Page 2 of 3

Re: A Question on the Phoenix

Posted: 2014-01-22 05:29pm
by Batman
Well we know that Warp capability doesn't need M/AM per se, when the Romulans were introduced to TOS they were said to be limited to 'impulse power' yet definitely Warp capable, and weapons grade fissionables should easily be able to fuel a fission reactor (given those are used to create the weapons grade stuff). Wether or not a single missile would contain enough fissionables to make that feasible I don't know.

And why would the Phoenix need inertial dampers? Unless the launch involved accelerations seriously in excess of what modern world space launches had (dubious as we're talking about a modified ICBM and I don't think the visuals disagree) the crew could easily just suffer through it like real-world astronauts did and the jump to Warp is a non-Newtonian maneuver so it's highly likely there are no g forces acting on the craft or crew.

Re: A Question on the Phoenix

Posted: 2014-01-22 06:13pm
by Lord Revan
IIRC only difference between weapons grade uranium and standard fuel rod uranium is enrichment state (weapons grade stuff is more enriched), so in theory you could run a nuclear power plant with weapons grade stuff but it's just more dangerous and needs better coolant and control

dunno about plutonium though.

Re: A Question on the Phoenix

Posted: 2014-01-22 06:45pm
by Eternal_Freedom
Having the fuel is fine, it doesn't explain how he managed to turn said warhead components into a functioning reactor. It's a lot more complicated than just having the fuel.

Re: A Question on the Phoenix

Posted: 2014-01-22 07:59pm
by biostem
Wait... don't you need tritium/deuterium for a fusion reaction? Did Cochran state he was using a fission reaction to power the phoenix? Also, I didn't notice a deflector dish of any sort on it - what did he use to keep dust particles or micro-meteorites away from the ship?

Re: A Question on the Phoenix

Posted: 2014-01-22 08:12pm
by Eternal_Freedom
The novel stated (as far as I can recall) he used the warheads. That suggests a fission reactor of some kind. Then again, modern nukes contain some tritium and lithium deuteride, so he may have extracted fusion fuel from that.

However, during their test flight, Riker clearly mentions "bringing the warp core online." Given that the warp core has only ever been described as a power source, not an essential part of the warp drive, it makes it even sillier to me.

Re: A Question on the Phoenix

Posted: 2014-01-22 08:42pm
by biostem
Eternal_Freedom wrote:The novel stated (as far as I can recall) he used the warheads. That suggests a fission reactor of some kind. Then again, modern nukes contain some tritium and lithium deuteride, so he may have extracted fusion fuel from that.

However, during their test flight, Riker clearly mentions "bringing the warp core online." Given that the warp core has only ever been described as a power source, not an essential part of the warp drive, it makes it even sillier to me.

Wait... I thought the M/AM reactor was the power source, and the Warp Reactor was powered by that, in order to produce the warp field necessary to go FTL...

Regardless, they still don't address the other required technologies - such as inertial dampeners, artificial gravity, FTL sensors of some sort, structural integrity, and the so-called "super alloys" necessary to withstand the stresses of FTL travel. Granted, it may be one of those things where regular titanium and steel are fine for warp 1 or so, and the stresses ramp up quickly as you go faster...

And while we're on the topic - do they ever address why no one on Earth has ever picked up, for instance, radio transmissions from an early Vulcan or Quo'nos?

Re: A Question on the Phoenix

Posted: 2014-01-22 08:48pm
by Borgholio
It's kinda confusing actually. On further research, it seems like the Phoenix DID use antimatter but with a nuke as a regulator instead of dilithium (how the fuck is THAT supposed to work)?

http://en.memory-alpha.org/wiki/Phoenix
At one point during the writing of First Contact, the writers of the film considered what might power the matter-antimatter reaction chamber aboard the Phoenix, in lieu of dilithium crystals. Co-writer Ronald D. Moore later recalled, "We had talked about it being from something modified from the thermonuclear warhead – that somehow setting off the fission reaction was what kicked it off." (Star Trek Monthly issue 45, p. 46)
I dunno, if it DID have antimatter, that just throws the whole thing into doubt. I agree it's a stretch just to have built the Phoenix so soon after WW3, but to include antimatter as well?

Hey we could always blame it on aliens...

Re: A Question on the Phoenix

Posted: 2014-01-22 08:55pm
by biostem
Borgholio wrote:It's kinda confusing actually. On further research, it seems like the Phoenix DID use antimatter but with a nuke as a regulator instead of dilithium (how the fuck is THAT supposed to work)?

http://en.memory-alpha.org/wiki/Phoenix
At one point during the writing of First Contact, the writers of the film considered what might power the matter-antimatter reaction chamber aboard the Phoenix, in lieu of dilithium crystals. Co-writer Ronald D. Moore later recalled, "We had talked about it being from something modified from the thermonuclear warhead – that somehow setting off the fission reaction was what kicked it off." (Star Trek Monthly issue 45, p. 46)
I dunno, if it DID have antimatter, that just throws the whole thing into doubt. I agree it's a stretch just to have built the Phoenix so soon after WW3, but to include antimatter as well?

