemesis where a chunk of blown up warbird collides with the E-E's nacelle. And it's no big deal because the shields are up...

Two I can recall off the top of my head. The first is in The Search for Spock, where a torpedo hit to the Enterprise's unshielded warp nacelle doesn't cause any obvious structural damage, but causes catastrophic damage to the ship's systems (though that's largely because of Scotty's jury-rigged automation). The second is in Star Trek Into Darkness, where the Vengeance blows the hell out of one of the Enterprise's nacelles at warp, which violently knocks her back into sublight speeds but doesn't seem to cause any other major damage in of itself.

The E-D in Generations and the Odyssey in The Jem'Hadar both suffered repeated hits to their nacelles without catastrophic damage.

Elheru Aran wrote:

Eternal_Freedom wrote:Given what we've seen, taking extensive damage to a nacelle is basically a game-over anyway. It's not a matter of "oh noes we no longer have a functioning warp drive" it's "oh fuck, we've taken catastrophic damage and we're running for the escape pods."

Which, again, begs the question of why they're not better protected. If they're that vital... why put them way out in the open like that, big fat juicy targets that are a significant portion of your ship's size? Just doesn't make sense.

From an OOU perspective, original design conventions required the assumption that nacelles need be to paired and have at least 50% unobstructed space between themselves in order to generate a warp bubble. That's why the D'Deridex was shaped like it is as well. That convention was abandoned, but given that designs with a nacelle placement including uninterrupted space between them are extremely common (if not exactly ubiquitous) across starship designs of multiple species, at the expense of more structurally sound design conventions, I think we can use that bit of knowledge to assume it provides some benefit in terms of engine speed or efficiency.

This conjecture is further supported by official statements regarding the "variable geometry" nacelles on Voyager. That is supposedly to minimize subspace distortions caused by warp drives, what I like to think of as the starship equivalent of a catalytic converter.

I think we can use that bit of knowledge to assume it provides some benefit in terms of engine speed or efficiency.

That probably makes the most sense, that having multiple nacelles is most efficient. There must be some reason though why ships were built with a single nacelle, such as the New-trek Kelvin-class. Cost, maybe?

FireNexus wrote:From an OOU perspective, original design conventions required the assumption that nacelles need be to paired and have at least 50% unobstructed space between themselves in order to generate a warp bubble. That's why the D'Deridex was shaped like it is as well. That convention was abandoned, but given that designs with a nacelle placement including uninterrupted space between them are extremely common (if not exactly ubiquitous) across starship designs of multiple species, at the expense of more structurally sound design conventions, I think we can use that bit of knowledge to assume it provides some benefit in terms of engine speed or efficiency.

This conjecture is further supported by official statements regarding the "variable geometry" nacelles on Voyager. That is supposedly to minimize subspace distortions caused by warp drives, what I like to think of as the starship equivalent of a catalytic converter.

If memory serves, Matt Jefferies also designed the original Enterprise under the assumption that the nacelles contained not only the warp coils, but the M/AM reactors as well, so that they could be quickly jettisoned in case of an emergency. However, that bit of info was never stated on-screen in TOS, and when TMP (which had a different production designer) came around, they switched to having the warp core located in the central part of the engineering hull, which became the standard approach on all future Trek productions.

EDIT: As an aside, whereas a lot of the early GCSes blew up real good, the prototype USS Galaxy was still in active service as late as the events of Nemesis (18 years after being commissioned if you believe the TNG Tech Manual), despite the fact that it took a major ass-kicking in an episode of DS9. It's enough to make you wonder whether Starfleet made cutbacks on the next few Galaxies for whatever reason, only to reinstate the original design once it became clear that the Yamato subclass tended to blow up in people's faces. Either that or the Galaxy just got lucky.

Well, the Enterprise D lasted until it got the shit kicked out of it (essentially unshielded) by a hostile. The Odyssey got shellacked by a similar problem plus a ship of comparable size ramming directly into the stardrive section at high impulse. For all the act of plot near warp core breeches, the only time we see them blow up is when they are getting attacked by enemies that bypass their shields.

If anything, the issue with the Yamato highlights a need for better computer task/permission isolation - allowing some foreign task to simply infiltrate every computer system is ludicrous. That, and the active nature of the Galaxy's safety systems are what doomed them - if the Yamato had a passive safety system, they'd simply be adrift due to the Iconian software, instead of dead...

It's not a design issue, but it's something that's always bugged me. Why USS Yamato? The other ships of the class have names associated with exploration in some way: Galaxy, Enterprise, Odyssey, Venture, Challenger...so naming one of the class Yamato seems really out of place.

