www.ditl.org

Sionnach Glic wrote:From where do people get the idea that the Miranda from WoK is refitted?

Several make appearances in some of the novels. GK even has an entry on the "un-refit" Miranda on the main page, IIRC.

Yeah, I've seen pictures and similar stuff from non-canon sources showing a hypothetical pre-refit Miranda (usualy without the rollbar), but is there any canon that suggests it?

None at all to my knowledge. I've always assumed it was a new class designed to replace the aging Connie design.

Vic wrote:It seems to me that there were a couple of times that Scotty was showing off his (TOS) domain and talking about the warp system while looking through that big assed screen in engineering. There were alot of blocky shapes with vague lighting there, and the boxy protuberance in the middle of engineering was mentioned in the Nomad(?) Daystroms M5(?) episode as well.

That thing in the middle of Engineering in TOS had something to do with dilithium crystals but other then that there isn't much canon info on where the core is or how it works.

Yeah, I've seen pictures and similar stuff from non-canon sources showing a hypothetical pre-refit Miranda (usualy without the rollbar), but is there any canon that suggests it?

Not that I'm aware of, I think the idea comes from the fan assumption that the Enterprise was the first TOS ship to be refitted like we saw and they applied it across the board after it was successful.

Right - as far as canon goes, there is nothing to suggest that the Reliant-type Miranda wasn't the original one.

Tyyr wrote: We've seen warp cores and nacelles both pre TOS and post TOS. In both cases the warp cores were large structures housed in the secondary hulls. In both cases we've seen nacelles as relatively hollow structures that house the warp coils and not much else. What I'm proposing is consistent with what we've seen before of starship warp drive systems. You're postulating that for some reason between Ent and TMP Starfleet radically changed the way they handled the warp drive systems of their starships, then changed back to it all with little to no outward difference in the basic design of their ships.

You do have a point here and altough the basic principle of the warpdrive remains the same - with a m/am reactor, nacelles etc. the layout of said components might have changed during the time. The Enterprise warpcore for instance looks imho very different from those we see from TMP onwards. Having all those components in the nacelles could also be reason enough to form a subclass of ships equipped with those nacelle units, the Class 1 starships. Now I say not that is how it is, all I am saying is it fits beautifully together with what we see and with the FJ-TM.

The warp sleed and the runabout are also examples of ships where the whole warp systems is built into the drive chain so it is not unheard of if you must have a canonical reference.

Tyyr wrote:I realize that XI doesn't gel with the standard timeline but in XI we see them eject the warp core(s) not from the nacelles but from the secondary hull.

Good point actually because it shows that the "warp core" doesn't necessarily must be one big hulking united entity but could consist of more smaller packages. Maybe the tech-level of that time didn't allow for larger ones and only a small m/am reaction could be contained so they made more smaller ones.

Tyyr wrote:All evidence points to the warp cores of starfleet ships being housed in the secondary hulls, not the nacelles. This is consistent across everything we see of them.

That would be a logical assumption, I agree but please keep in mind that during TOS afaik we see no warp core(s). The phoenix warp core is within the rocket and the NX-01 warpcore is in the primary hull. (Have I forgotten a pre-TOS example?)

Tyyr wrote:

and there is no need to speculate about a huge core running through multiple decks like the one seen in the TMP connie when we never saw one or heard about one in the TOS connie.

Yet you feel free to speculate that it didn't exist until then?

I feel free to speculate that the necessary parts were arranged in a different configuration which imho is not far fetched and consistent with what we see on TV and doesn't go against background info. I am ok with that.

Tyyr wrote:Because the Miranda isn't a pure cut and paste. Someone with a little sense realized that things like the Saladin are just f***ing stupid. The majorly modified the entire aft 1/3 of saucer and incorporated a major redesign of the aft to handle all the systems that were in the secondary hull but now needed a home in the primary.

Well we must agree to disagree here. Combining a saucer shape with a square in the aft is for me the same as the main sensor/deflector beeing exterior on the saladins. Granted it is a very well done effort to make it look better but I guess that was also the thought behind the modifications. To make it look cooler, not because of design considerations.

Tyyr wrote:Because the non-canon blueprints differ radically with what appears to be standard Starfleet design rules?

Well those rules are also non-canon if you are speaking of the GR rules of starship design. (I generelly like them because even having them - no matter how sensible - at least shows that the creators gave a s**** about consistency but then single nacelle ships seem not to violate these rules after all if argued correctly)

Tyyr wrote:

Atekimogus wrote:So according to logic I should stick to canon when discussing ships which are arguable non-canon?

You should stick to the general rules of canon when it comes to ship design.