Hey we could always blame it on aliens...

They should have just thrown in some line that they found this strange new element in a meteorite, (dilithium), which had the unique ability to regulate M/AM reactions, and that Lilly had helped setup a collider to collect AM over a series of months or so...

Or just say they powered the prototype via fission and be done with it... make some comment about it being at or near its maximum output to do so.

Re: A Question on the Phoenix

Posted: 2014-01-23 12:35am
by StarSword
biostem wrote:And while we're on the topic - do they ever address why no one on Earth has ever picked up, for instance, radio transmissions from an early Vulcan or Quo'nos?
I don't know about Qo'noS, but Vulcan's sun is 40 Eridani A according to statements by Roddenberry, and that's only sixteen light years from Earth. Couple that with some reasoning I borrowed from Randall Munroe here:
Randall Munroe wrote:The full picture is more complicated, but the bottom line is that as our technology has advanced, less of our radio traffic has been leaking out into space. We’re closing down the giant transmitting antennas and switching to cable and fiber and tightly-focused cell-tower networks.[2]

While our TV signals may have been detectable—with great effort—for a while,[3] that window is closing. In the late 20th century, when we were using TV and radio to scream into the void at the top of our lungs, the signal probably faded to undetectability after a few light-years.[4] The potentially habitable exoplanets we’ve spotted so far are dozens of light-years away, so the odds are they aren’t currently repeating our catchphrases.

But TV and radio transmissions still weren’t Earth’s most powerful radio signal. They were outshone by the beams from early-warning radar.[4]

Early-warning radar, a product of the Cold War, consisted of a bunch of ground and airborne stations scattered around the Arctic. These stations swept the atmosphere with powerful radar beams 24/7, often bouncing them off the ionosphere, and people obsessively monitored the echos for any hints of enemy movement. (I wasn’t alive during most of this period, but from what I hear, the mood was a little tense.)

These radar transmissions leaked into space, and could probably be picked up by nearby exoplanets[5] if they happened to be listening when the beam swept over their part of the sky. But the same march of technological progress that made the TV broadcast towers obsolete has had the same effect on early-warning radar. Today’s systems—where they exist at all—are much quieter, and may eventually be replaced completely by new technology.
We know from ENT: "Carbon Creek" that Vulcan ships were surveying Earth at least as early as 1957, giving us a date at which we know they had warp travel. I posit that, given that it would only take sixteen years for signals from Vulcan to reach Earth, humans simply didn't have powerful enough radio receivers during the time period that the pre-warp Vulcans were spamming the vicinity with radio traffic.

Re: A Question on the Phoenix

Posted: 2014-01-23 12:44am
by Flagg
I always just assumed the Phoenix used an advanced prototype fusion reactor to power a short warp jump. And that's what I'm going with.

Re: A Question on the Phoenix

Posted: 2014-01-24 01:20am
by Knife
Flagg wrote:I always just assumed the Phoenix used an advanced prototype fusion reactor to power a short warp jump. And that's what I'm going with.
Agreed. Proof of concept and disposable.
Biostem wrote: Wait... I thought the M/AM reactor was the power source, and the Warp Reactor was powered by that, in order to produce the warp field necessary to go FTL...
Plenty of races in the ST lore who do not use M/AM reactions for warp drive. There is no reason to believe antimater reactions are needed, just convenient for the Feds.
Regardless, they still don't address the other required technologies - such as inertial dampeners
Warp drive is supposed to... well warp space time around you to move, why would you need to dampen inertia when you are not moving? Space is moving around you, no you through it? It is very possible that technology isn't made yet.
artificial gravity,
If they had something that can dampen inertia and create anti gravity, there would be no reason to put the ship on a rocket. So, I'm going with the idea that those technologies are not created yet.
FTL sensors of some sort,
For what?
structural integrity,
It's called the hull.
and the so-called "super alloys" necessary to withstand the stresses of FTL travel.
Again, the whole idea of warp is to move space around you, so what stress?

Most of the things you mention above were never in TOS either. Most of that stuff is TNG stuff. You don't need most of that stuff to do a proof of concept even if it did exist. Cochrane wasn't trying to move to Alpha Centauri, he was seeing if his engine worked. My personal internal cannon has it that most of that stuff was 'discovered' later as they improved both their knowledge of warp drive and associated fields.

