StarDestroyer.Net BBS

I've been trying to 3D model a TNG era style alien vessel on my spare time and I was wondering the glow that comes up when ships go to Warp is it suppose to come from inside the nacelles or is some sort of glowing Warp field that forms around the nacelles when the engines power up for warp?

The problem here is that I don't think we've ever seen many alien vessels go to warp speed in Berman Era Trek; most of the time they're slowly plodding along at impulse speeds if they're even moving. I tend to think that it's the first one you mentioned, from inside the nacelles.

I do recall one instance of a Ferengi vessel going to warp; IIRC, the glowy parts of the ship along the back of the crescent shaped hull glowed, then left warp trails in the same pattern as the engines/thrusters/lights/whatever. I'm hunting down the clip now. I'm also hunting episodes of Enterprise; I'm fairly certain we've seen Andorian and Vulcan ships go to warp. I think the Andorian nacelles light up before warping out but I don't know about the Vulcans.

The Bounty in Star Trek IV, going to warp in Earth's atmosphere, had a brightly glowing orange and red engine, but the warp trails it left behind were the same width as the wingspan of the BOP. The ship itself did not glow.

However, in Star Trek: DSC, the Klingons warp away after the Battle at the Binary Stars; their warp is very similar to the SFX seen in JJ trek. For a moment after the engines light up and flash, when the ship elongates, the light takes on the shape of the vessel, nacelles and hull together. There is a second bright flash, brighter than the glow of the warp engines themselves, right after the ship rubberbands out of sight. The second flash is more like what you would see in a thunderstorm (there were clouds and alot of debris at the site of the battle) rather than the "Q-Flash" style visual seen when the Enterprise-D goes to warp.

Found the Ferengi at warp. This is how the Ferengi react when Worf cooks up a "surprise" in the form of a Federation starship for the Ferengi in TNG "Peak Performance." There was no Q-Flash, the next shot cuts to Picard when they're gone.

Lastly, I found a good video with examples of Warp Speed seen in the first 11 Trek movies.

I still dunno if I'll do a warp out animation (or any animation) with this project but I was able to do a nice looking warp grill glow with Blender I'm gonna experiment with relective planes later to see if I can spread the glow a bit more.

I was also able to get a bussard collector glow I was really happy with, it's not perfect as it doesn't have the red glow I wanted there but it's close enough to be acceptable.

Thanks for the clips though with those and the clip of the La Sirena warping out I could get a decent looking warp out if I end doing that.

I made a nice warp glow with an emission panel behind a flat black grill. Love the honeycomb option in mesh.

Anyway, as I understand Rodenberry's original rules, the 2 nacelles in sight of each other bit, because the effect/field off of them are supposed to interact between the nacelles. I think EC Henry did a video on it...

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

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xnbmZ6Z7WU0

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

Hmm couldn't find anything specific but here are some interesting ones on warp itself.

Knife wrote: ↑2020-04-14 12:04pm Anyway, as I understand Rodenberry's original rules, the 2 nacelles in sight of each other bit, because the effect/field off of them are supposed to interact between the nacelles. I think EC Henry did a video on it...

I think this is the one you're thinking of:

Interestingly enough, it seems that Defiant actually violates that rule of nacelles having line of sight with each other. Maybe it is because the ship itself is smaller, which allows it to generate a field through the hull of the ship. Also, isn't the Defiant slower at warp speed?

Though all ships consistently seem to be using a sort of Bussard ramjet, as none of them have an unobstructed view from the front, and all are using paired nacelles.

Roddenberry's rules of starship design are garbage. First of all, they are never stated onscreen which means that according to Star Trek canon rules they aren't at all canon. People treat them as canon because Roddenberry stated them, but that isn't sufficient. After all, he was the first person to state the canon rules, so if he wanted to canonize the starship design rules he should have said them onscreen. Jokes about third nacelles are insufficient to canonize the "two nacelles" rule, because the joke can be interpreted multiple ways. Second, even when Roddenberry was in charge the ships didn't follow his rules consistently. The rule stating that the nacelles need an unobstructed line of sight to eachother is violated by almost every alien vessel I can think of, no matter what the era. Its not followed by Ferengi vessels (whose warp nacelles are invisible to eachother), its not followed by most Klingon vessels (notably the Bird of Prey where its the guns that follow this rule) and the Borg cube is a fucking cube. It doesn't have nacelles at all, or any familiar design element of a Trek warp drive. Its also not followed by certain TOS vessels, such as the Doomsday Weapon which also lacks nacelles entirely. This also invalidates the rule that nacelles must be visible from the front, because if a ship doesn't have nacelles at all then that function can be either ignored because not all ships have a Bussard collector, or the collectors don't have to be on a nacelle. Again, the Klingon Bird of Prey appears to have nacelles that don't see the front, if you can even figure out where they are on the ship. This makes sense, of course, because Roddenberry didn't come up with his rules during TOS, he only came up with them after the first Technical Manual was created, which is why so many Trek fans think he created the rules specifically to invalidate that manual. But even Federation vessels don't follow the rules consistently! Two nacelles and only two nacelles? The Stargazer has four, and I don't care what excuses people give about the ship only needing to use two of them at a time, it still has four. The Franklin class, only seen in background shots during Best of Both Worlds part II but still made during Roddenberry's lifetime, has only one. And again, I don't want to hear your fan theories about it having two sets of warp coils inside the one, that's conjecture. We can all see that it has only one. I'm pretty sure we've also seen ships fly with a damaged nacelle, which would suggest that one nacelle is the minimum for warp flight (unless you count the Borg Cube and other ships that don't even have nacelles).