Well, that is rather strict and specific, is it not? The general rules of canon-ship design. Care to point those out?

Atekimogus wrote:The warp sleed and the runabout are also examples of ships where the whole warp systems is built into the drive chain so it is not unheard of if you must have a canonical reference.

The runabout doesn't have an integrated drive train - the main core is laid lengthways along the spine of the ship. Most shuttles, on the other hand, do have integrated drives.

Captain Seafort wrote:The runabout doesn't have an integrated drive train - the main core is laid lengthways along the spine of the ship.

In what ep did we see the core of a runabout?

Atekimogus wrote:The general rules of canon-ship design. Care to point those out?

They are as follows:
#1 - Nacelles must be in pairs.
#2 - Nacelles must have at least 50% line-of-sight of each other.
#3 - All nacellese must be fully visible from in front of the ship.
#4 - The bridge must be at the top center of the primary hull.

These are Roddenberry's rules of starship design, and were created by Gene for the express purpose of discrediting Joseph's designs, so Gene wouldn't have to share any royalty or residual money. However, there is nothing in here about internal configuration; and further, even these rules have been violated by canon ships.

Mikey wrote:

Atekimogus wrote:The general rules of canon-ship design. Care to point those out?

They are as follows:
#1 - Nacelles must be in pairs.
#2 - Nacelles must have at least 50% line-of-sight of each other.
#3 - All nacellese must be fully visible from in front of the ship.
#4 - The bridge must be at the top center of the primary hull.

These are Roddenberry's rules of starship design, and were created by Gene for the express purpose of discrediting Joseph's designs, so Gene wouldn't have to share any royalty or residual money. However, there is nothing in here about internal configuration; and further, even these rules have been violated by canon ships.

I think what he is getting at is that these may be "official" rules, but they are not canon. Therefore, using them to dismiss a non-canon set of blueprints would be foolishness.

But thats just a guess.

Atekimogus wrote:You do have a point here and altough the basic principle of the warpdrive remains the same - with a m/am reactor, nacelles etc. the layout of said components might have changed during the time.

My point was that the general arrangement of said components and the way they are represented is fairly consistant and that the layout you propose is not consistant with that layout at all.

The Enterprise warpcore for instance looks imho very different from those we see from TMP onwards.

I don't dispute that it is not similar to the vertical style we see later. However the point remains that it is NOT in the nacelles. The warp core, regardless of its configuration, has never to my knowlege been located in the nacelles.

The warp sleed and the runabout are also examples of ships where the whole warp systems is built into the drive chain so it is not unheard of if you must have a canonical reference.

Actually there's nothing canon that says one way or another where the warp sled's power supply is. I also don't recall anything on screen on way or another indicating where the runabout's power supply's are.

Good point actually because it shows that the "warp core" doesn't necessarily must be one big hulking united entity but could consist of more smaller packages. Maybe the tech-level of that time didn't allow for larger ones and only a small m/am reaction could be contained so they made more smaller ones.

And again you miss the central point. The warp core(s) were not in the nacelles.

That would be a logical assumption, I agree but please keep in mind that during TOS afaik we see no warp core(s). The phoenix warp core is within the rocket and the NX-01 warpcore is in the primary hull. (Have I forgotten a pre-TOS example?)

No, you've simply reconfirmed once again that we've never seen a Federation ship in Trek that had its warpcore in its nacelles.

I feel free to speculate that the necessary parts were arranged in a different configuration which imho is not far fetched and consistent with what we see on TV and doesn't go against background info. I am ok with that.

But it's not alright for me to speculate? Regardless your proposed configuration is NOT consistant with what's seen on TV. At best you can claim that in TOS we don't have visuals that directly refute it. We've never seen the innards of a transporter but that doesn't mean I can say it's powered by gnomes and claim its consistant with what we see on TV.

Well we must agree to disagree here. Combining a saucer shape with a square in the aft is for me the same as the main sensor/deflector beeing exterior on the saladins. Granted it is a very well done effort to make it look better but I guess that was also the thought behind the modifications. To make it look cooler, not because of design considerations.

Two seperate issues, one in universe the other out. Both in universe and out the Miranda makes sense. In universe it has a radically altered aft section consistant with what you'd expect from such a ship. Out of universe it looks cooler than a simple rearranged kit bash. Both in and out of universe the Saladin and others like it make no sense and look like what they are, quick cut and paste jobs.