Re: A Question on the Phoenix

Posted: 2014-01-24 10:57am
by Prometheus Unbound
Borgholio wrote:It's kinda confusing actually. On further research, it seems like the Phoenix DID use antimatter but with a nuke as a regulator instead of dilithium (how the fuck is THAT supposed to work)?

http://en.memory-alpha.org/wiki/Phoenix
At one point during the writing of First Contact, the writers of the film considered what might power the matter-antimatter reaction chamber aboard the Phoenix, in lieu of dilithium crystals. Co-writer Ronald D. Moore later recalled, "We had talked about it being from something modified from the thermonuclear warhead – that somehow setting off the fission reaction was what kicked it off." (Star Trek Monthly issue 45, p. 46)
I dunno, if it DID have antimatter, that just throws the whole thing into doubt. I agree it's a stretch just to have built the Phoenix so soon after WW3, but to include antimatter as well?

Hey we could always blame it on aliens...
It can't be antimatter - that requires (in Trek) dilithium to work... which is not present in Earth's solar system...

Re: A Question on the Phoenix

Posted: 2014-01-24 11:13am
by Borgholio
It can't be antimatter - that requires (in Trek) dilithium to work... which is not present in Earth's solar system...
Dude, the writers themselves say it was antimatter. Thus, as implausible as it seems to us, it was antimatter...modulated somehow by a nuclear warhead.

Re: A Question on the Phoenix

Posted: 2014-01-24 11:58am
by InsaneTD
Do they ever mention why dilithium is needed/wanted? Does it help create a stable containment field, or keep the reaction stable over long periods?

Re: A Question on the Phoenix

Posted: 2014-01-24 12:26pm
by Borgholio
Dilithium is supposedly the one substance in the universe that is not instantly destroyed by contact with antimatter. They basically use it to "tune" the reaction between matter and anti-matter by converting the energy released into plasma that is then fed to the ship systems.

Re: A Question on the Phoenix

Posted: 2014-01-27 03:56am
by Prometheus Unbound
Borgholio wrote:
It can't be antimatter - that requires (in Trek) dilithium to work... which is not present in Earth's solar system...
Dude, the writers themselves say it was antimatter. Thus, as implausible as it seems to us, it was antimatter...modulated somehow by a nuclear warhead.
Is it stated in the final version? According to the transcript, the word "anti" is used only once - when picard is talking about not shooting the deflector dish because it's charged with anti-protons. Shortly before shooting the deflector dish to make a Borg fly into space.

It's Trek lore that antimatter warp drives need dilithium as a catalyst to the reaction.

Re: A Question on the Phoenix

Posted: 2014-01-30 01:32pm
by Flagg
Since ST Canon is still what's shown on TV and in the movies, and there was no mention of a warp core or antimatter whatsoever concerning the Phoenix...

Re: A Question on the Phoenix

Posted: 2014-01-31 01:09am
by Flagg
Btw, further evidence that the Phoenix had no Matter/ Antimatter reactor: if Zeke had just wanted to make a fuckton of money as he claimed, just building a working matter/ antimatter reactor would do the trick.

Re: A Question on the Phoenix

Posted: 2014-01-31 03:58am
by Prometheus Unbound
Exactly.

And doesnt riker say "bringing the warp coils online" not warp core?

Re: A Question on the Phoenix

Posted: 2014-01-31 08:16am
by Borgholio
No he said "Core". But a warp core doesn't have to be exclusive to matter / antimatter. I can't recall the source, but I read some back-story about early Warp drives being electrically powered by a fission or fusion reactor. Once antimatter production took off, they switched to that because it is (of course) far more powerful than either fission or fusion. I am curious how a non-antimatter warp core could generate warp plasma though...

Re: A Question on the Phoenix

Posted: 2014-01-31 11:55am
by StarSword
Borgholio wrote:No he said "Core". But a warp core doesn't have to be exclusive to matter / antimatter. I can't recall the source, but I read some back-story about early Warp drives being electrically powered by a fission or fusion reactor. Once antimatter production took off, they switched to that because it is (of course) far more powerful than either fission or fusion. I am curious how a non-antimatter warp core could generate warp plasma though...
Honestly the technobabble on the subject conflicts with itself so often that I'm inclined to consider the TNG TM the only really reliable source for the inner workings of the warp drive, despite its non-canon status.

Re: A Question on the Phoenix

Posted: 2014-01-31 08:03pm
by Batman
Except the TNG TM is virtually useless given that it provides nothing but technobabble on the subject.

Re: A Question on the Phoenix

Posted: 2014-02-02 05:34pm
by Prometheus Unbound
ok so:

technical manual is out
antimatter is not said in script
it's canon (somewhere?) that a matter/antimatter reaction as a fuel source requires dilithium
dilithium is not in our solar system

ergo, it was not antimatter powered.


Fusion it is.

Re: A Question on the Phoenix

Posted: 2014-02-02 05:58pm
by Batman
Err-no, fission it is, and as we've known since the Romulans made their debut in TOS that Warp doesn't require M/AM I completely fail to see the problem with that?

Re: A Question on the Phoenix

Posted: 2014-02-02 08:09pm
by Borgholio
I think it would be an interesting prequel to see the aftermath of WW3 and the construction of the Phoenix...with the movie ending as the rocket launches on its first flight.