Warp Coils: Everything There Is To Know 

Actually most of his data is derived from what was in the TNG Tech Manual back in the day, which was an offshoot of the series bible. The writers on that show were pretty consistent about most of those details. It's still a good read. He then extrapolated off of that.

Meanwhile, in modern Trek: "Muh skrong black wamen"

@@3Rayfire Except for that one episode of TNG in which two people were transported through the shield of a small ship.

hahahaha

@@IndigoGollum Can you give me more, don't remember that instance.

There has to be at least an even amount of nasals. Here, it's a good watch I promise: ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-Au9UeLfI6TE.html

Oh wait, you were talking about the number of coils, never mind XD. Yeah, I have no idea how they went from 18 to like 8. I would still watch that video though, it's really good!

Is that a 3d6+4 roll? Or a 2d20?

@@jamesofthekaijukompendium I thought there was one ship that had three nacelles?

I was going to say exactly that. This is all sci-fi, this guy talks about it like if it's reality...

Yeah. It makes sense tho, because an anti-borg warship needs to be maneuverable. It's alright being huge and durable, but as seen in Wolf 359, the galaxy class didn't stand much of a chance

Part of me wishes they decided to salvage the D's saucer and slapped it onto a newer galaxy-class secondary with sovereign-class nacelles

@@erojerisiz1571 The producers at Paramount felt the saucer-style ships were too old school and wanted to draw in a younger audience. Thus the Sovereign class was designed. The crash-landing of the 1701D saucer wasn't just for screen time; it was a symbolic burial as well.

Starfleet finally figured out that building a ship were over half the space inside is empty and there are entire decks that are unfinished is not a great idea. They always said the Galaxy class had extra room for expansion but unfortunately that expansion never happened.

turns out they just rebuilt the D lol@@erojerisiz1571

Not just that, also consider the circumstances under which the Federation built the Defiant. They were at war. They didn't have any dedicated warships. They needed something that could pack a punch, and they needed it quickly. Why spend valuable time designing an entirely new warp drive for your warship, which is primarily designed for firepower, when you could just overengineer it (likely with existing equipment, as that would decrease the time you would need to get production going) and call it a day? Keep in mind, stuff like the Nebula class was built because the Federation needed numbers. These factors being taken into account, it makes perfect sense for Starfleet to wing some less important aspects of the design. Who cares if the warp drive isn't as resilient as we might want it to be? Should it become defunct, you can repair that after the battle, provided you win.

That's why you didn't see them in the Dominion war, getting spare parts out for a Galaxy is "send us five coils", getting them for a Sov involves asking "which ones?" ...and hoping there's not additional damage from a raid on your dock in the meantime.

Would've been better if the sovereign had all small coils

@@michaelmartin9022 The only thing is, in universe I think warp coils are easily replicated. The Sovereign could replicate her own warp coils for repairs, since they are not made out of materials considered exotic by Starfleet standards. All they need is a molecular pattern, and they can replicate as many replacements as necessary, so long as matter-antimatter power remains constant. People often over look this when analyzing Starfleet logistics in the 24th century. So many components can simply be replicated, it cuts down on the need for freight lines with things like anti-deuterium and dilithium crystals being the exception.

@@Acrosurge That doesn't eliminate the problem, but it sure does reduce it by a huge amount. Do you recall if that ability was held by previous classes of ship? Because if it's new, it would probably explain the choice to go with whatever improvement in performance the tapered coils provide.

Implying that there's some advantage to 'tapered' warp coils that was just beyond the point of diminishing returns before the Sovereign design program.

Damned impressive if you ask me.

Next show what a Refit constitution class engine cutaway looks like.

As I understand it, warp drive do not shift mass, but rather distort space time itself, therefore negating mass concerns. A "warp bubble" however, does have a particular diameter which would been smaller for physically smaller craft.

Also: Defiant, as dedicated warship, probably had never put premium maintainability or long term reliability when compared to long-duration explorers.

