Trek Ponderings

I believe it's mentioned somewhere (probably the TNG Technical Manual, as that's where a lot of my early trek lore was gleaned from) that this general configuration of hulls and nacelles worked well to produce a stable and efficient warp field. Clearly it isn't the only viable configuration, but it was a particularly optimal one, at least for larger starships.

I think the division into two hulls was essentially considered a safety feature, allowing for the possibility of separating the most densely-populated section of the ship from the engines and nacelles in the case of critical failure - a quicker and less drastic option than a full-scale evacuation.

That becomes a minor plot point in Star Trek Beyond, when the Enterprise's 'neck' is severed just below the saucer section's detachment point, and the saucer section's independent propulsion systems won't kick in because it still thinks it's linked to the engineering section.

The original reason for the separate warp nacelles design was simply because Gene wanted something that did NOT look like a flying saucer or a conventional rocket - which were the two tropes found in existing science fiction to that point. Why were they originally so detached from the ship on thin pylons? No reason. Reasons were retconned later and were hardly consistent. Having the primary hull able to separate and even land was indeed an included concept of the original Enterprise design. It was simply never mentioned and never actually USED on the show because they couldn't afford ANYTHING. Every planet they visited (except Earth) was the same planet - just given a different color filter. I heard once that even the location where phaser fire and torpedoes originated on the hull was incorrect, but they never changed it because they didn't want to spend the money or just couldn't afford to even if they did. They re-used those shots through the whole original series. Even the transporters, IIRC, were a gimmick to avoid having to spend money on model shots of SHUTTLING people to and from planets or other ships - I mean, why even have a HUGE shuttle bay and a squadron of shuttles if you have transporter technology?

Only the fans really wanted or needed explanations for why why why after the original series was over and done. There really weren't any explanations to begin with because that wasn't the kind of show that Gene had been trying to run. It wasn't about the technology, ships, and general hardware - it was about the advancements (or lack thereof) of humanity, contrasted with alien societies and thus providing commentary on what was the current, actual human condition. Explanations for how and why things worked the way they did, or were configured as seen on the show were almost all retconned. Some explanations were clever, some were pretty simple to come up with, some were pretty dang lame.

But we're nerds and nerds love theses bits of things that honestly don't matter lol and we love to argue about them.

The "in-universe" explanations have been mentioned already, I think.

The nacelles are seperated from the rest to minimize the crew's exposure to their dangerous radiation.

The Voyager's nacelle were moving because by altering the position of the nacelles they managed to lower the damage of warp engines to subspace. (That they only have two positions makes little sense and can only be blamed on the CGI/SFX limits)

I don't remember any explicit explanations for the typical hull/saucer split in canon or licensed products, but if I had to guess - the other risk factor of these ships is the matter/anti-matter warp core. If it blows up, it's devestating. So being able to keep some distance between the core and the main quarters might have been deemed desirable.

Classes like the Intrepid and the Sovereign might have been designed with such a strong need for seperation, since the warp core ejection mechanism had become more effective. The Galaxy Class had such a mechanism, too, but it proved insufficient in at least two on-screen examples (more if we count alternate timelines), while we have examples of sucessful ejections for the Voyager and the Sovereign. (Though in case of the Sovereign, it was not under immediate need for the origina purpose.)

We have to conclude that by the time the Defiant was build, the problem of the radiation wasn't as big. Though we also have to remember the Defiant was a "special" ship - designed as prototype for a fleet of anti-Borg ships. It wasn't intended for long range / deep space operations, so if the radiation exposure of the crew was a bit higher than normal might have been acceptable.
The ships would probably only be manned temporarily, and the ship wasn't going to do any 5-20 year long exploration missions into deep space. The entire design was based on cramming everything you need to deliver combat power with the least amount of resources expended.


The meta reason is of course that the original creatores wanted a unique design that didn't look like something we already had. And it seems they basically approached it from the idea that the silhouette needs to be recognizable.

Water Bob said:

Just wondering...

Why does the federation use the two-hull design so often? Why do almost all of the Federation ship designs use a circular hull?

Voyager is a bit of a meld, but you can still see the influence of the primary and secondary hull, even if the primary hull is more tear shaped than oval.

