The USS Enterprise: Just how practical?

[ZenGalacticore]

The Storm Troopers are random expendable henchmen.

I think it comes down to the subtle, and not so subtle differences between science-fiction vis-a-vis science-fantasy. I've quoted this before in a long, long ago thread, far, far away about the differences between the two. I don't know who originally said it, and neither did Rod Serling:

Science Fantasy makes the impossible possible, whereas Science Fiction makes the improbable plausible.

Roddenberry's Star Trek is fiction; Lucas' Star Wars is fantasy. Roddenberry tried to have a consistent, plausible technology within his created Universe; Lucas just made stuff up without worrying about technical details and logic. "She made the Kessel Run in less than 12 parsecs", for example, makes absolutely no sense.

And those Storm Troopers? Besides being an obvious referral to Hitler's minions, I take it one had to hit the troopers' armor in the joints with a blaster to be effective.

Btw, in the starship journey story I've been working on- it's a hydrogen fusion scoop ship- the scoop is the size of Texas and the ship itself is about 900 miles long. But don't confuse mass with size. It is made of materials 200 times stronger than steel and 10,000 times lighter.

If that sounds implausible, consider what Andrew Carnegie would have said about nano-carbon materials 130 years ago. It is set in the not-to-distant future, about 200 years from now, and the apogee of their voyage is only about 32 light-years. More H is obtained and directed toward the scoop with an artificially created magnetic vortex that extends several thousand miles in front of the scoop.

It's fun writing the story, but I tell ya, writing fiction, especially the characters and making them seem real, is very hard. And my captain always starts to seem like captain Kirk, and I have to go back and redo it. There's no warp drive or "lightspeed". The ship, however, attains a percentage of the speed of light. :ugeek:

 

[JasonChapman]

"who would win picture- empire versus federation"

Awesome! I get to repost a picture I made on the old forum, years ago!

Fullsize available here.

Oh, there is little doubt who would win....

(The ships represented are to scale. Standard "Enterprise D" versus an Imperial Super Stardestroyer. No contest, pick up the pieces and scraps of the Federation ships after it's done with them...

Oh, and in case anyone is interested, the Borg wouldn't fair too well either.

Full Size Available Here

Ok if you're going to get all geeky, It only took one Borg cube to put the willies up the federation when they captured Captain Picard 'TNG Best of Both Worlds' It only takes a few of those Borg to beam over to the death star and assimilate a few storm troopers, next thing you know you have ten thousand borg drones marching though the detention area of that death star. And since the storm troopers use particle based blasters, the Borg will have no trouble adapting.
The orginal Battlestar Rocks, as do the Cylon Basestars.
I almost forgot why I posted, check this out.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/8367081.stm

 

[bdewoody]

Even though this thread started out with a simple question about whether the Enterprise is a practical design it has now been hi-jacked by those who think that all that sci-fi is real. Who knows whether a star destroyer can defeat a Federation Starship. I can imagine the characters in the comedy series "The Big Bang Theory" sitting around for days debating the point.

Again my answer is that the "Enterprise" is highly impractical for a number of reasons but I love it anyway as it was my first visual contact with the concept of a big spaceship. After all in 1966 all we had were the little spheres the USSR was flying and the Gemini and Apollo capsules the USA was flying.

 

[ZenGalacticore]

Hey bwoody!! We don't think it's real. This is, after all, the Science Fiction Forum. We're just having fun. Remember fun?

 

[yevaud]

It's worth noting that Storm Troopers die a lot more readily than Clone Troopers do.

 

[a_lost_packet_]

..Ok if you're going to get all geeky, It only took one Borg cube to put the willies up the federation when they captured Captain Picard 'TNG Best of Both Worlds' It only takes a few of those Borg to beam over to the death star and assimilate a few storm troopers, next thing you know you have ten thousand borg drones marching though the detention area of that death star. And since the storm troopers use particle based blasters, the Borg will have no trouble adapting.

Rofl! GEEKFIGHT!

The orginal Battlestar Rocks, as do the Cylon Basestars. I almost forgot why I posted, check this out.

I love the original Battlestar Galactica. Awesome stuff. I also agree the old Cylon Basestars are more practical.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/8367081.stm

Neat! Take that nematodes! /phzzzzat!