Yeah, was gonna point out the Defiant trying to tear itself in half is canon, if anyone hadn't.

@@piotrd.4850 and I would expect a warship as maneuverable as the Defiant to be speced for sub-light operation. They outgun or outmaneuver an adversary, not outrun. Less sustained redline operation, less maintenance issues (possibly).

@@Suiseisexy That was even explicitly because of a revolution in warp drive that occurred around the time Starfleet was prototyping the Defiant, which means that the Intrepid, Defiant, and the Sovereign could all use a radically different warp drive unit compared to earlier ships, and the Galaxy already used a very different warp drive compared to the Constitution. Hell, the Constitution and the NX didn't even have _vertical_ warp cores yet. The entire basic design of the compact vertical pillar antimatter annihilation chamber was a huge breakthrough that came well into the Constitution's service life I believe some time before Wrath of Khan takes place.

shingshongshamalama the Constitution did have a second, vertical warp core installed between 2270 & 2285, 25-40 years after it entered service. It should be noted that horizontal cores seem far less safe, having to be ejected possibly up to 50 meters in either direction instead of cleanly dropped out of the ship. However, due to size limitations, I will say the Danube Class and Delta Flyer may have horizontal warp cores, again in the interest of saving space.

More coils for bigger bubble is my guess too. The shape might be a factor too when it comes to generating the warp field. Realignment might have become less of an issue with more advanced tech, on the NX it might have been manual labor and on the Galaxy done with the push of a button in most cases. But I agree that one piece of metal is rather hard to fuse with itself compared with fusing multiple pieces.

The heat can cause the small spaces within each individual coils could melt and literally fuse into one ring making them useless. Or in the defiant's case makes cylinders when fused.

I was about to post something similar. The size of the warp bubble must be important to how much energy must be needed. Also the Enterprise E being the newest ship in the list, there could be something in the tapering of the coils that improves efficiency.

yeah... i agree. and that’s why the defiant only needs 4 or 8 in total

Well the last argument of large pieces not being able to fuse is at best unlikely and at worst totaly stupid. The first how ever could most definitly be true. Also maybe the shape and distance between coils may have an effect on warp performance, because the warp plasma(super heated stuffs) has to travel trough the coils to generate a warp bubble.

Oh dear my dad is going to be disappointed at Christmas? Some how mom's present of sub space distortion isn't going to rekindle their bumping of ugly's oh well there's always next year...........

No, that's a measure of Vaginal Distortion.

@@definitely_notme4112 Just a hunch, but I think they already knew.

@@definitely_notme4112 The joke is that it sounds like cock ring

No wonder the stupid algorithm deletes his channel if it misinterprets words like this!

Financial cost may be a thing..... Sometime Trek says money doesen't exist, sometime Trek is all about (in-universe) the money. Both can be true if money exists as a medium of exchange, but being a post-scarcity world (and particularly after directed mater/energy conversion I.E. replicators were a thing) ten kilos of fecal matter had the same value as ten kilos platinum. As such while used in exchanges and as a measure of expenditure only a few pay any attention to the acquisition of material goods and/or "money".

@Travis Smith. I agree about the replicators, but it has been mentioned across several iterations of Trek that in a few situations replicated materials were definitely inferior to the real deal. Kind of why Dilithium is still mined, and new ways of recompositing the crystals are in use as opposed to flat out replicating them. There might be certain materials that the Defiant class needed, but Starfleet decided were better served on other ships like the Akiras, Steamrunner, or even Sovereigns.

AvengerBB1 A reasonable, if somewhat contrived (on the part of ST, not you) argument. Still for consumer goods most things are of no material value whilst still conceptually having a monetary price. Funny thing, to me, is the seeming inconsistency of some things can be moved via a transporter but not replicated. Make a copy of that pattern from the "buffers" and store it in a permanent way, transport junk from pad to pad whilst having the receiving pad replace the incoming pattern with the one stored, you have "replicated" unreplicatable material.

