Voyager and warp speed: Consistent?

[Mike DiCenso]

Except that it makes no sense in context to most of the power quotes we've heard in Trek over the years. How does your chart explain the E-D warp core idling ticking over while generating 12.75 million terawatts? Or about Voyager putting around on impulse power with a conduit that has at least 5,000 terawatts running through it. Given that the Defiant was highly overpowered for it's size, iand was said to be comparable in power output to a larger vessel, it makes little sense that only severall hundred gigawatts would be necessary to drive the ship to high warp.
-Mike

[Mith]

Except that it makes no sense in context to most of the power quotes we've heard in Trek over the years. How does your chart explain the E-D warp core idling ticking over while generating 12.75 million terawatts? Or about Voyager putting around on impulse power with a conduit that has at least 5,000 terawatts running through it. Given that the Defiant was highly overpowered for it's size, iand was said to be comparable in power output to a larger vessel, it makes little sense that only severall hundred gigawatts would be necessary to drive the ship to high warp.
-Mike

How? There's no reason to believe that warp takes so much power. Surely, it taks a great deal, but why does it have to be millions of terrawatts? That could be going to other things.

[Mike DiCenso]

Such as, what? In some cases, shields and weapons can powered by the impulse engines, though not as effectively as with warp power. We hear in VOY of the ship's main sensor array requiring another 5 terawatts, but that is hardly on the same level of using the huge amounts of power that we hear about from time-to-time. Even going by the "terawatt range" statement from Geordi in "Masterpiece Society", you have potentially hundreds, to just shy of a thousand terawatts to make use of. Ten terawatts for a sensor is still chump change even at that scale of power output.

The only other possiblity is the navigational deflector array, but it still seems to be a second priority system compared to warp drive.

Oh and another thing that argues against your power figures is this line from "Deja Q":

LAFORGE: The moon will hit its perigee in ten hours. Now, we match its trajectory, increase emitter coolant rate so we can applywarp-equivalent power nine to the tractor beam continuous . We can push it for nearly seven hours and I think that just might do it. But, there's a problem.

Remember the Bre'el moon thread from a while back? Recall how much power it was estimated to push that moon, and then apply that to what is being currently discussed at hand. That means that warp 9 power is an insanely huge amount to push a 10e16 kg moon around as Geordi is suggesting doing there!
-Mike

[Mith]

Such as, what? In some cases, shields and weapons can powered by the impulse engines, though not as effectively as with warp power. We hear in VOY of the ship's main sensor array requiring another 5 terawatts, but that is hardly on the same level of using the huge amounts of power that we hear about from time-to-time. Even going by the "terawatt range" statement from Geordi in "Masterpiece Society", you have potentially hundreds, to just shy of a thousand terawatts to make use of. Ten terawatts for a sensor is still chump change even at that scale of power output.

The only other possiblity is the navigational deflector array, but it still seems to be a second priority system compared to warp drive.

Oh and another thing that argues against your power figures is this line from "Deja Q":

LAFORGE: The moon will hit its perigee in ten hours. Now, we match its trajectory, increase emitter coolant rate so we can applywarp-equivalent power nine to the tractor beam continuous . We can push it for nearly seven hours and I think that just might do it. But, there's a problem.

Remember the Bre'el moon thread from a while back? Recall how much power it was estimated to push that moon, and then apply that to what is being currently discussed at hand. That means that warp 9 power is an insanely huge amount to push a 10e16 kg moon around as Geordi is suggesting doing there!
-Mike

Can you put it a bit more into context? Also, what size are you claiming for that astrodial moon? My calculations put it at around 8-10 kilomters in size. Also, it was stated in the TNG green episode (warp drive damaging subspace), that a ship can actually overload their warp engines. It's possible that the Enterprise D can actually increase its power higher than required for Warp 9 and this is in fact so in one episode where the ship is going so fast (I forget the reason) that the ship is about to collapse from the stress.

[Jedi Master Spock]

How? There's no reason to believe that warp takes so much power. Surely, it taks a great deal, but why does it have to be millions of terrawatts? That could be going to other things.

Why? Well, because the peak energy requirements tend to be in that area. I'll give you one example.

From a cold start, and assuming an average density equal to that of the Intrepid class, the NX-01 changes in GPE by about 200,000 terajoules between Earth orbit and Neptune orbit.

Given the NX-01 can travel to Neptune and back in six minutes, this strongly suggests the NX class - as originally launched - can burn more than a petawatt in its warp core.