DS9's Defiant comes to mind as the only major starship design I can remember in all of Trekdom that went with a completely different hull design.

And, back to Voyager...why is there two position for the warp nacelles? One is for cruising position, the other for warp...but why not just have the nacelles angled up for warp at all times, like most other Starfleet ships?

Another thought: Why are the warp nacelles on ships projected away from the ship? I've heard/read that it's necessary to create the warp field around the ship. And, I think I read, years ago, that its because of radiation--that they have to be some distance from the hull to protect the crew.



Thoughts? Other questions?

Click to expand...

The two hull approach is used by the Federation because the possible threat of an unstable warp core breach (due to damage etc) could quickly destroy the ship,
The crew move to the saucer section, and it separates from the rest of the hull on impulse drives, leaving the warp core to explode etc,

The nacelle geometry is set to create a warp bubble around a ship, it can be internal like with the Defiant (which is done so mostly to protect the drive system)
The variable geometry of voyages nacelles is due to the old warp drive damaging the fabric of space, It's more eco friendly,

I always thought that a "warp field" had to have two parallel axes for stability - to actually get where you wanted to go - and the engines did something that would look like a DNA helix in 4D, but is flat and straight in 3D. Not that I gave the physics and pseudo-physics a lot of thought. I was in grade school when I began watching Star Trek in reruns (and was too young to watch original broadcasts).

The warp field looks more like the lines of force on a magnet, (and yes you tend to need two nacelles, (Gene said you always needed two))

also see, alcubierre drive,

DeltaEcho said:

(and yes you tend to need two nacelles, (Gene said you always needed two))

Click to expand...

Eh. The original Star Fleet Technical Manual from 1975 has the Saladin- and Hermes- class ships (a destroyer and scout, respectively) each with only one nacelle. So, if Gene said that at one time, they chose to ignore it soon afterwards. In later canon, there's the Freedom-class and ships like the movie's Kelvin (whose class name has not been made canon, as I recall), also with only one nacelle.

also see, alcubierre drive,

Click to expand...

Except, of course, that Trek starships were devised in the 1960s, and Alcubierre came up with his solutions to general relativity in 1994. Alcubierre was inspired by the term "warp drive" used in the show, but that doesn't mean that the ships in the show are configured in such a way as they'd actually be using Alcubierre drives.

Overall, the spacetime distortion required for an Alcubierre drive doesn't really look much like a magnetic field. They both have an axial symmetry, but the resemblance largely ends there.

Umbran said:

Eh. The original Star Fleet Technical Manual from 1975 has the Saladin- and Hermes- class ships (a destroyer and scout) each with only one nacelle. So, if Gene said that at one time, they chose to ignore it soon afterwards. In later canon, there's the Freedom-class and ships like the movie's Kelvin (whose class name has not been made canon, as I recall), also with only one nacelle.

Click to expand...

I think I have read Gene saying that, too. But, this was a long, long time ago, probably before TNG. Things change.

Umbran said:

Eh. The original Star Fleet Technical Manual from 1975 has the Saladin- and Hermes- class ships (a destroyer and scout, respectively) each with only one nacelle. So, if Gene said that at one time, they chose to ignore it soon afterwards. In later canon, there's the Freedom-class and ships like the movie's Kelvin (whose class name has not been made canon, as I recall), also with only one nacelle.

Click to expand...

There are many single nacelle ships in Star Trek,
I doubt that manual was canon, (well, as much canon as star fleet battles is...)

Umbran said:

Except, of course, that Trek starships were devised in the 1960s, and Alcubierre came up with his solutions to general relativity in 1994. Alcubierre was inspired by the term "warp drive" used in the show, but that doesn't mean that the ships in the show are configured in such a way as they'd actually be using Alcubierre drives.

Click to expand...

Missing the point, point being the theoretical science behind something like warp drive, is valid,

Umbran said:

Overall, the spacetime distortion required for an Alcubierre drive doesn't really look much like a magnetic field. They both have an axial symmetry, but the resemblance largely ends there.

Click to expand...

No, in the show warp drive looks like the lines of force on a magnet,