Well those rules are also non-canon if you are speaking of the GR rules of starship design. (I generelly like them because even having them - no matter how sensible - at least shows that the creators gave a s**** about consistency but then single nacelle ships seem not to violate these rules after all if argued correctly)

And those aren't the rules I'm speaking of. What I'm speaking of are what we've seen in canon. That the nacelles of starships do not contain the warp cores. That those warp cores are either in the secondary hull (TMP, TNG, Voy, XI) or in the primary if the ship has no secondary (Ent). Those are the basic rules of the warp drive train and I don't recall a single instance of a canon starship that doesn't abide by them.

Well, that is rather strict and specific, is it not? The general rules of canon-ship design. Care to point those out?

See above.

Mikey wrote:These are Roddenberry's rules of starship design, and were created by Gene for the express purpose of discrediting Joseph's designs, so Gene wouldn't have to share any royalty or residual money. However, there is nothing in here about internal configuration; and further, even these rules have been violated by canon ships.

They're also not the ones I'm talking about.

stitch626 wrote:I think what he is getting at is that these may be "official" rules, but they are not canon. Therefore, using them to dismiss a non-canon set of blueprints would be foolishness.

But thats just a guess.

Could be, but that's not what I'm doing.

Both in and out of universe the Saladin and others like it make no sense and look like what they are, quick cut and paste jobs.

The Saladin makes fine sense, no less than the GCS and original Connie.

As for warp cores in the necelles, the Type 9 shuttle would be a perfect candidate.

Tyyr wrote:Out of universe it looks cooler than a simple rearranged kit bash.

Out of universe, it is a simple rearranged kitbash. I'm not sure what you're arguing for here; I know the bit about "warp cores aren't in the nacelles," which I agree with but which by no means disallows the Joseph designs; but with the Miranda vs. others argument, it seems like you're arguing that kitbashes are OK in they're from STII, but not otherwise.

Tyyr wrote:They're also not the ones I'm talking about.

Then, which ones are you talking about? There are no other "rules" for starship design that have been presented, either canon or not. Perhaps you're talking about overarching "warp field dynamics" or other physical laws, which wouldn't be "rules of design" anymore than fluid dynamics determine how we build ships today in RL.

Mikey wrote:In what ep did we see the core of a runabout?

We don't. However look at this:



It's not that clear, unfortunately, but you can see what looks very much like a power transfer conduit running down the middle of the pylon.

Mikey wrote:Out of universe, it is a simple rearranged kitbash. I'm not sure what you're arguing for here; I know the bit about "warp cores aren't in the nacelles," which I agree with but which by no means disallows the Joseph designs; but with the Miranda vs. others argument, it seems like you're arguing that kitbashes are OK in they're from STII, but not otherwise.

No. Reading comprehension, try some. The Saladin is a cut and paste kit bash. The secondary hull was lopped off the Connie and a single warp nacelle was attached to the bottom of the neck. Then only non-cut and paste bit is the strut that holds the deflector dish in place.

The Miranda does use the front half to 3/5ths of the refit Connie's saucer as well as the warp nacelles. However they modified the aft half of the saucer significantly. If you'll recall early in the thread I took the stance that the Saladin would have required major modifications to move critical systems out of the secondary hull and into the primary, things like the M/AM reactor. Such modifications would have almost certainly resulted in significant external differences. The Miranda has significant external differences between it and the refit Connie. They didn't just hang the nacelles from the primary hull and call it a ship.

Then, which ones are you talking about? There are no other "rules" for starship design that have been presented, either canon or not. Perhaps you're talking about overarching "warp field dynamics" or other physical laws, which wouldn't be "rules of design" anymore than fluid dynamics determine how we build ships today in RL.

Two paragraphs above that sentence.

And those aren't the rules I'm speaking of. What I'm speaking of are what we've seen in canon. That the nacelles of starships do not contain the warp cores. That those warp cores are either in the secondary hull (TMP, TNG, Voy, XI) or in the primary if the ship has no secondary (Ent). Those are the basic rules of the warp drive train and I don't recall a single instance of a canon starship that doesn't abide by them.

Does anyone ever say them in the show? No, but if you can show me a single instance of a Federation starship with warp cores in the nacelles I'll eat my hat. After a couple thousand hours of air time, lots of shots of warp cores, a couple of nacelle interiors, and not once seeing a warp core in a nacelle I feel fairly confident in saying that the Federation simply does not do that.

Tyyr wrote:if you can show me a single instance of a Federation starship with warp cores in the nacelles I'll eat my hat.

Get eating then - we have yet to see a single shuttle with space to fit the WC anywhere else. We also have the warp sled from TMP, and circumstantial evidence of the pre-refit Connie having the main drive there:

The Apple wrote:KIRK: ...Discard the warp drive nacelles if you have to, and crack out of there with the main section, but get that ship out of there!