Then there's another incident after the shakedown. "Singularity" - within two million kilometers - and takes seventeen minutes to fly all the way outside the system. A typical stellar black hole is at least 4 solar masses, meaning that the NX-01 was over 250 GJ/kg deep into the gravitational well.

If the NX-01's engines can drag a 200,000 ton mass out of a >250 GJ/kg gravity well in seventeen minutes, it should exceed 50 petawatts in average power consumption over that period. This is for a warp five engine pushing a relatively small starship.

The Constitution class has a mass of a million tons (about five times what we've assumed for the NX) and is usually considered at least an order of magnitude faster. You do the math.

[Airlocke_Jedi_Knight]

I-I really don't know how. Stupid educated people with your science and math, gives me headaches.

[Mith]

How? There's no reason to believe that warp takes so much power. Surely, it taks a great deal, but why does it have to be millions of terrawatts? That could be going to other things.

Why? Well, because the peak energy requirements tend to be in that area. I'll give you one example.

From a cold start, and assuming an average density equal to that of the Intrepid class, the NX-01 changes in GPE by about 200,000 terajoules between Earth orbit and Neptune orbit.

Given the NX-01 can travel to Neptune and back in six minutes, this strongly suggests the NX class - as originally launched - can burn more than a petawatt in its warp core.

Wasn't that rated at warp .5?

Then there's another incident after the shakedown. "Singularity" - within two million kilometers - and takes seventeen minutes to fly all the way outside the system. A typical stellar black hole is at least 4 solar masses, meaning that the NX-01 was over 250 GJ/kg deep into the gravitational well.

If the NX-01's engines can drag a 200,000 ton mass out of a >250 GJ/kg gravity well in seventeen minutes, it should exceed 50 petawatts in average power consumption over that period. This is for a warp five engine pushing a relatively small starship.

The Constitution class has a mass of a million tons (about five times what we've assumed for the NX) and is usually considered at least an order of magnitude faster. You do the math.

At what warp factor was the NX moving at?

[Mr. Oragahn]

How? There's no reason to believe that warp takes so much power. Surely, it taks a great deal, but why does it have to be millions of terrawatts? That could be going to other things.

Why? Well, because the peak energy requirements tend to be in that area. I'll give you one example.

From a cold start, and assuming an average density equal to that of the Intrepid class, the NX-01 changes in GPE by about 200,000 terajoules between Earth orbit and Neptune orbit.

Given the NX-01 can travel to Neptune and back in six minutes, this strongly suggests the NX class - as originally launched - can burn more than a petawatt in its warp core.

Then there's another incident after the shakedown. "Singularity" - within two million kilometers - and takes seventeen minutes to fly all the way outside the system. A typical stellar black hole is at least 4 solar masses, meaning that the NX-01 was over 250 GJ/kg deep into the gravitational well.

If the NX-01's engines can drag a 200,000 ton mass out of a >250 GJ/kg gravity well in seventeen minutes, it should exceed 50 petawatts in average power consumption over that period. This is for a warp five engine pushing a relatively small starship.

The Constitution class has a mass of a million tons (about five times what we've assumed for the NX) and is usually considered at least an order of magnitude faster. You do the math.

Is it me or are you using newtonian physics, and eventually the very basics of relativistic physics, to obtain a value of warp drives?

[Mr. Oragahn]

Giaglist.

I'm not sure there's something weird, or any "weird shit" when mentioning frequencies regarding a technology based around high energy plasma.

[Jedi Master Spock]

Is it me or are you using newtonian physics, and eventually the very basics of relativistic physics, to obtain a value of warp drives?

In this particular instance, the relativistic treatment and the newtonian treatment vary little, and the limit I'm stating is a quite appropriate one. COE based on GPE is strictly valid for deriving power when you begin with a given mass at a given location and take it away the binding energy either through mass lightening or distance.

Now, strictly speaking, this is where "Broken Bow" ("Descent" and "Relics" as well) are stronger examples than "Singularity" with regard to power generation. It's quite possible the NX-01 began substantial mass lightening prior to its closest approach to the black hole and would have been unable to escape the system in seventeen minutes had warp systems been momentarily interrupted, even though they appear to be moving at impulse speeds while dodging debris close to the black hole.

Now, if the core model is false (and this model provides much stronger results in TNG, as I've discussed before) then you can use warp engines to create power. Which I think is absurd.