@@travissmith2848 energy credits. Each citizen or private entity is given a ration of energy to use for trade and commerce, and the ability to gain credits through work, etc.

@@mazz2622 Then money by another name very much exists.

F*ck yeah

Oh. Snap!

Lmao love it, filing that one away for later use

Lmaoooo

Ah.... a cock joke. Clever.

Yeah, it takes a bit to realise that there are multiple warp scales in Star Trek. There's the TOS scale, the TNG scale, and then the 'future' scale, whose existence is implied by the Enterprise in 'All Good Things' going to warp 13, which is impossible in the TNG scale. How fast are ships? The TOS scale is trivial; A ship moves at the cube of it's warp speed. So warp 5 is 5x5x5 or 125 times lightspeed. (Enterprise even explicitly references the number 125 at times) Interesting to note that Enterprise through much of the early parts of the series is only managing warp 4.5, which is just 90 times the speed of light, give or take, so it's even slower than the 'warp 5' speed suggests, and that's about 3/4 of the theoretical max speed. The TNG scale is... Painfully complex, but at heart it's logarithmic. From memory it's something like C = 10^W_log_1.9953 And even that only holds up to warp factor 9, because between warp factor 9 and 10 it goes from that scale to infinite speed. A simpler way of looking at this is that every time you double the warp factor, you increase speed by a factor of 10. This is only very roughly true though, hence the really strange logarithmic factor. Warp 1 = 1x lightspeed Warp 2 = 10x lightspeed Warp 4 = 100x lightspeed Warp 8 = 1000x lightspeed. (actual values Warp 2 is 10x lightspeed, warp 4 is 102x lightspeed, warp 8 is 1023x lightspeed, warp 9 is 1516x lightspeed) The tricky part is the warp 9 and higher, since it goes to infinity. I personally haven't been able to work out a formula that fits known values for this. Warp 9.6 is roughly 3000x lightspeed, while warp 9.99 is about 10000x lightspeed... The 'All Good Things' scale has never been explained. But my personal interpretation is that it's the TNG scale with the top end moved to a higher number. Which makes sense because we were starting to get a LOT of ships with top speeds of 9.9, 9.995, 9.99995 etc... Which is... Well, at that point you might as well just start stating speeds in multiples of lightspeed - it's easier. XD So what I assume happened is something like warp 20, or 50 or maybe even 100 was redefined to be equal to what was warp 10 in the TNG scale. And then the logic of the TNG scale was extended to higher warp factors. So warp 16 is 10,000x lightspeed, warp 32 is 100,000x and so on. Anyway, it's apparent that 'Enterprise' at warp 5 is closer to warp 4.2 or something in the TNG scale. (warp 5 is 216x lightspeed, warp 6 is 392x lightspeed)

I _knew_ there was a reason I liked the Defiant...

100 th like

It's "thick" you fucking imbecilic social lemming!

Well, who do you think designed the Defiant-Class? You think he would satisfy a Borg Queen with a Small Coil? Lol

@@angelus_solus "thicc" is slang.....you can be mad if you want I guess

lol I was just thinking of putting a link of this up for you guys!

peccatumDei Actually, no. The plasma transfer conduits terminate in a manifold that runs down the middle of the nacelles. Although it's not correctly shown in the episode of TNG where the woman commits suicide by jumping into the plasma stream, that's what's indicated in both the blueprints and the tech manual. The manifold contains a pair of injectors per coil pair (one top and one bottom) and uses timed injection pulses to determine coil output.

One of the other big problems (in the real world) with any warp system is thermal management. Once you isolate yourself from the "outside" (which is how a warp bubble would work), there's also the problem of thermal radiation - which cannot traverse the bubble boundary. There have been a few papers addressing this problem, and (in view of the energy needed - which is pretty astronomical), many authors have guesstimated that by the time the bubble is formed, the thermal effects would be such that the craft (and contents) would be a VERY hot plasma, since the heating effects would be many TENS of orders of magnitude greater than the average domestic microwave oven :-). Looking on the bright side (in our case very incandescently bright!), should a problem occur the crew would be atomised before they had time to notice, let alone react.