 

[a_lost_packet_]

Even though this thread started out with a simple question about whether the Enterprise is a practical design it has now been hi-jacked by those who think that all that sci-fi is real. Who knows whether a star destroyer can defeat a Federation Starship. I can imagine the characters in the comedy series "The Big Bang Theory" sitting around for days debating the point...

Imagination is the key to creativity! After all, how many engineers owe their desire to become an engineer to Scotty from Star Trek? Bunches!

Yes, debating who would beat up who is kind of impractical. But, look at what JasonChapman came up with - Borg beams over to DeathStar and infects crew, DeathStar becomes Borg, end of story! Well, that's a well thought plan of attack. Maybe future space explorers should be particularly aware of the possibility of being assaulted not by beings in PVC armor but by nanobots?

Science Fiction is fun. It's exercise for the brain. You work within certain acceptable constraints (science as represented in sci-fi) and then come up with solutions.

 

[ZenGalacticore]

Even though counsel enjoys the Original Star Wars Trilogy, ie, Episodes IV, V, and VI, I have to say that it is true that all the Borg would have to do is get a hold of one Imperial computer or actual Storm Trooper, and the rest would be viral, computer, interaction of living matter and robot exponential history.

I hope they have General "SpacePattons" in the future to wage war on these things!

 

[bdewoody]

Even though this thread started out with a simple question about whether the Enterprise is a practical design it has now been hi-jacked by those who think that all that sci-fi is real. Who knows whether a star destroyer can defeat a Federation Starship. I can imagine the characters in the comedy series "The Big Bang Theory" sitting around for days debating the point...

Imagination is the key to creativity! After all, how many engineers owe their desire to become an engineer to Scotty from Star Trek? Bunches!

Yes, debating who would beat up who is kind of impractical. But, look at what JasonChapman came up with - Borg beams over to DeathStar and infects crew, DeathStar becomes Borg, end of story! Well, that's a well thought plan of attack. Maybe future space explorers should be particularly aware of the possibility of being assaulted not by beings in PVC armor but by nanobots?

Science Fiction is fun. It's exercise for the brain. You work within certain acceptable constraints (science as represented in sci-fi) and then come up with solutions.

My point really was that they got off topic. I too have engaged in these debates about the relative power of different sci-fi spaceships

 

[ZenGalacticore]

Bdwoody- Hey brother! It's all fiction and/or fantasy. This is the Sci-fi Forum. It's like Disney World, or, actually better yet, the limitless frontiers of the mind.

We're only having fun here. Come with us. It's a trip beyond all our imaginations. And the kicker is that our imaginations can travel faster and further than light in the age of the Universe!

Right on!!! My fellow human, in this fantastic Universe!!! Yayah!!!!

We, all of us, have no idea, really, what is possible. We may think we do, but we probably have no idea of the possibilities.

Think about it. If you could magically transport yourself a 1,000 years into the future, and see what the human world looked like at that time, would you laugh, or cry about what we aspire for today?

Come on man. It's a roller-coaster and we don't know where it's going!

 

[JasonChapman]

Even though this thread started out with a simple question about whether the Enterprise is a practical design it has now been hi-jacked by those who think that all that sci-fi is real. Who knows whether a star destroyer can defeat a Federation Starship. I can imagine the characters in the comedy series "The Big Bang Theory" sitting around for days debating the point.

Again my answer is that the "Enterprise" is highly impractical for a number of reasons but I love it anyway as it was my first visual contact with the concept of a big spaceship. After all in 1966 all we had were the little spheres the USSR was flying and the Gemini and Apollo capsules the USA was flying.

You're absolutely right, and as I am the one who started this post, I apologise for side tracking, the initial question of whether the design of the enterprise is practical, which I did post as a serious question. But in defence of those who have contributed to this post in good humour I seriously doubt there is a person on this forum who believes that Star Trek, Star Wars is real, it’s good to let the imagination run wild every now and then.

So why don’t we take it up a notch shall we.

Exhibit A ‘The Saucer section’ I have always thought that the position of the bridge has been far to vulnerable, not just from a stray laser beam but things like micro meteors. Imagine of this kind of thing was possible to build with current materials, without shielding technology would it be a good place to sit the captain? I have often wondered about the design of Aircraft carriers, yes they’re well defended but in the unlikely event a stray missile got though it would certainly devastate the tower section of the ship.