However, there is also supporting evidence from outside the model. I've estimate "Peak Performance" shows an ~8 PW consumption for a warp 1 Constellation, based on the quantity of antimatter we see onscreen. Warp 1 is widely presumed to be a couple orders of magnitude slower than warp 5, fuel efficiency is expected to decline with warp factor, consumption should not exactly match the change in GPE, and the Constellation is about three times the volume of the NX. Consider that list of facts, and it fits quite well. The dialog references from "Revulsion" and "True Q", which respectively refer to 12.75 EW for the E-D's warp core and 5 PW (or maybe EW) moving through a conduit on Voyager similarly make sense, as does the moon-haul in "Deja Q."

I'm well aware the peak power consumption figures I've given for warp engines seem very high to VS debaters. I think you've probably questioned them before, and you've certainly seen lower figures. ST-v-SW.net speaks dubiously about the 12.75 exawatt figure in "True Q," and Stardestroyer.net claims the effective power generation of a Galaxy class is 900 terawatts.

It's worth keeping in mind two things:

One, channeling anywhere near full warp power into anything but warp engines is exceedingly rare ("Deja Q" and "Best of Both Worlds" come to mind). The only time we see anything suggesting phaser banks and warp coils consuming remotely comparable quantities of energy is in "The Sound of Her Voice," and the Defiant is a small ship with extraordinarily heavy armaments by Trek standards.

Two, this is peak power consumption. Computing the rate at which antimatter is consumed tells us very quickly that peak power consumption is noticeably higher than average power consumption.

Wasn't that rated at warp .5?

Warp 4.5 was the warp factor under discussion in "Broken Bow." The speed of the Earth-Neptune run is incidentally quite a bit slower than we see the NX move, both in "Broken Bow" and other episodes.

At what warp factor was the NX moving at?

I don't believe a warp factor is given in "Singularity." However, it's established numerous times that the NX-01 has a warp 5 rated engine. "Singularity" also gives the fastest certain speed for the NX-01 (~15,500 c), since "Broken Bow" is more than a little bit odd; we can presume that T'pol and Archer redlined the engines.[/url]

[Mr. Oragahn]

In this particular instance, the relativistic treatment and the newtonian treatment vary little, and the limit I'm stating is a quite appropriate one. COE based on GPE is strictly valid for deriving power when you begin with a given mass at a given location and take it away the binding energy either through mass lightening or distance.

Now, strictly speaking, this is where "Broken Bow" ("Descent" and "Relics" as well) are stronger examples than "Singularity" with regard to power generation. It's quite possible the NX-01 began substantial mass lightening prior to its closest approach to the black hole and would have been unable to escape the system in seventeen minutes had warp systems been momentarily interrupted, even though they appear to be moving at impulse speeds while dodging debris close to the black hole.

Now, if the core model is false (and this model provides much stronger results in TNG, as I've discussed before) then you can use warp engines to create power. Which I think is absurd.

It would, unless for some reason, this "gain" was restricted to the warp tech/field/bubble, and thus couldn't be exploited outside of such this ensemble.
Perhaps, in another way, there's no real net gain, but more like a considerably reduced cost.

However, there is also supporting evidence from outside the model. I've estimate "Peak Performance" shows an ~8 PW consumption for a warp 1 Constellation, based on the quantity of antimatter we see onscreen. Warp 1 is widely presumed to be a couple orders of magnitude slower than warp 5, fuel efficiency is expected to decline with warp factor, consumption should not exactly match the change in GPE, and the Constellation is about three times the volume of the NX. Consider that list of facts, and it fits quite well. The dialog references from "Revulsion" and "True Q", which respectively refer to 12.75 EW for the E-D's warp core and 5 PW (or maybe EW) moving through a conduit on Voyager similarly make sense, as does the moon-haul in "Deja Q."

I'm well aware the peak power consumption figures I've given for warp engines seem very high to VS debaters. I think you've probably questioned them before, and you've certainly seen lower figures. ST-v-SW.net speaks dubiously about the 12.75 exawatt figure in "True Q," and Stardestroyer.net claims the effective power generation of a Galaxy class is 900 terawatts.

Yes, I have been tackling this before.