I would tend to agree. The warp plasma acts like the electricity in the wire wrapped around an iron bar. It charges the core, only instead of a magnetic field you get a warp field. The "warp" part of warp plasma's name is simply to refer the plasma as having come from tbe warp core (matter-antimatter reactor) . This is to distinguish it as different from regular charged plasma used by other systems (much like a kilowatt, gigawatt, and a megawatt are all comprised of watts, but are referring to vastly different magnitudes of power.) Trying to power a display screen with charged warp plasma would likely be like using lightning to power a pocket flashlight... You would fry the sucker if not melt it beyond recognition. Also, in all likelihood, regular charged plasma and warp plasma are recycled as much as possible (dumping it into space being a safer alternative than risking exploding conduits due to containment issues.) Additionally, both types probably have different chemical/atomic breakdowns (like regular car gasoline versus an 18 wheeled truck powered on diesel.) As for sizing and numbers, Defiant's coils are big and thick - you can dump a ton of energy in each really quickly and get a fast and powerful response, which is what they wanted for the tiny ship with power to spare. Bigger ships with lighter, thinner coils get more fine control, and having more coils lets them get the same kind of response time. I guess its like comparing the kickback of an elephant rifle versus a rapid-shooter like an uzi or chaingun. The Defiant is like the elephant rifle, it'll tear your shoulder off if you're not careful (Sisko did say the ship nearly tore itself apart when tested at full power. Most likely the coils threatened to tear off and go shooting away from the ship like a pair of missiles. A warp field doesn't start growing out from the center of the ship, but from the coils. The initial growth is so fast that they quickly merge and surround the whole ship before forward acceleration becomes an issue. I'm guessing that despite the Defiant's small size, the forward acceleration threatened to become an issue before the two tiny fields could grow and merge enough to carry the rest of the ship.)

Exactly. Most systems on the ship are powered by the EPS. (Energized Plasma System) I would speculate that the EPS is more weight and space efficient than giant copper bus bars, to carry the amount of power used on a starship.

I presume the plasma gets gradually vented through the field release gaps in the coils and out of the blue glowing strips on the sides of the nacelles and as it is vented more is pumped in from the warp core through the EPS conduits and into the nacelles via the plasma injectors

Bryon Letterman I know - I love it

says the man wearing THE red shirt.

aethertech lol

No, the greatest would be going to college and actually getting an engineering degree and discussing real science with real applications.

Watch any Game Theory episode.

Thicc Naccels, Kinda hot, or not?^^

She’s designed to kick ass on a massive scale.

Some people like her for her short thick coils and well rounded nacelles.

Absolute units.

That's what she said.

Tazuren Savu'len. Yeah, the ship isnt particularly fast at warp so I would say the warp drive is where they chose to compromise. It would be interesting to compare the Defiant and the Nova, iirc both in and out of canon the Nova was a potential version of the Defiant. They seem polar opposites visually so I wonder how they compare technically? Probably two takes on a small support vessel, one a flying tank the other a lighter armed but quicker concept.

I have not been ale to find any source for the Nova being a Defiant version.

Tazuren Savu'len. Check memory beta, " The final design of the Nova-class initially started out as a pathfinder for the proposed Defiant-classfast torpedo ship. However, with the looming threat of the Borg Collective, Starfleet Commandradically altered the concept of the Defiant-class, rendering the pathfinder design unsuitable." I havent found the source yet but I recall the Nova in Voyager was a repurposed early concept for the Defiant from the ds9 production.

That's because the Nova WAS the Defiant at first to concept artists. Functionally, the finished ships differ quite a bit from each other.