 

[JasonChapman]

It's worth noting that Storm Troopers die a lot more readily than Clone Troopers do.

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

 

[ZenGalacticore]

The bridge on the Enterprise is the most protected part of the ship-or one of them- it has the thickest hull. And I believe it's a given that in the fiction they didn't use 20th century materials in building a 23rd century starship.

Since the 1960s, take a look at our advances in graphite composites, resins, and most promising, nano-carbon tubes, etc. And its only been 40 or so years. God only knows what kinds of materials we'll be making in 2267 A.D.

Look how radically different our stealth bombers and fighters are to the jets of the 1960s. And the exponentiation of technology shows no signs of slowing down or approaching anywhere near the asymptotic limit.

Back in 1899, the Chief Clerk of the US Patent office said, "Everything that can be invented, has been invented." Ha ha, what a narrow-minded, unimaginative fool!

 

[a_lost_packet_]

...So why don’t we take it up a notch shall we.


Exhibit A ‘The Saucer section’ I have always thought that the position of the bridge has been far to vulnerable, not just from a stray laser beam but things like micro meteors. Imagine of this kind of thing was possible to build with current materials, without shielding technology would it be a good place to sit the captain? I have often wondered about the design of Aircraft carriers, yes they’re well defended but in the unlikely event a stray missile got though it would certainly devastate the tower section of the ship.

The island on a carrier is pretty well protected... considering. The critical areas relating to actual air operations and control aren't up in the top portions of the island, they are below it and the main flight deck. The problem is that a carrier is basically a giant floating gascan that has a lot of fireworkes taped inside it and planes taking off an landing on top of it 24 hrs a day. "Safe" is a relative term. Fuel is used as ballast so, the lower you go, the close you are to thousands of gallons of liquid explosives..

I do agree that the standard Federation bridge placement is a bit too dangerous. Even an alien species totally unfamiliar with federation design could take one look at it: "Hey, what's that dome-shaped thing?" "I don't know, but it looks important. Shoot it!" But, they have secondary bridges as well.

I'll muck around a bit and see what I can come up with for a 3D design based off of it. I don't have any source meshes though and room is a scarce commodity atm. (Haven't finished prep'ing my new drive yet.) But, I'll wing it.

 

[a_lost_packet_]

I present, the CNS Improbable on her main-engine burn shakedown cruise. No paintjob (no textures, just a simple procedural), not all of her lighting is installed (only a few lights), her windows aren't finished (get to those later) and she's very good at traveling in two dimensions... (no maneuvering engines installed atm.)

Over&Under superstructure, artificial gravity simulated by centrifugal force. (Have to work out the radius later.) A separate generator powers a magnetic field for handling charged particles. Armor does the rest... works well unless they find a rock by accident...

Closeup of magnetic rail area. It provides the main force behind the rotation of the saucer using magnetic acceleration much like a levitating train does. The central spindle is magnetically suspended. IOW, there are NO moving parts. Uses a separate fusion reactor powered by Unobtainium...

Rear Advanced Ion Engine cluster. Advanced Ion Engines are cool, mmkay? This is a long-duration ship, not some spiffy sportscar! Maneuvering engines would be fitted to the spindle area. There are rotational assist engines on the superstructure to rotate the entire engine cluster away from the direction of travel for brake assists. They're just.. invisible atm...

PS - Lighting is crappy because I didn't want to put a lot of energy into it.

 

[JasonChapman]

that's mega cool, at last another spaceship modeller.

 

[ZenGalacticore]

It looks like some gadget out of my mom's extensive kitchen. :lol:

 

[bdewoody]

The designers of Sci Fi space warships have just followed a long tradition in warship design of putting the bridge where the Captain would have a commanding view of the battle. In sailing ships it was the quarterdeck. Captains would even climb up into the rigging to supervise the battle. Lord Nelson lost his life in the battle of Trafalgar because he insisted on being out in an exposed area. In WW I and WW II battleships the bridge was exposed in the highest part of the superstructure and several admirals lost their lives during battles. The case of the aircraft carrier has already been stated. I might mention that for a brief while the USA considered a design with no island. The carrier was scrapped before it really got started and the next carrier, the USS Forrestal was built with the traditional island.