I'm concerned about Wes using AM from his pet project to fuel a warp core of an older ship than a Galaxy-class, to obtain a given low warp speed for something like two seconds or more.
This was actually part of a discussion about AM containment, and appeared at the same time Mith TOS' AM rounds used in a mortar, which really didn't seem overly powerful despite their size and all.
The blue was is rather intriguing in how its weight, once remaining after you filtered out the weight of the glass sphere and its handles, would not be terribly heavy.
If being generous, a few kilograms of AM could be stored in there.
Eventually, a low petawatt short peak for the warp jump could fit with the numbers you mention.

Now, how short was the consumption featured in Revulsion?





Now, I've looked at Voyager's speed issue.
If Cardassian territory is as wide as I think it is, that is, not much, you probably have the most distant Cardassian Union point from the Badlands being at 1000 LY or less.
I cannot see a way to reconcile this with how the Dreadnaught still thinks it's 75,000 LY away from Aschelon Five after, what? 3 years of travel since their "kidnapping."
Let's pretend the navigational system was just totally burnt.

[Jedi Master Spock]

It would, unless for some reason, this "gain" was restricted to the warp tech/field/bubble, and thus couldn't be exploited outside of such this ensemble.
Perhaps, in another way, there's no real net gain, but more like a considerably reduced cost.

Well, when the ship arrives at point B, the energy gain is realized. And it's there after you turn the warp field off, which is the whole point of using this model - then you just gained gravitational potential energy. This is quite easy to turn into other useful forms of energy.

Yes, I have been tackling this before.

I'm concerned about Wes using AM from his pet project to fuel a warp core of an older ship than a Galaxy-class, to obtain a given low warp speed for something like two seconds or more.
This was actually part of a discussion about AM containment, and appeared at the same time Mith TOS' AM rounds used in a mortar, which really didn't seem overly powerful despite their size and all.
The blue was is rather intriguing in how its weight, once remaining after you filtered out the weight of the glass sphere and its handles, would not be terribly heavy.
If being generous, a few kilograms of AM could be stored in there.
Eventually, a low petawatt short peak for the warp jump could fit with the numbers you mention.

If being generous. I've been assuming it is no more than a couple hundred grams of frozen antideuterium - deuterium is not a very dense substance normally. 1 kg antimatter + 1 kg matter = 180 petajoules. You can say a lot about efficiency, of course, but warp engines are stated to be highly efficient, and we don't notice much radiation or heat leaking outside of the warp core under normal operations.

Now, how short was the consumption featured in Revulsion?

Casual flow through a conduit.

[Mike DiCenso]

Such as, what? In some cases, shields and weapons can powered by the impulse engines, though not as effectively as with warp power. We hear in VOY of the ship's main sensor array requiring another 5 terawatts, but that is hardly on the same level of using the huge amounts of power that we hear about from time-to-time. Even going by the "terawatt range" statement from Geordi in "Masterpiece Society", you have potentially hundreds, to just shy of a thousand terawatts to make use of. Ten terawatts for a sensor is still chump change even at that scale of power output.

The only other possiblity is the navigational deflector array, but it still seems to be a second priority system compared to warp drive.

Oh and another thing that argues against your power figures is this line from "Deja Q":

LAFORGE: The moon will hit its perigee in ten hours. Now, we match its trajectory, increase emitter coolant rate so we can applywarp-equivalent power nine to the tractor beam continuous . We can push it for nearly seven hours and I think that just might do it. But, there's a problem.

Remember the Bre'el moon thread from a while back? Recall how much power it was estimated to push that moon, and then apply that to what is being currently discussed at hand. That means that warp 9 power is an insanely huge amount to push a 10e16 kg moon around as Geordi is suggesting doing there!
-Mike

Can you put it a bit more into context? Also, what size are you claiming for that asteroidal moon? My calculations put it at around 8-10 kilometers in size. Also, it was stated in the TNG green episode (warp drive damaging subspace), that a ship can actually overload their warp engines. It's possible that the Enterprise D can actually increase its power higher than required for Warp 9 and this is in fact so in one episode where the ship is going so fast (I forget the reason) that the ship is about to collapse from the stress.

I'am not sure what you mean. The thread I linked to goes into the details on the Bre'el moon's size, calculated at 10e16 kg from the tidal stresses it exerted on it's primary.

As noted in the thread, it would be comparable in size to the Martian moon Phobos, which is 27 x 22 x 18 km, assuming similar density. Roondar in this thread here calculated the raw energy needed by the E-D to move the 10e16 kg moon... or about 4.2 x 10e18 watts. In this thread here, I calculated the rough energy to vaporize a Galaxy class starship's stardrive section at 3.98 gigatons.
-Mike