Chris sonofPear. Yeah, I could see in universe two development teams tackling the fast attack torpedo ship from two different perspectives, the Defiant team led by Benjamin makes a lot of sense. The guy who punches an all powerful being in the face for being annoying would go for a ship able to slug it out with an enemy, the other team I like to imagine went for a lighter speedier design that could unload its compliment and evade return fire. That design also lends its self to regular service as its closer to a traditional fed ship, replace torpedoes with probes and you got a handy science vessel!

Voyager mentions this, it is less about the field being cleaner and more that the ship recycles the excess subspace radiation (see junkers with theta radiation). I love the comment though, since this is a rabbit hole we can all go down.

"Newer" ships being "cleaner" ships... That sounds like the writers projecting our problems into the future. I would hope we would have learned to build clean from the start...

The Defiant was explicitly stated to have an overpowered warp core for its size, so the "brute force" argument for it makes a lot of sense. Likewise, with the 1701, we've seen a few incidents where there was concern that excessive engine power was threatening to overwhelm the ship's structural integrity: * When Nomad boosted the Enterprise's reactor efficiency and the ship briefly jumped in speed past Warp 10. * When the Kelvans take over the Enterprise and retrofit it to endure sustained travel at Warp 11 *etc. Also, starting in the TOS movies, it's established that the Federation uses forcefields to augment the ship's structure (called "Structural Integrity Fields"). It may be that the Kelvans had considerably upgraded the 1701's field generators and copying the upgrades was what allowed TOS-movie era ships (such as the Constitution refit) to go faster than before.

That's right, I had forgotten about those statements. And the TOS examples also works with the theory on r/daystrominstitute called "A Starship is a Collection of Energy Fields". I love it when a theory comes together like this.

@@redshirt0479 Ironically, this is all very close to what is in our existing real world TR-3B anti-gravity 'triangle' ships. (It's ok. I didn't believe in them either, until I saw one flying over Walnut Creek , CA. About 4 years ago) I was just standing outside, walking my cat, 8-9pm or so, I look up for some reason.., and right above me to my left and slightly behind me, was a HUGE Triangle ship, with a light at each corner and one less bright one in the center. It was so close, I could see details and such, that made me absolutely certain, it was made by people, it was clearly 'US',. _But,_ at the same time,.. It was absolutely silent and it moved so slowly, at first I thought it must be coming in for a landing,.? but 30 seconds later had only gone a short distance. I couldn't understand why it wasn't falling downwards... I kinda clung onto the 'coming in for a landing' thing for a long time, until I realized, that was just me trying to interpret what I saw, based on tech I know existed, in retrospect, . well.. It didn't land, just kept going in the direction I was facing until was too far too see... I wish I had my phone with me... I wish another person had been there to show, say LOOK! Coolest thing ever. Only the second really mysterious unusual thing that ever happened to me!

Hello there

As I have just said the number of coils does matter because they activate in sequence from back to front creating a layered sub space distortion, of course from an engineering point of view the groupings definitely suggest that it was drain for ease of replacement, but there must be a limit of the amount of coils needed for maximum warp, the rest must be spare parts in case one Breaks

the Defiant is simply more advanced in every way. it could run circles around the Enterprise at impulse speed. it could also get from Deep space Nine (edge of the Federation) to Earth in mere days

The defiant and valiant needed to be overcharged to get above warp three. If I remember correctly, their coils were also subjected to extra plasma as a result of that. So shes hot and snappy on those coils.

I'm not sure where they are getting their numbers. I always thought the Defiant was much slower than the Enterprise D.

Comparable, I thought, from the manuals.

It says it has a class 7 warp drive (at first appearance) capable of warp 9.5. memory-alpha.wikia.com/wiki/Class_7_warp_drive

where is Voyager hiding all its shuttles ?

Major Grin. They build ships on board all the time, its really not an issue.

DrewLSsix each shuttle had its own warp core too

Major Grin so did both of the delta fliers, those definitely got built on board.