And of course the rule that the ship's bridge must be at the top of the hull is obviously an aesthetic choice rather than a technical rule, and was freely inverted in the Kelvinverse timeline where the bridge was moved to the bottom of the saucer section.

Adam Reynolds wrote: ↑2020-04-14 01:33pm I think this is the one you're thinking of:

Interestingly enough, it seems that Defiant actually violates that rule of nacelles having line of sight with each other. Maybe it is because the ship itself is smaller, which allows it to generate a field through the hull of the ship. Also, isn't the Defiant slower at warp speed?

Though all ships consistently seem to be using a sort of Bussard ramjet, as none of them have an unobstructed view from the front, and all are using paired nacelles.

Yeah, that's it.

Well, as far as the rules go, they violated them lots of times. All Good Things Enterprise had 3 nacelles. But yeah, Defiant definitely broke the rules.

Formless wrote: Roddenberry's rules of starship design are garbage. First of all, they are never stated onscreen which means that according to Star Trek canon rules they aren't at all canon.

Indeed. As a pirate captain once said, The rules is more what you'd call "guidelines" than actual rules.

Formless wrote: ↑2020-04-14 03:17pm And of course the rule that the ship's bridge must be at the top of the hull is obviously an aesthetic choice rather than a technical rule, and was freely inverted in the Kelvinverse timeline where the bridge was moved to the bottom of the saucer section.

Hmm none of the Kelvin timeline ships have the bridge at bottom, the Walker does but it's made by a different production Company and has 0 connections with Kelvin timeline (not mention it's a prime timeline ship).

As for Roddenberry making the ship design rules to invalidate the Technical Manual, while obviously nothing official has been stated (and seeing as Rod Roddenberry aka Gene Roddenberry's son is one the chief minds behind DSC and possibly Picard as well I doubt they would say anything) it does make sense as Gene Roddenberry was somewhat greedy (going as far as making lyrics for the TOS theme just that he could get part of the royalities) so not wanting to share credit would seem to be in character for him.

Lord Revan wrote:Hmm none of the Kelvin timeline ships have the bridge at bottom, the Walker does but it's made by a different production Company and has 0 connections with Kelvin timeline (not mention it's a prime timeline ship).

You are forgetting the Kelvin Enterprise herself. In the redesign they decided to move the bridge to the bottom of the saucer. We see this multiple times in the films. I don't entirely know why they chose to do this, but I think they just liked showing shots of her from below and putting the bridge on the bottom gave them an excuse.

Formless wrote: ↑2020-04-15 04:33am

Lord Revan wrote:Hmm none of the Kelvin timeline ships have the bridge at bottom, the Walker does but it's made by a different production Company and has 0 connections with Kelvin timeline (not mention it's a prime timeline ship).

You are forgetting the Kelvin Enterprise herself. In the redesign they decided to move the bridge to the bottom of the saucer. We see this multiple times in the films. I don't entirely know why they chose to do this, but I think they just liked showing shots of her from below and putting the bridge on the bottom gave them an excuse.

Hmm Im pretty sure the bridge window is at top of the saucer where it's suppose to be. in fact during the attack of Krell's swarm you can see the bridge window and the nacelles at same shop even though it's filmed from a downward angle looking down on the top of the ship.

Yeah, the bridge of the Kelvinverse Big E is at the top of the saucer just like the regular one. I have no clue where Formless got the idea it's at the bottom.

Batman wrote: ↑2020-04-15 07:01pm Yeah, the bridge of the Kelvinverse Big E is at the top of the saucer just like the regular one. I have no clue where Formless got the idea it's at the bottom.

Yes, JJ-prise used the 'light' panel at the bottom of the bridge dome as a window on the new one. No idea what Formless is about. Only bottom bridge I know of is the Discovery ship in the opening episode.

Yeah I remember back when Discovery launched it was a big deal that the Shenzhou (and by extension rest of the Walker class though we did see only 1 ship of that class) had the bridge at the bottom rather then the top.

Only Kelvin timeline ship that didn't have the bridge at top of the ship would be the Kelvin herself due the secondary hull being above the the saucer but even there the bridge is on top of the saucer.

IIRC in the TNG tech manual bridges are on the exterior of the hull and detachable so they can be fully swapped out during major repairs / upgrades.

Non canon source of course but as good of an in-universe explanation as any to their placement.

EDIT: one would think ease of construction and maintenance plays a roll in the location / number of nacelles too. Maybe the advantages of having internal nacelles and/or more than two of them are generally outweighed by the increased complexity and maintenance costs.

Darth Lucifer wrote: ↑2020-03-11 11:17pm The problem here is that I don't think we've ever seen many alien vessels go to warp speed in Berman Era Trek;

Ferengi vessel did it in Peak Performance.

Klingon ships have done it in DS9 a few times.