Isn't Yamato an ancient name for Japan?

Purple wrote:Isn't Yamato an ancient name for Japan?

Indeed it is.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UcIDRl9OakI

The Yamato's destruction was one of my favourite effects in TNG. It was far more than your typical ship explosion - the blast threw the saucer section entirely clear with some debris actually hitting the E-D. You can see the hull of the saucer section beginning to peel away but it's slow enough to give the impression that some of the Yamato's crew might just make it, especially because the scene briefly cuts to the E-D bridge crew. However, the camera quickly goes back to the view screen and we witness the rest of the upper hull peeling away, random energy burst going about, and the rest of the hull superheated. And as it slowly drifts away, its clear that no one could have survived.

The irony of course Donald was absolutely right - the Galaxy-Class should have gone threw several more design reviews as accidents like this one (and many others like it) were entirely preventable had any sane engineer been at the drawing board. Too bad no one ever actually follows up on that.

That being said, as ridiculous as the cause of the explosion ended up being I thought the scene was well done, and a hell of an opening act.

biostem wrote:If anything, the issue with the Yamato highlights a need for better computer task/permission isolation - allowing some foreign task to simply infiltrate every computer system is ludicrous.

If computer security is that easy, please tell me how it is possible that so many companies and even public authorities are getting hacked?

How is it possible that a South Korean Nuclear Power Plant was Hacked?

How is it possible that US power plants are 'vulnerable to hacking'?

How is it possible that The Stuxnet Attack On Iran's Nuclear Plant Was 'Far More Dangerous' Than Previously Thought

Reading what you have written, it seems as if it were so easy.

biostem wrote:That, and the active nature of the Galaxy's safety systems are what doomed them - if the Yamato had a passive safety system, they'd simply be adrift due to the Iconian software, instead of dead...

Could it be that they have a reason for the active nature of the Galaxy's safety systems?

Imagine a passive safety system had ejecteded the warp core when the magnetic containment field started to deteriorate and a containment breach was imminent while the Enterprise was still inside the Spacedock of starbase 47 in the TNG episode "11001001".

Or imagine a passive safety system had ejected the warp core when the Enterprise lost power in the orbit of Delphi Ardu IV in the TNG episode "The Last Outpost"

Or imagine a passive safety system had ejected the warp core after the Enterprise was hit by the quantum filament in the TNG episode "Disaster".

Or imagine a passive safety system had ejected the warp core after all main systems went down in the vicinity of the temporal distortion in the TNG episode "Cause and Effect"

Or imagine a passive safety system had ejected the warp core when the power levels dropped under a certain point in the TNG episode "Booby Trap"

Or imagine a passive safety system had ejected the warp core when the interphasic parasites contaminated a conduit causing a malfunction of the warp core in the TNG episode "Phantasms"

Or imagine a passive safety system ejects the warp core in the middle of a battle because the ship gets a good shaking and is damaged.

Or imagine a passive safety system ejects the warp core in orbit around a inhabited planet due to any problems.

Baffalo wrote:It's not so much the smacking into it thing that worries me, it's just that we already saw something rather more catastrophic happen, and it wasn't the end of the world.

Well actually we don't know it was more catastrophic.

In Cause and Effect (CaE):
You have two charged rods, sliding against each other for a considerable length - about 1/3 to 1/2 of the length of each naecelle.

This seems to cause an internal explosion which shatters all the "see-through" (? whatever that gap is that turns blue) material, but does not blow up the ship.

Plasma leaks then started occurring all over the warp systems. They attempted a "core shutdown", which was unsuccessful.

The Naecelle that was hit explodes, throwing the Enterprise out of control in a spiral pattern.

Then when trying to eject the core, the "ejection system's offline".

A few seconds later, the other naecelle explodes, even though it suffered no visible damage. A fraction of a second later, the warp core explodes, destroying the ship completely.



My version: The warp systems were running along at whatever it is they do. One of the naecelles had some sort of charge problem - the rubbing of the two together - and we know that it causes things with magnets and electricity and charged streams in real life.

The naecelle exploded and because they couldn't shut down the warp core, all that energy meant for two naecells is now dumped into one. This runs for a bit but overheats and explodes.

With no where to shunt the energy, the warp core overloads, like a balloon with too much air in it.



In TWOK, a naecelle is destroyed, by an antimatter explosion. There is nothing talking about the warp core overloading or being unable to shut down or maybe it was just a completely different design?