DrewLSsix and in the first episode Janeway said they cant even create new Torpedoes. Then suddenly can build new warp cores

They call it technobabble not without a reason.

Brain and brain!!! What is brain?

That's ok. It's all make believe anyway, so dosen't matter. LOL!

amazedsatsuma Of course. Always one that has to be a jerk.

Michael X I understood it , took me 10 years of science though lol

This is my reasoning, too.

Not just yours. Secondary non-canon sources of 'technical' documentation have pretty much all explicitly stated this was the purpose of the Sovereign and Intrepid class warp designs, and why they're suddenly quite different from say, a Galaxy class nacelle design.

Galaxy class maximum speed is Warp 9.65 for 12 hours

Thats the Voyager. Only the Intrepid and Sovereign class ships allowed to use its maximum speed for constant travel, due their unique nacelle characteristic. The other classes stuck at warp 5 for long travels, because a speed faster than warp 5 damages the subspace. They only allowed in emergency cases to use warp 9.x. Picard ordered warp 5 almost every time, unless it was combat situation or they needed really quickly to get somewhere.

Safe to the ship, yes. Safe to subspace? Not so much. Also that warp 5 limit only came into effect around season 6 or so, when they realised the damage it was causing...

All I need is more cowbell.

You'd be surprised at just how deep hardcore fans of any series are willing to go.

aperson22222 there's fans, and then there's fans.

In big-budget film, television, and game design, artists are usually required to come up with rudimentary explanations for their aesthetic choices. This helps justify and direct later choices so designs can hopefully maintain some continuity and visual believability. Denise and Michael Okuda were the production designers on most of the Star Trek series and put quite a bit of effort into developing the never-seen-on-screen technology that exists beneath what we DO see. Videos like this just take that a little further; tying things together with a slightly more cohesive bow. I think it's rather fun!

Well, have you ever read any of the various technical manuals? Clearly there's a demand for such things or they'd never bother publishing books like that. This kind of weird level of detail is exactly what the technical manuals are full of. I own the TNG and DS9 technical manuals, and this is the kind of stuff they talk about. (a Voyager technical manual was never published, and TOS tech manuals, if they existed were out of print many years before I got into this stuff.) So... Yeah, there are such people around. Such as me... (In a roleplay and debate forum someone joked that if they were in the star trek universe, they'd want me as their chief engineer, since I was constantly going on about technical stuff like that... XD)

Twan Del Spores ;-)

@Twan Del Rio we got it. You think spores are dumb. Did you need to comment that a hundred times though?

@@blsharpley, normies can't handle their shrooms.

S C I always took that as just an analogy for what they were trying to do. It kinda reminded me of the crystalline entity in TNG, it seemed to both make sound and transmit/ receive frequencies through some other medium while in space.

DrewLSsix yes i also agree that it was a possible analogy, but i havent watched that episode in while, so its something i cant swear to - the bigger point that even if it wasnt, is that it in no way breaks from the trek tradition of suspect wonky "science" - some fans seems confuse the use of science words as being actual science

S C oh absolutely, and even further one thing I appreciated about Discovery was the relative lack of technobabble. Something we didn't see all that much of in the original series on the other hand all the hyped up talk about Federation values and such feel decidedly Next Generation and later compared to the somewhat roguish nature of the original series LOL.

DrewLSsix yeah i was rewatching VOY on BBCAmerica, and i like the show for the most part, but man it is ate up with technobabble!! and yeah i like that they actually showed in DSC that the federations values are just that values, not something that is encoded into robot officers and never tested - but i do miss the flying double leg kicks of Kirks Kirk Fu TOS style of diplomacy!

+11gg Or just wait for Q to snap his fingers, because trek "science" is more wizardry than real science!