So the bridges of the starship Enterprise and the Empires Star Destroyers are an extension of traditional design philosophy.

 

[a_lost_packet_]

that's mega cool, at last another spaceship modeller.

Actually, I'm not terribly good with inorganic modeling. (hard surface modeling) But, I do have some "concept" models I've been working on just to hone my skills there. They are based on a "near future" type of design with some acknowledgments of the necessity for sci-fis artificial gravity. But, I didn't abuse that kind of tech in envisioning them.

I'll try to put something together and post a render of a couple.

The point of the model I linked was trying to bring the general shape of a Star Fleet vessel into today's age with tech that didn't require a fantasy element.

There's only one, itty bitty problem..

See, acceleration would be.. difficult on the crew housed in a saucer that was generating artificial gravity using centrifugal force. It's fine as long as it's maintaining velocity but, any appreciable acceleration is going to end up with people bounced around from floor to ceiling as they get spun around. When it got to its destination, you could call the captain, crew and passengers by one name - Soup.

 

[a_lost_packet_]

The designers of Sci Fi space warships have just followed a long tradition in warship design of putting the bridge where the Captain would have a commanding view of the battle. In sailing ships it was the quarterdeck. Captains would even climb up into the rigging to supervise the battle. Lord Nelson lost his life in the battle of Trafalgar because he insisted on being out in an exposed area. In WW I and WW II battleships the bridge was exposed in the highest part of the superstructure and several admirals lost their lives during battles. The case of the aircraft carrier has already been stated. I might mention that for a brief while the USA considered a design with no island. The carrier was scrapped before it really got started and the next carrier, the USS Forrestal was built with the traditional island.

So the bridges of the starship Enterprise and the Empires Star Destroyers are an extension of traditional design philosophy.

Quoted for Truth!

Battlefield commanders depend a lot on the Mk1 Eyeball and that hasn't changed yet.

 

[JasonChapman]

See, acceleration would be.. difficult on the crew housed in a saucer that was generating artificial gravity using centrifugal force. It's fine as long as it's maintaining velocity but, any appreciable acceleration is going to end up with people bounced around from floor to ceiling as they get spun around. When it got to its destination, you could call the captain, crew and passengers by one name - Soup.

I have always wondered how the creators of science fiction create artificial gravity without making the object spin. Some kind of artificially generated field which creates a gravatational field under the deck plating of each floor which affects any object with a mass, I don't think they cover that one in the star trek technical manual.

 

[ZenGalacticore]

I'm sure people in the early twentieth century and long before would wonder how we get people and landscapes inside a box with a glass sheet on the front of it (tv). Or how one can send a letter over a phone line (fax). Or get all that energy out of splitting an atom. Or...

 

[bdewoody]

See, acceleration would be.. difficult on the crew housed in a saucer that was generating artificial gravity using centrifugal force. It's fine as long as it's maintaining velocity but, any appreciable acceleration is going to end up with people bounced around from floor to ceiling as they get spun around. When it got to its destination, you could call the captain, crew and passengers by one name - Soup.

I have always wondered how the creators of science fiction create artificial gravity without making the object spin. Some kind of artificially generated field which creates a gravatational field under the deck plating of each floor which affects any object with a mass, I don't think they cover that one in the star trek technical manual.

They cheat. They come up with some unobtanium and cover the deck plating with it and presto, artificial gravity. I think in Star Trek there is supposed to be some sort of generator that gives a gravity effect. Makes it easy to do TV production that way. Battlestar Galactica never bothered to explain how they got their artificial gravity. In Bab 5 either you spun a portion of the ship or if your technology was advanced enough you had some sort of artificial gravity.

 

[drwayne]

I seem to recall some mention of Graviton manipulation (presumably connected to the inertial dampers) in
the Star Trek universe.

In a bit of trivia, in the first or second episode of Lost In Space, the artifical gravity in the Jupiter 2 was
turned off to repair some equipment.

 

[ZenGalacticore]

It seems to me that the simulation of gravity-without the old centrifugal force solution- is not all that far out or unlikely. After all, if memory serves me correctly, gravity is the weakest of the four known forces of the Universe.

We have no problem "artificially" producing electricity or magnetism, so why not gravity in the not-so-distant future?