Micah van Everdingen I think you mean canon not cannon, one is a metal tube that fires rounds the size of bowling balls, the other is not.

no he wants him to make a technical warp cannon using those warp coils lol

Sorry I did mean canon, but english is not my native language. Thanks for pointing out though!:)

Micah van Everdingen truthfully you could have fooled me lol

sweep that BACK under the rug where it belongs ok

Sounds good - like turning a light cone inside out? Or an off-shell effect.

Well, the NX-01 is an engine with a ship built around it. They designed an engine first, then tried to figure out what kind of ship to build around it - and arguably it's a pure explorer, given it's extremely poorly armed, but they realised through constantly getting in trouble that the design needed more weapons and better defenses in general. So the original was upgraded, and the second in the line was more heavily armed and outfitted right from the start. Starfleet does understand this a little though. Notice how the Nebula class looks similar to a galaxy class. No doubt they share a very large number of components, with the Nebula simply being a smaller design with broadly the same systems. Plus the Nebula also demonstrates the concept of an external 'mission module'. With both tactical and sensor packages seen in the past. - presumably the external module allows rapid switching of a ship's role by replacing the whole module. Secondary sources also suggest the Galaxy class is a multi-mission adaptive ship designed for many roles. One aspect of this is that it's sort of general purpose and can do a lot of things reasonably well, but another part of it is that it's internal volume can be reconfigured for different roles as and when it's needed. One source claims as much as 40% of the internal volume actually has no designated purpose or standard fit-out, with that entire volume available for mission specific adaptation as and when it's needed. It makes sense, indeed. But only to a point, and only if your small number of designs don't end up obsolete. Notice how many Mirandas and Excelsiors starfleet had at some point too. Other designs actually seem somewhat rare by comparison. It's only in recent times (2470+) that there's a sudden explosion of new ship designs. (What exists prior to the Galaxy class? Ambassador, Oberth, Excelsior, Miranda, Constellation - that's about all they were using for going on 50-60 years it seems. Even with the Galaxy class, and Nebula class introduced, that's two more ships, but the Galaxy makes the Ambassador obsolete, and the Nebula was probably supposed to replace the Miranda and the like.) But after using a handful of ships for ages, all of a sudden in one decade we get the Defiant, Sovereign, Intrepid, Akira, and saber... That's almost more ship designs in a single decade than in the last 7 decades put together... Which is crazy.

I'd disagree slightly on your perception of each ship's role. I think the Intrepid class is most closely related to the Constitution. Both are mid-sized exploratory craft, designed for long-range, independent missions. The notably large crew quarters on Voyager speak of a ship that's intended to be away from home for long periods. The Galaxy ships are big, prestigious ships, well-rounded and flexible. The Ent-D was designed in a time of relative peace, and its cruise-ship proportions make it best suited as a diplomatic flagship which doesn't stray as far from Federation space. It's speed is intended to get it where it's needed quickly, not for extreme range. The Defiant is also a sprinter, though for different reasons. They're both reactive problem-solvers, not proactive explorers. The NX-01 is simply designed to go as far and as fast as possible, and only gets pushed into other roles because there are no other ships that are capable.

I thought it said:- "Cockring's" How fast is your cockring?

I shouldn't reply to a troll but... Zero thought went into it? Then what exactly were the science advisors on the show doing?

It's a graphic design choice. I've worked on tv production, stuff like that is all graphic design and set design issues.

Username checks out.

captianjessie1 who cares.

They use pixie dust to achieve warp 10 without becoming salamanders.

Does it even matter? They took the Orcs of Mordor and call them Klingons. For all I care their warp nacelles are full of hobbits.

Kind of rectangular, squished, uneven things. Full of fungi.

Discovery sucks.

Make the Milky Way Great Again! :-)

You don't become a multi-billionaire by being obsessed with faux high tech.

I'll put my upcoming retirement on hold and sign up for another 20 years if the U.S. Space Force has warp capable ships!

It's something way more advanced than Star Trek and Star Wars Technology. The globalists elite have shit that makes star trek tech look like ancient history.